Redditor since 15/02/2016 (4561 link karma, 18123 comment karma)
created by iunoionnis on 03/02/2024 at 20:32 UTC - 6 upvotes (https, www.reddit.com)
Eminent Containment in Descartes
created by iunoionnis on 29/09/2023 at 12:51 UTC - 2 upvotes (https, www.reddit.com)
Deleuze’s argument against contradiction
created by iunoionnis on 13/08/2023 at 00:54 UTC - 7 upvotes (https, www.reddit.com)
[Standard] Grixis Midrange in MoM
created by iunoionnis on 18/04/2023 at 15:43 UTC* - 13 upvotes (https, www.reddit.com)
created by iunoionnis on 06/01/2023 at 15:15 UTC - 8 upvotes (https, www.reddit.com)
Going from Mono Red Prowess to Izzet Murktide with a budget of $60 a month
created by iunoionnis on 30/12/2022 at 17:58 UTC* - 179 upvotes (https, www.reddit.com)
[Discussion] UW Control in MID Standard 2022
created by iunoionnis on 10/09/2021 at 17:58 UTC* - 34 upvotes (https, www.reddit.com)
[U] First Tron Deck: Budget Mono Blue Tron
created by iunoionnis on 04/09/2021 at 21:22 UTC* - 10 upvotes (https, www.reddit.com)
How do we fight general robotniks?
created by iunoionnis on 01/04/2021 at 17:50 UTC - 81 upvotes (, )
[Standard] UWx Control in Ikoria Standard
created by iunoionnis on 15/04/2020 at 16:12 UTC* - 162 upvotes (https, www.reddit.com)
created by iunoionnis on 10/09/2019 at 01:53 UTC - 13 upvotes (https, mygestaltherapy.com)
Anyone tried using the pitch shifter effect with an expression pedal?
created by iunoionnis on 08/03/2019 at 19:08 UTC - 7 upvotes (https, www.reddit.com)
[Discussion] What do you do (effects/amp-wise) when switching between Rhythm and Lead?
created by iunoionnis on 13/02/2019 at 16:16 UTC* - 1 upvotes (https, www.reddit.com)
New Guitar: 2014 American Standard Fender Stratocaster - first time buying a nice guitar
created by iunoionnis on 06/02/2019 at 09:51 UTC - 93 upvotes (https, i.redd.it)
created by iunoionnis on 07/01/2019 at 17:28 UTC - 2 upvotes (https, www.reddit.com)
[Question]: Practice amp for low-volume jamming
created by iunoionnis on 05/01/2019 at 18:46 UTC* - 6 upvotes (https, www.reddit.com)
Current Debates on Teleology in Philosophy of Biology
created by iunoionnis on 27/10/2018 at 14:44 UTC* - 9 upvotes (https, www.reddit.com)
Graham Harman interviews Markus Gabriel
created by iunoionnis on 25/09/2018 at 00:12 UTC - 4 upvotes (https, euppublishingblog.com)
Stephen Houlgate on Top Five Hegel Books and an General Overview of Hegel's Life and Philosophy
created by iunoionnis on 24/07/2018 at 14:02 UTC - 5 upvotes (https, fivebooks.com)
Markus Gabriel Explains What Sense Hegel is an Idealist
created by iunoionnis on 24/06/2018 at 22:07 UTC - 8 upvotes (https, www.youtube.com)
Graham Priest on Hegel and Marx: Dialectic and Dialetheic
created by iunoionnis on 19/06/2018 at 12:05 UTC - 4 upvotes (https, philpapers.org)
Robert Pippin: The Significance of Self-Consciousness in Idealist Theories of Logic
created by iunoionnis on 17/06/2018 at 01:10 UTC - 5 upvotes (https, youtu.be)
Robert Pippin: The Significance of Self-Consciousness in Idealist Theories of Logic
created by iunoionnis on 17/06/2018 at 00:59 UTC - 1081 upvotes (https, youtu.be)
How Many Members are Posting Regularly?
created by iunoionnis on 29/05/2018 at 20:37 UTC - 1 upvotes (https, www.reddit.com)
created by iunoionnis on 22/04/2018 at 13:21 UTC - 5 upvotes (https, www.reddit.com)
Comment by iunoionnis at 27/04/2024 at 19:19 UTC
3 upvotes
I did not know that. I met him sixteen years ago and hadn’t heard this until now. Thanks for letting me know
Comment by iunoionnis at 25/02/2024 at 12:30 UTC
5 upvotes
I would recommend starting with this short essay by Hegel, which I actually use as the first text I teach philosophy students in intro to philosophy:
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/se/abstract.htm[1][2]
1: https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/se/abstract.htm
2: https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/se/abstract.htm
Here, Hegel explains the difference between "abstract" thinking and what he will later call "concrete" thinking, an important distinction for both Hegel and the Marxist tradition.
