- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Hegel, Wokeism, and the Dialectical Faith of Leftism
Posted on 1/28/23 at 2:34 pm to narddogg81
Posted on 1/28/23 at 2:34 pm to narddogg81
Hegel and WOKEISM? Hegel has often been associated with right-wing conservatism, so the overall claim here defies what is typically associated with him.
The first 10 minutes of the podcast gives me the impression that James Lindsay has a very thin understanding of Hegel, especially considering the dialectic. The dialectic is merely, for Hegel, a means of using contradictory information to reach an "absolute" logic when you've reached an impasse.
An additional use of Hegelian dialectics is to think critically around a thing. So when I see a car, I see a unified thing. Using a dialectical approach, I can see the textures, colors, and shapes of the thing, but the outcome of the dialectic would be a car.
I guess I can see how leftist thought - in the forms of critical theories - relies upon the dialectic to advance any kind of knowledge. You see a thriving business; a dialectical approach helps see all of the details of that business. Someone using critical race theory, using a dialectical approach, sees racial injustice through the construction of the business. Obviously politically charged people will act on this knowledge because they want to eradicate racial injustice from society.
Anyways, I haven't listened to the entire podcast, but I think the initial premise is faulty. Lindsay is essentially using a Hegelian dialectical approach to critique the progressive left for its use of Hegelian dialectics.
The first 10 minutes of the podcast gives me the impression that James Lindsay has a very thin understanding of Hegel, especially considering the dialectic. The dialectic is merely, for Hegel, a means of using contradictory information to reach an "absolute" logic when you've reached an impasse.
An additional use of Hegelian dialectics is to think critically around a thing. So when I see a car, I see a unified thing. Using a dialectical approach, I can see the textures, colors, and shapes of the thing, but the outcome of the dialectic would be a car.
I guess I can see how leftist thought - in the forms of critical theories - relies upon the dialectic to advance any kind of knowledge. You see a thriving business; a dialectical approach helps see all of the details of that business. Someone using critical race theory, using a dialectical approach, sees racial injustice through the construction of the business. Obviously politically charged people will act on this knowledge because they want to eradicate racial injustice from society.
Anyways, I haven't listened to the entire podcast, but I think the initial premise is faulty. Lindsay is essentially using a Hegelian dialectical approach to critique the progressive left for its use of Hegelian dialectics.
This post was edited on 1/28/23 at 2:36 pm
3
Posted on 1/28/23 at 2:38 pm to StringedInstruments
quote:
An additional use of Hegelian dialectics is to think critically around a thing. So when I see a car, I see a unified thing. Using a dialectical approach, I can see the textures, colors, and shapes of the thing, but the outcome of the dialectic would be a car.
This is nonsense.
Posted on 1/28/23 at 2:44 pm to the808bass
quote:
This is nonsense.
It's not.
It's a simplified illustration of the thesis + antithesis to reach a synthesis model that is Hegelian dialectics.
Posted on 1/28/23 at 4:27 pm to Intelligent
quote:
I don't know any wokeists and haven't heard of any. In fact, the only people that use the term "woke" are right wingers. Furthermore, the term is only used to disparage others.
"Woke"
Last time we heard a local here embarrass himself using the term was in the first day of one of our Essence Fests when our esteemed mayor, Mitch Landrieu, led off his welcoming speech with this "admonishment" to the crowd, "Stay woke!"
Upon which the mostly black audience chuckled mockingly at him.
Mitch had already executed his apparent lifelong dream of having our Confederate monuments pulled down - and he is an unofficial "graduate" of the leftist Aspen Institute.
Itself a "tentacle" of the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations, the most leftist, intrusive, globalist propaganda mill in the world for now over 100 years.
So that at least is one example of a pandering, extreme leftist, southern scalawag using the term "woke" before an audience that laughed derisively at him for his use of it.
"Dialectic"
The egotistical, miserable Marx hated Hegel because his new, exciting system couldn't work without his "borrowing" of Hegel's dialectic.
The later neo-Marxist Marcuse was so smitten by the concept - and by Freud - that he actually tried to make a political dialectic out of Freud's Id, Ego, and Superego. But he had it really bad.
If you or anyone else challenges this, read Marcuse's Eros and Civilization.
No, "woke" is another term "borrowed" by the Left so they can use it in their own consistent, lifelong pander fest, ensuring that they can continue to feel good about themselves.
Posted on 1/28/23 at 4:45 pm to Intelligent
quote:This is not correct. The "woke" were the first to use the term, and they may or may not still use it now, because their opponents HAVE absorbed the term and started using it disparagingly.
