[thenecrosoviet]

im not too sure if this belongs here, since i know nothing of hagel except marx wrote a critique of hagel, anywho, i was wondering if someone could give me a quick rundown about hagel and his beliefs

[jaakko]

im not too sure if this belongs here, since i know nothing of hagel except marx wrote a critique of hagel, anywho, i was wondering if someone could give me a quick rundown about hagel and his beliefs

The name is Hegel. Hegel's importance to the philosophy on which scientific socialism is build on, lies in the fact that Hegel had developed dialectics (ie. developement through contradiction, everythings' interaction with everything etc.). Marx and Engels however couldn't accept Hegel's dialectics as such, because they were materialists while Hegel was an idealist. Marx and Engels thought that Hegel's dialectics had an element of thruth in it, but it was "standing on it head" (because Hegel's philosophy was objective idealism. It had to be put "on its feet", ie. on the basis of materialist philosophy. When they had done this and developed it further, they had created the philosophy of dialectical materialism.

DiaMat isn't SO complicated as one might think. My advice would be the following:
-Try to think of DM as an opposite to the older, vulgar forms of materialism (mechanical materialism). (For example when vulgar materialists said that thought is matter, DMists say that while consciousness exists materially, it's not matter, just as while there isn't motion without matter, motion isn't matter)

-Don't get stuck in things like the general laws of materialism. They are important but it's better to understand the basic ideas before trying remember all formulas

[jaakko]

-Don't get stuck in things like the general laws of materialism. They are important but it's better to understand the basic ideas before trying remember all formulas

TYPO! I meant to say 'the general laws of dialectics'. Kind of hard to talk philosophy in a foreign language and still say something sensible... Especially when I'm a little tired.

[sokath edit: there's an edit button for just that reason jaako... ]

[Noumenon]

Isn't Hegel the one with the thesis and anti-thesis? The thesis is a certain idea that someone comes up with, and then the anti-thesis arises in reaction to that, and then there is a synthesis of the two ideas that merges afterwards.

[jaakko]

Isn't Hegel the one with the thesis and anti-thesis? The thesis is a certain idea that someone comes up with, and then the anti-thesis arises in reaction to that, and then there is a synthesis of the two ideas that merges afterwards.

Well yes, but it isn't just discussion between persons. 'Thesis->anti-thesis->synthesis' can be used do describe developement in the nature or in society as well. And the thesis and its anti-thesis doesn't just 'merge' into synthesis. In the process, more or less of the 'thesis' gets abandoned.

I'm not really good with these "formulas", but I'll try to give an example of such development.

Capitalist society (thesis) - Socialism (anti-thesis) - Communism (synthesis)

Contrary to what it might seem, the 'thesis' isn't entirely negated in the process. For example, while the relations of production of the 'thesis' are abolished during the 'anti-thesis' stage, the means of production of course aren't.

Of course it's entirely different with Hegel, who was an objective idealist, who saw the 'Absolute Spirit' as being behind the progress of history. maybe someone could find examples from Hegel.

I bet there are a lot of stuff online about Hegel.

[Ixa]

Well yes, but it isn't just discussion between persons. 'Thesis->anti-thesis->synthesis' can be used do describe developement in the nature or in society as well. And the thesis and its anti-thesis doesn't just 'merge' into synthesis. In the process, more or less of the 'thesis' gets abandoned.

Not true. The synthesis represents the unity of thesis and antithesis. In a sense, nothing is abandoned. In other sense, everything is abandoned. In an other sense, everything is preserved. Everything, in both thesis and antithesis, is abandoned and preserved. This is called sublation. It means to "set aside" -- i.e. to abandon and preseve. As Hegel said, in Dialectics "nothing is ever lost" (or something like that). What is in the category "being" is preserved in all subsequent categories including the final category, i.e the Absolute. Again, nothing is ever abandoned in the dialectic process.

Contrary to what it might seem, the 'thesis' isn't entirely negated in the process.

Correct. Thesis and antithesis stand confronting one another, and can only be corrected by a reconciliation of the two, i.e. a synthesis. Without a synthesis, the thesis and antithesis manifest a contradiction. Without a synthesis, the thesis does negate the process in a way. Logic, however, cannot rest on contradiction, and so we arrive at synthesis.

Of course it's entirely different with Hegel, who was an objective idealist, who saw the 'Absolute Spirit' as being behind the progress of history.

Which makes perfect sense. History would thus amount to perpetual self-criticism. I think Hegel was on to something here.

[AnotherDeadHero]

POST DELETED

[thenecrosoviet]

is that the same outsider that takes place in the 60's and is about rich and poor gangs? because if it is i have to read that in school, but i havent yet im lazy and personally it didnt look that interesting

[Ixa]

is that the same outsider that takes place in the 60's and is about rich and poor gangs? because if it is i have to read that in school, but i havent yet im lazy and personally it didnt look that interesting

About what are you talking?