Next, while the introduction to the philosophy of history can teach you quite a bit about Hegel and is a good first text, if you are reading Hegel for understanding Marxism, I think it's important to dive into the logical writings. While both the *Science of Logic* and the *Encyclopedia Logic* are quite difficult, Hegel's Berlin *Lectures on Logic* present his logical system in a much less complicated form with lots of good examples, since it's aimed at his students. You can also read the Berlin *Lectures on Logic* alongside the *Encyclopedia* *Logic*, since the *Encyclopedia* was designed for his students in order to accompany the lectures.
Comment by iunoionnis at 18/02/2024 at 03:33 UTC
2 upvotes
Marx and Engels talk in their letters about how Hegel would have loved cell theory.
Combining dialectics with science fell out of fashion for a while after around 1950, but there has been some work in French about the dialectics of nature looking at stuff in biology. It’s not translated though
Comment by iunoionnis at 17/02/2024 at 20:29 UTC
1 upvotes
Wow, that's crazy. Can't believe they banned the real zizek
Comment by iunoionnis at 17/02/2024 at 17:21 UTC
2 upvotes
Winfield is a rabid anti-communist and not the best reader of Hegel (and his book on Marx was laughable), so I'd advise against it.
Comment by iunoionnis at 17/02/2024 at 17:17 UTC*
2 upvotes
Is there any significant overlap or influence between the life experiences of Hegel and Marx that might have contributed to Marx's engagement with Hegelian philosophy?
Marx was a member of the Young Hegelians, people who were students and followers of Hegel that were aligned with the political left. He was also friends with Heinrich Heine, one of Hegel's more left-leaning and atheistic students. So he developed philosophically at a time where there was a strong Hegelian movement and he would go with Stiner, Engels, Ruge, and the Bauer brothers to some bar where they would drink and curse like sailors. They were also being watched by the police. Worth mentioning that the monarchy wanted to crush Hegelianism after the death of Hegel, since it was associated with atheism, Jacobinism, and left-wing politics.
What are some key concepts or ideas that both Hegel and Marx share?
They both wrote a ton, but I would say the biggest general idea would be that history is constantly changing and moving, that nothing is permanent, and that everything is contradictory and bears the seeds of its own demise. Marx just takes Hegel's viewpoint in a post-Darwinian materialist direction. For Hegel, the dialectical movement takes place within the realm of ideas, and real things just provide us with examples of this movement. Marx and Engels actually want to theorize the dialectics within the real things themselves.
Difference between Hegelian idealism and Marx's materialism: Can someone provide a comprehensive comparison between Hegel's idealism and Marx's materialism?
Hegel obviously believed that reality existed outside of human thought, but he did not believe that we could find any *necessity* within this external world. Instead, we find necessity at the level of concepts. If you look at his philosophy of nature, for example, it is organized by the relationship of ideas to each other, not in terms of temporal succession. Likewise, he understands history primarily in terms of the history of ideas, specifically as a gradual unfolding of the idea of freedom.
After Darwin, it became clear that there are laws of the material world, namely natural selection, so what binds the different species together isn't their arrangement into ideal categories, but a natural process. Marx similarly argues that we can understand the evolution of society to have laws that govern the material basis of this society and explain when there are revolutionary transformations from one society to another. The laws have to do with how we work to take care of our basic needs and how we arrange society around that labor.
Are there any particular books, articles, or essays that offer a deep exploration of the relationship between Hegel and Marx?
The big problem with works on both Hegel and Marx is that they either misunderstand Marx or misunderstand Hegel.
1: https://www.marxists.org/archive/ilyenkov/works/essays/index.htm
2: https://www.marxists.org/archive/ilyenkov/works/essays/index.htm
Another good source would be Engels himself, like this text:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1886/ludwig-feuerbach/[3][4]
3: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1886/ludwig-feuerbach/
4: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1886/ludwig-feuerbach/
Comment by iunoionnis at 17/02/2024 at 17:06 UTC
2 upvotes
It's a huge huge question, and there are lots of texts, questions about manuscript authenticity, and then lots of personal interests involved in the debate.
Somebody once asked Hegel whether he believed in the immortality of the soul and he apparently just pointed at the Bible without saying a word.
William Desmond's *Hegel's God: The Counterfeit Double* is a good source on this. Desmond is a Catholic philosopher who takes Hegel to task on the issue of religion, so it might be interesting.
Comment by iunoionnis at 12/02/2024 at 03:41 UTC
2 upvotes
Comment by iunoionnis at 12/02/2024 at 01:54 UTC
1 upvotes
Brandom doesn’t agree with McDowell’s claim that the master-slave only occurs within one consciousness. When I studied with him, he cited a passage from the Phenomenology where Hegel mentions two consciousnesses and called it “the smoking gun passage.”