In fact, the only people that use the term "woke" are right wingers. Furthermore, the term is only used to disparage others.
I remember this because I recall thinking how frickING illiterate the "woke" sounded in using the term, and how MORONIC it was for the "non-woke" to accept and use the same illiterate terminology.
To this day, I refuse to use the term, except in quotation marks to clarify that I am utilizing someone else's ignorant terminology.
Posted on 1/28/23 at 4:52 pm to StringedInstruments
quote:
Hegel has often been associated with right-wing conservatism,
Negative liberty is culturally marxist, Hegel was a utopian.
Posted on 1/28/23 at 4:54 pm to StringedInstruments
quote:it's true that at the end of his life and after his death there was a portion of his followers who considered that his march of history idea had been fulfilled and took his philosophy in a religious and socially conservative direction. they are referred to as the old Hegelian or the right hegelians. But they pale in significance when compared to the young hegelians, which Marx was. Marx took hegels dialectic to the dialectic, tried to strip out the metaphysics and mystical stuff, and that's where he got his dialectic materialism. Later after the very abject failure of communism in the 20th century, the neo Marxists swung back towards Hegel away from Marxian materialism.
Hegel and WOKEISM? Hegel has often been associated with right-wing conservatism, so the overall claim here defies what is typically associated with him.
quote:
The first 10 minutes of the podcast gives me the impression that James Lindsay has a very thin understanding of Hegel, especially considering the dialectic. The dialectic is merely, for Hegel, a means of using contradictory information to reach an "absolute" logic when you've reached an impasse.
An additional use of Hegelian dialectics is to think critically around a thing. So when I see a car, I see a unified thing. Using a dialectical approach, I can see the textures, colors, and shapes of the thing, but the outcome of the dialectic would be a car.
Your example makes me think you have a very thin understanding of the dialectic, because it's nonsense. What is your thesis, antithesis, and synthesis in the example? The dialectic is not about thinking critically about things, it's about crashing ideas against their contradictions to arrive at a new understanding. Which by the way as a thought exercise is perfectly fine and useful, and in no way originated with Hegel. It goes back to the Greeks, is in the bible, etc. It's what Hegel and the young hegelians did with it that's the issue
quote:so why bother commenting after listening to 10 minutes of 4 hours?
Anyways, I haven't listened to the entire podcast, but I think the initial premise is faulty. Lindsay is essentially using a Hegelian dialectical approach to critique the progressive left for its use of Hegelian dialectics.
This post was edited on 1/28/23 at 4:58 pm
Posted on 1/28/23 at 5:19 pm to jackamo3300
I believe that the poster 'intelligent' actually used a rude action by making the big deal about "oh, 'woke' is only a right wing label.
It fits leftist religion in that your question of one small part of what has been said disrupts.
I ALSO believe that the diatribe later in the thread is an example of the Grimes County, Texas attorney doing EXACTLY THE SAME THING - a contribution of a cup of disorder of the same insignificant crumb of this biscuit.
SYMBOLIZING their commitment to the quest and devotion to their 'religion'.
I fully expect more of the same shoe to drop after making this illustration.
It fits leftist religion in that your question of one small part of what has been said disrupts.
I ALSO believe that the diatribe later in the thread is an example of the Grimes County, Texas attorney doing EXACTLY THE SAME THING - a contribution of a cup of disorder of the same insignificant crumb of this biscuit.
SYMBOLIZING their commitment to the quest and devotion to their 'religion'.
I fully expect more of the same shoe to drop after making this illustration.
Posted on 1/28/23 at 7:38 pm to StringedInstruments
Nothing in your example has anything whatsoever to do with the Hegelian dialectic.
Posted on 1/28/23 at 8:01 pm to narddogg81
quote:
What is your thesis, antithesis, and synthesis in the example? The dialectic is not about thinking critically about things, it's about crashing ideas against their contradictions to arrive at a new understanding.
It was meant to be simplified. Thesis = it is a thing of shapes. Antithesis = it is a thing of textures. Synthesis becomes the car. But the illustration of the car wasn’t meant to warrant a discussion about cars. It’s to show that dialectics allow for a deconstruction of current paradigms in order to arrive at a synthesized conclusion.
Marx may have utilized Hegel, but he did so to use dialectics as a means to produce violent uprisings against capitalists.
Perhaps that’s Lindsay’s main point, but he tends to go into conspiracy theory tirades rather than actually participate in any kind of intellectual discussion. Which is why I didn’t bother to spend 4 hours listening. Maybe he does better this time.
I mean, his recent talk on social and emotional health links the concept to global world order domination. He takes quite the leaps in his argument.
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News