Hegelian Dialectics discussion

When will the next Heaglian Dialectical transition happen and what country do you think will be the first. There’s change in the air and it’s a strong smell.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatism
youtube.com/watch?v=iOk6HB609po
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

explain what this is

It's jews all the way down

Continental Philosophy is trash, this model is why it gets stuck in stupid places. They take wrong turns, then refuse to turn around to review their first steps.

When an idea (thesis) is proposed, it’s then opposed by a counter culture/idea (antithesis) the two eventually conflict and out of the ashes, the victor absorbs the destroyed and eliminates the flaws of both ideas and forms a synthesis. This synthesis eventually becomes a thesis in itself when an antithesis pops up and so on.

I am not sure you are applying this model to an appropriate domain. I am not convinced it would apply at a 'country' level. Maybe an ideological perspective only?

Hegelians are cancer god bless America for avoiding that steaming dumpster fire for so long.

lmao the right/left divide is guided Hegelian dialectic to a T wtf are you talking about?

Thank you

"Hegelianism is the philosophy of G. W. F. Hegel which can be summed up by the dictum that "the rational alone is real",[1] which means that all reality is capable of being expressed in rational categories. His goal was to reduce reality to a more synthetic unity within the system of absolute idealism."
Absolute gobbledegook. This is the basis on which people think themselves into such stupidities as "not all women have vaginas".

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatism
educate yourself you blithering cryptocommunist

I don't get it. can you apply it to today's world? what would the white nationalists, establishmentfags and libertarians be in this model?

whig history is a lie. And so is hegelianism. All things are cyclical.

>Heaglian dialectic
>copied it from Fichte
Can't wait until Trump finalizes the system of German idealism
youtube.com/watch?v=iOk6HB609po

You guys are retarded.

What is fichte? This is not Hegel. Come back when you have read a book.

In what way did the US avoid that?

Not either of those guys but,
>No U

German Idealism and English Empiricism will be the next two. They will merge in the ethno state.

Leftist detected. Hegel and his ilk make the entire rotting corpse we call modern society possible. Name one major cancerous political, social or philosophical movement not defined and made possible by Hegel. I put Hegelianism in the same boat that I put Critical Theory. Provide a real fucking rebuttal or kill yourself you trending faggot.

Because the fundamental ideas that would be articulated in Pragmatic philosophical works extended back to the Puritans. Hegelianism and Pragmatic philosophy are almost diametrically opposed. To sum up
>Kant: There is an objective truth and what we see in the world describes that truth
>Hegel: Truth is what we perceive. We cant know the truth we can only know our perception through the application of reason, so reasonable truth is the only truth
>Pragmatics: lul idgaf about truth faggot the only truth that matters is the truth that is useful.

Hegel is the grandpappy of Liberalism, the French Revolution, Communism, Nihilism and Frankfurt School bullshit, and much, much more.

The Jewish Chaos Engine. It turns our conventions and traditions into a perpetual dissonance spiral and causes our reality to infinitely emulate itself in small degree of decreasing accuracy until we're completely detached from adherence to anything resembling a natural order or sustainable culture.

It just happened.

Mass shooting happens
>Gun control now!
Thesis
>Shall not be infringed!
Anti-Thesis
>Metal detectors in schools
Synthesis

Chertoff needs to die.

The Hegelian dialectic is intrinsically Jewish. To believe everyone hates you, and then to act in a way to make everyone hate you to validate the belief, is the Jewish story.

Philosophy. Hegel was slightly crazy though

The Hegelian model is outdated

The establishment is the thesis, everything else is antithesis. Whichever overtakes or conglomerates the establishment will contribute in the formation of the synthesis, i.e. tomorrow's politics. Are you familiar with short and long-run equilibria?

You have Kant and Hegel and Pragmatism exactly wrong. As is to be expected from a memeflag, wiki reader.

The idea the pragmatism and hegelianism are diametrically opposed is based on nothing besides your lackluster googleing/some dumb jpg you half remember. John Dewey (One of the big three pragmatists, I'm certain you don't know that) often remarked upon the "hegelian deposit" in his thought. Read the phenomonology and read Dewey's '38 logic, the one Russell didn't get, if you want further evidence. Pierce (another of the big three pragmatists) also wrote about Hegel. You might try reading Richard Bernstein's "beyond objectivism and relativism" if you want to learn more about the relationship between idealism and pragmatism from a contemporary pragmatist.

>What is liberalism?
Setting aside for now, how retarded blaming things on Hegel is -why do you think liberalism stems from him? It is pretty telling that Paul Gottfried, Christopher Lasch and Domenico Losurdo,historians of liberalism from across the idealogical spectrum do not lay the blame on Hegel.