Also, Brandom wrote his dissertation with Rorty, so there’s obviously going to be some level of connection there.
Comment by iunoionnis at 11/02/2024 at 13:37 UTC
1 upvotes
I mean, your German abilities aren’t a static thing, and trying to force your way through these texts in German is an excellent way to push your German abilities to a higher level. I got to reading fluency because I refused to use English translations of German texts while in graduate school and one semester I ended up having to read 80 pages of Heidegger a week in German, which is what pushed me to fluency with philosophical reading.
Of the thinkers you mentioned, Marx is certainly the best writer in terms of both clarity and style. Hegel is difficult to understand, but not more difficult to read in German than in English. He tends to write in short choppy sentences or independent clauses separated by a semicolon. I find Kant to be rather difficult for non-native German speakers, just because his sentences are very long and grammatically complex. (I’ve never read Schopenhauer in German, so I can’t say much about him).
I would stay away from trying to read Adorno in German. I can read and speak German fluently and yet Adorno’s prose is largely impenetrable to me in the original. More literary texts like certain works of Nietzsche, Schiller, or Goethe will also be difficult—just like reading Shakespeare is difficult for a fluent English speaker in middle school.
Be aware, you’re going to be picking up and learning 19th century German conventions, which doesn’t always translate well into modern German, as well as doing it within a specific discipline. The other day I picked up a medical journal in English (my native language) and couldn’t understand the words—similarly, you’ll have to continually conquer new “language games” that aren’t necessarily included within philosophical texts.
Comment by iunoionnis at 08/02/2024 at 15:44 UTC*
8 upvotes
Marx only alludes to the master-slave dialectic once in *Capital*, when he says that in the same way that the “I” can only be self-conscious by becoming an object for another consciousness, the value of commodities only appears when it expresses its exchange value in terms of a quantity of some other commodity.
Marx was influenced by lots of different aspects of Hegel’s philosophy and was a member of a group of young Hegelians who called themselves “die Freien,” a group that included Engels, Stirner, Bruno Bauer, and Arnold Ruge.
But as far as Marx’s masterpiece goes, he is mainly influenced by Hegel’s Logic and his method of expanding upon contradictions. He studied the Logic deeply before writing Capital, and the influence of this work is especially clear in *Grundrisse*, one of Marx’s early drafts of the work.
Of course, the master-slave relationship involves one person exploiting another for their labor, so one cannot help but see that there is a connection to the current relationship of the proletariat under capitalism. Yet it wouldn’t be correct to see this as directly influencing Marx—if it does, he doesn’t say much about it.
Indeed, the young Marx frequently talks about alienation, yet he takes this theme more from Bauer’s reading of “Absolute Knowing,” where the worker is alienated from labor in a way similar to how consciousness is alienated from its object in the Phenomenology. But this is the young Marx in unpublished manuscripts, and the importance of these texts in Marx’s overall philosophy is heavily debated.
Fanon, on the other hand, explicitly takes up Hegel’s master-slave dialectic in *Black Skin, White Masks*.
Comment by iunoionnis at 05/02/2024 at 22:27 UTC
5 upvotes
Been focused heavily on teaching and finishing my dissertation, but I’ve been reading:
Comment by iunoionnis at 05/02/2024 at 18:14 UTC
1 upvotes
I think the claim that Hegel's philosophy is "presuppositionless" is dead wrong. I'll be publishing this portion of my dissertation in article form at some point, but that's the main one (currently teaching courses and about to have a child, so we will see if any research happens this summer, but presuming it does, the critique should be published sometime next year).
Houlgate also takes up Maker's claim that Hegel doesn't have a dialectical method (originally floated by Kaufman in the 1960's). I also think this is pretty easily contradicted by the text.
Besides those two claims, I don't think I really have any other problems with Houlgate--otherwise, he's generally the best commentator on Hegel that I've read.
Comment by iunoionnis at 05/02/2024 at 15:05 UTC
7 upvotes
Hegel's 1831 *Lectures on Logic* are a super helpful for understanding the *Logic*, so I'd highly recommend checking them out.
Comment by iunoionnis at 05/02/2024 at 15:04 UTC
3 upvotes
I would start with the Introduction and read the Preface last. Trying to read Hegel without a previous background in philosophy or the history of philosophy is going to be difficult: it's kind of like jumping into quantum physics before learning arithmetic. You can definitely do it, and the *Logic of Desire* can help you do this, but be aware it's going to be difficult to understand everything going on in the text (because it's already difficult even for trained philosophers to understand what's going on in the text).
Comment by iunoionnis at 05/02/2024 at 12:40 UTC
1 upvotes
Nobody?
