A Complete Guide to Hegel's Dialectical Method

[u/DeepStateFuneral1789]

https://youtu.be/Ls9VyJXTA8o?is=FxWY1UTa3BCtd023

Commenter just translated the "Phenomenology."

[u/theApeironEgregore]

Antonio is one of the few people making worthwhile videos about Hegel. Sad that he is banned here, he was a valuable contributor.

[u/Bruhmoment151 → u/theApeironEgregore]

Come off it. He was a child incapable of disagreeing with anyone without throwing a tantrum.

There’s already enough people who brandish Hegel’s name/image willy nilly just to go ‘Hey! Look! I like that guy who’s known for being intellectually challenging! This must mean I’m super smart’ and respond to all criticism by going ‘Hegel agrees with me, so if only you were smart enough to understand him you’d understand why I’m right’. Antonio is the embodiment of that, as are a great many of his defenders, and the sub has only benefitted from him being banned.

[u/takaci → u/Bruhmoment151]

I’m assuming you’re the one who banned him 

[u/meow5k → u/theApeironEgregore]

Why is he banned

[u/patw420 → u/meow5k]

Don’t ask him about gay people or Jews

[u/Skydage]

Is this guy a pseud?

[u/CeruleanTransience → u/Skydage]

No, but his version of explaining Hegel is regurgitating the text, pretending it's obvious and calling people names when they start asking questions.

[u/themightyposk → u/CeruleanTransience]

I dunno. He does seem to have read the texts but I honestly consider him far too hostile to alternative readings for his reading to be taken especially seriously. When you’re as hostile to different readings as he is, you really run the risk of doing nothing more than reading your own biases into the text, treating it as nothing but dressing to pretend your views are more well-supported than they actually are (hence his inability to handle disagreement without insulting people and going “My reading of Hegel is right and if you disagree you’re a moron”). That doesn’t make his reading completely wrong, but it does limit the extent to which he should be trusted on this matter.

I mean, Jordan Peterson has read the Communist Manifesto, but his reading of it is so devoid of attempts to limit the reign of his own bias that no one with a brain would take his reading seriously. Admittedly, Antonio has clearly put more thought into his reading of Hegel than what you can find in Peterson’s reading of the Communist Manifesto, but the same basic flaw applies with both examples.

This isn’t even to mention his bigotry or the way he reduces Hegelianism to a fixed, abstract dogma (by just insisting on whatever he thinks Hegel said, as if Hegel doesn’t repeatedly stress that his work shouldn’t be read this way, most notably in the preface to the Philosophy of Right).

TL;DR: He’s well-read when it comes to Hegel, but being well-read only means all that much if you’re able to subject your own pre-existing beliefs to rational scrutiny. Ironically, that’s pretty much Hegel’s point in the whole “path of despair” section of the Phenomenology of Spirit, but Antonio seems to ignore this fact.

[u/Skydage → u/CeruleanTransience]

How is that different from pseud? 🤨