I am not a "leftist". My taste in Political literature tends toward stuff like Kirk and Gottfried. You're just too stupid to conceptualize someone disagreeing with your vacuous non-thoughts who isn't a leftist -a term vacated of all meaning when you use it. Besides that, it's pretty hard to take someone seriously when they legitimately defend reading less. I suspect You're financially poor as well as spiritually. Faggot

I know who Dewey is and I always thought that his attempts to affect his ideas were hackery because Lipmann was less of an absolute nerd. Dewey based most of his practical lifes work on his conceptions of democracy. Dewey was wrong, and Lippmann was right, and its why when you flick on television you get CNN/MSNBC?ABC broadcasting your AGENDAOFTHEDAYtm straight into the waiting minds of THEPUBLICcopyright.
>often remarked upon the "hegelian deposit"
And? These are people, drawing from form as much as the function of an ideology. I don't give a shit what Dewey had to say on Hegel, I care what Hegels thoughts actually caused in the world.
>You might try reading Richard Bernstein's "beyond objectivism and relativism" if you want to learn more about the relationship between idealism and pragmatism from a contemporary pragmatist.
A Jew
>It is pretty telling that Paul Gottfried
another Jew, but oh hes a (((conservative))) Jew so I'm sure he's (((Based!)))
>Christopher Lasch
The son of a hippy and a social activist
>Domenico Losurdo
A Marxist
Wow shocker every source you've got is incredibly subversive. Imagine my surprise.
>why do you think liberalism stems from him?
Because the constant redefinition of the terms of the discussion at hand that his dialectic call for enable the kind of toxic degradation of discourse that is killing the West? Because "reason" is a fucking meme and framing something meant to mirror objective analysis of the world we live in through a spook like "rationality" is a jewish trick that serves only to benefit the Khazars?
>I am not a "leftist"
I'm sure
>when they legitimately defend reading less
Where did I post this? Please, point it out to me. Oh that's right, I didn't. I literally have multiple books by Hegel in my book collection. I never said don't read him, I don't said don't buy the bullshit. But ofc you saw an opportunity to try and attack me and like the Yid you are, took it.

I also notice you didn't provide any response to the substantive bit of what I said as to what is the central ethos of each. Do you dispute that Hegel defined meaningful truth (that we could use and discuss) as the 'rational' interpretation of our perceptions, while Pragamatist since early American Protestant Preachers define useful truth as the truth that manifest directly in the world, that predicts the results of the mechanisms of the world we inhabit, y/n? Because those are pretty diametrically opposed fucking ideas.

Also reading politics is for hacks. Get a fucking job you beatnik. A real job, a productive one.

You can't turn around once you reach a position. Once we're where we are today, today will forever be a part of the lineage of any future positions we have. Looking at ideas from an ahistorical perspective is unrealistic.

To the OP, I see a new idea of liberalism coming about. Sargon and those wacky libertarians don't have the monopoly on liberalism. I see weaknesses in the alt-right position where I think a lot of alt-righters don't love their race primarily, although they position themselves that way. They love the idea of the civilization it has produced. But that's not the same as the race and it doesn't stand assumed that the race will produce that civilization again. There are higher ideas related to what Christian white culture produced and those ideas are still necessary.

I feel like people are claiming race because they don't feel the liberal idea is strong enough to defend itself, but actually they're not smart enough to defend the idea. Since both SJW liberalism and alt-right race realism are materialist, the correct way out of both is to assert a new kind of liberal anti-materialism, even if it's not a specific religion.

That's not true. The social progressive idea of SJWs is a lie to the extent it assumes the outcome of history, but technology clearly develops in a historical progress. We never stop using a technology once it's adopted unless a better one is invented. We never simply go backwards. Social technologies are the same as other technologies.

Alright, thanks. Can't see why this model would be useful though. Can't we just talk about 'revolution' instead?
>short and long-run equilibria
No fucking clue

>but actually they're not smart enough to defend the idea
Or maybe, seeing as in practice people vote almost exclusively along racial lines we don't want to end up "too smart to win". Maybe we understand this, and maybe a significant proportion of the alt-right was libertarian (also cancerous but less so then) during the late 2000's. And anti-materialism is DOA. You just need more correct and more useful material precepts and methods of analysis.

where the fuck did you go to school?

White nationalists and the white left will merge and make a third party.

Jews threaten the Sampson Option (they nuke all major white cities) to make everyone bow to them in public. The public takes this threat to heart and begins to bring random grievances to Jewish Centers all over the world. After all, if the Masters can't solve the issue, nobody can. The Jews feel uncomfortable with their new found exposure and some of their more nervous members trigger the Sampson Option.

There are basic problems with politics that claims to be materialist. You get people that claim to be morally agnostic (Marxists, modern day "it's just science" guys, Eugenics guys) practicing politics which is inherently a branch of moral philosophy, but they deny morality. Scientific materialism can only describe phenomenons in the world. Politics needs to define a "should do" which is a moral question.

As a practical matter, they still are making moral judgments but they don't have to defend them on moral grounds, and so they end up making really bad moral judgments.