Comment by iunoionnis at 05/02/2024 at 12:05 UTC
9 upvotes
Yeah I know I have read it. I was just teasing. It is true about Gaza that this is a genocide, not a war (although there are also many bravely resisting genocide).
Comment by iunoionnis at 05/02/2024 at 11:58 UTC
1 upvotes
There might still be time to apply for MA’s, but yeah, schools are currently sending out offers/interviewing.
Comment by iunoionnis at 05/02/2024 at 11:57 UTC
2 upvotes
It’s difficult to get into a PhD. You are up against 200 or more applicants competing for five slots. Grades aren’t as important as having a solid writing sample and letters of recommendation, but you might need an MA with good grades to demonstrate you can do graduate coursework, and the MA’s that pay you tend to be both competitive and do not inflate grades.
Also, you can find programs that pay you starvation wages. Don’t do this because you don’t have other plans. Do this only if you can’t bear doing anything else.
Comment by iunoionnis at 05/02/2024 at 11:50 UTC
-35 upvotes
Didn’t the dude argue that the Persian gulf war wasn’t taking place? Lol, that’s all that’s taken place for the past two decades
Comment by iunoionnis at 05/02/2024 at 11:22 UTC
1 upvotes
Houlgate is wrong about some things, but he can be good about the general moves sometimes
Comment by iunoionnis at 05/02/2024 at 11:21 UTC
1 upvotes
It isn’t driven by “pure negation” in the sense that Trendelenburg is defining it.
I think the “real opposition” thing is less of a problem for Hegel because there are some assumptions that negation is morally robust (found already in Kant’s account of disjunction), but the problem is more how we arrive at the unity of opposites, which is where determinate negation comes in. Like, the inference from being to nothing as what is “not being” is justified if you take the negation to be modal (if something in no way is, then it necessarily is not), but the inference from “being is nothing” to “becoming” requires that contradiction does not result in a nullity, but can be a real determination of things. Trendelenburg thinks that requires the experience of motion, whereas Hegel thinks that this is self-evident to reason if we example any number of dialectical examples carefully.
Comment by iunoionnis at 05/02/2024 at 11:12 UTC
1 upvotes
Pretty dope that you’re reading LU by Trendelenburg. I’ve skimmed through the arguments in German, but have been wanting to read it closely at some point. Might make a good reading group if there’s some German speakers ready to roll.
Comment by iunoionnis at 05/02/2024 at 11:04 UTC*
1 upvotes
It’s driven by the contradiction that occurs when we compare the category to the content of the definition provided by the understanding alongside the principle of determinate negation (that contradiction/negation does not reduce to a nullity, but is a nothing that results). The latter is what Trendelenburg is saying is based off the experience of motion, iirc.
Hegel seems to think that determinate negation is self-evident from any number of examples, including examples that are not spatio-temporal. trendelenburg iirc says it depends on experience, like the experience of motion. So if it is an intuition for Hegel, it’s more of a Cartesian style logical intuition than a spatio-temporal intuition.
Being as indeterminate immediacy *is* nothing, its opposite, which is a contradiction. Likewise with nothing. That very contradiction is the concept of becoming: the transition where being is nothing and nothing is being.
I think some of Hegel’s students actually do respond to Trendelenburg, Rosenkranz I believe for sure, although idk which work.
I’d say more but it’s early and I just woke up.
McTaggart’s commentary sucks, don’t bother with it.
Edit:
The commentator seems to be talking about the move from being to nothing, not from the contradiction to becoming, which I’m not sure is a fair representation of Hegel and is possibly misrepresenting Trendelenburg as well.
So there are two moves that need to be justified:
1. Why is being nothing rather than just not-being?
2. Why does the contradiction “being is nothing” (and vice-versa) produce “becoming,” a new positive concept?
In my view these are justified in the following ways:
1. This is justified by the meta-logical commitments about negation and disjunction where we can infer that whatever in no way is is nothing. It has to do with the idea that disjunction determines the entire space of possibilities and that we can infer contraries from a negative. This was taken for granted by Hegel and Kant, yet isn’t an assumption of 20th century formal logic, so you have to retrofit your logic.
2. Hegel says this is “self-evident” if you consider any number of dialectical examples. Of course, Trendelenburg wants to say that we need to draw off the experience of the real contradictions in motion (a point that Engels seems to follow him on), yet Hegel thinks it’s our ability to recognize the logic of certain self-sublating contradictions with reason itself. So like, if I tell you Socrates knows that he knows nothing, therefore he is wise because he knows one thing, viz. that he knows nothing, you recognize that the order of these negations make it so that the “nothing” is both canceled out by Socrates knowing and preserved. You grasp this with reason, not based on spatio-temporal intution.
Comment by iunoionnis at 05/02/2024 at 11:00 UTC
-29 upvotes
In all honestly, yeah kinda. Haven’t heard his name in a philosophy context in a decade
