[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 48 KB, 645x729, 1517761266036.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10978269 No.10978269 [Reply] [Original]

>thesis antithesis synthesis

>> No.10978277
File: 113 KB, 240x240, 1522432713881.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10978277

>>10978269

>Categorical imperative

>> No.10978292

>>10978269
Do you not understand what Hegel was trying to say you brainlet?

>> No.10978310
File: 54 KB, 500x500, 1519497273427.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10978310

>there's no need for gods to have a moral theory.

>> No.10978318
File: 31 KB, 485x443, 1510610347772.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10978318

>Nietzsche only expressed his personal conviction when he said God is dead

>> No.10978324
File: 3 KB, 211x239, wojak brainlet.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10978324

>you can't know the thing in itself bro

>> No.10978343

>>10978324
you literally can't
stay mad brainlet.

>> No.10978361
File: 32 KB, 294x343, hegel.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10978361

>>10978343
*blocks your path*

>> No.10978371

>>10978361
I know you can't but explain how Hegel dealt with it

>> No.10978384

>>10978269
>abstract negative concrete

>> No.10978385

>>10978361
Based on my understanding of the first sixth of Phenomenology, Hegel didn't say anything like this. Enlighten me?

>> No.10978394

>>10978310
This is true, here's a proof:
A: Moral theories exist
B: God doesn't exist
Q.E.D.

>> No.10978692

>>10978385
Hegel thinks that literally everything is Spirit. You and I are particular individuals within Spirit. The thing-in-itself is Spirit. The phenomenon we see is Spirit.

>> No.10978697

>>10978692
Is the Spirit the One of Hegel

>> No.10978757

>>10978692
The pantheistic viewpoint you're talking about really doesn't have anything to do with perception of the thing-in-itself. Hegel does go into detail about the dialectic between the thing-in-itself, the thing-for-another, and finally the thing-for-consciousness, and seems to me to come to a very different conclusion than you're espousing.