Hegel: The Phenomenology of Spirit

[Veritas Aequitas]

Anyone have read Hegel's The Phenomenology of Spirit?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pheno ... _of_Spirit

Do you have any positive or negative views of it?

Discuss??

[Veritas Aequitas]

Notes: KIV

[Age]

Well considering the irrefutable Fact that there is only One Mind, which, in a sense, is thee invisible One Spirit, Itself, and which both are just words denoting to God, Itself, and/or what the God word has just been referring to, exactly, in the invisible sense, then there is no actual 'positive' nor 'negative' view here. But rather just an/other actual irrefutable Truth to be wondered at, and/or pondered over, instead.

[Peter Kropotkin]

Well considering the irrefutable Fact that there is only One Mind, which, in a sense, is thee invisible One Spirit, Itself, and which both are just words denoting to God, Itself, and/or what the God word has just been referring to, exactly, in the invisible sense, then there is no actual 'positive' nor 'negative' view here. But rather just an/other actual irrefutable Truth to be wondered at, and/or pondered over, instead.

K: here we have the case of assumption build on another assumption built
on more assumptions..... there is no here, here... just more assumptions...

the assumption that there is a fact of, ''Only One Mind''
and followed by the assumption of ''thee invisible One Spirit, itself"
and more assumptions of god....and the assumption of an
''actual irrefutable Truth" there is no such thing as an ''actual
irrefutable Truth'' all ''truths'' can be refuted.... even something like
death.... as we cannot know that all human beings that have been born,
have in fact, died, it is an assumption to think that death is a human constant...
we in fact can't know that..... we certainly assume it, but we can't know it....
or prove it...... the problem is that most proofs, (and we can't even say all proofs,
but most proofs are not provable, that is the problem with knowledge, it is
unprovable... this is the uncertainty question of existence)

so, you may assume away, but at least have the decency to admit that
all you have are assumptions..

Kropotkin

[iambiguous]

On the other hand...

"Hegel, installed from above, by the powers that be, as the certified Great Philosopher, was a flat-headed, insipid, nauseating, illiterate charlatan, who reached the pinnacle of audacity in scribbling together and dishing up the craziest mystifying nonsense. This nonsense has been noisily proclaimed as immortal wisdom by mercenary followers and readily accepted as such by all fools, who thus joined into as perfect a chorus of admiration as had ever been heard before. The extensive field of spiritual influence with which Hegel was furnished by those in power has enabled him to achieve the intellectual corruption of a whole generation."

Arthur Schopenhauer

Unless, of course, he's wrong.

Anyway...

"The Phenomenology of Spirit is the most widely-discussed philosophical work of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel; its German title can be translated as either The Phenomenology of Spirit or The Phenomenology of Mind. Hegel described the work, published in 1807, as an "exposition of the coming to be of knowledge". This is explicated through a necessary self-origination and dissolution of "the various shapes of spirit as stations on the way through which spirit becomes pure knowledge". " wiki

Of course, you know me. When I read this [as a "general description intellectual contraption"] the first thing that pops into my head is this: "Given what particular context?"

Then the part where German idealism does or does not make a distinction between knowledge in the either/or world and knowledge in the is/ought world.

Just in case someone here does want to bring Hegel's thoughts down out of the philosophical clouds.

[Age]

Well considering the irrefutable Fact that there is only One Mind, which, in a sense, is thee invisible One Spirit, Itself, and which both are just words denoting to God, Itself, and/or what the God word has just been referring to, exactly, in the invisible sense, then there is no actual 'positive' nor 'negative' view here. But rather just an/other actual irrefutable Truth to be wondered at, and/or pondered over, instead.

K: here we have the case of assumption build on another assumption built
on more assumptions..... there is no here, here... just more assumptions...

Where do you think or believe 'an assumption' is here, exactly, "peter kropotkin"?

After all it would be very impolite to claim that there is an assumption built upon another assumption built upon another assumption, here, while expecting others to 'assume' what you are talking about and referring to, exactly.

the assumption that there is a fact of, ''Only One Mind''

But 'this' is not an 'assumption'. Why did you presume that 'it' was?

This is an irrefutable Fact, based of actual proof.

and followed by the assumption of ''thee invisible One Spirit, itself"
and more assumptions of god....and the assumption of an
''actual irrefutable Truth" there is no such thing as an ''actual
irrefutable Truth'' all ''truths'' can be refuted....

Here we have another one who believes that there is no actual truth. And, this one even goes to the length of, absolutely any and all truths can be refuted.

I wonder if this one has yet realized that if all truths can be refuted, then the 'truth' here, which this one believes is 'absolutely true' can also be refuted?

even something like
death.... as we cannot know that all human beings that have been born,
have in fact, died, it is an assumption to think that death is a human constant...
we in fact can't know that..... we certainly assume it, but we can't know it....
or prove it......

But you human beings do not so-call 'die'.

This is just another irrefutable Fact and truth, based upon already known irrefutable proofs.

the problem is that most proofs, (and we can't even say all proofs,
but most proofs are not provable, that is the problem with knowledge, it is
unprovable... this is the uncertainty question of existence)

How could 'a proof', supposedly, not be 'provable'?

it is an absolute 'oxy-moron' to say and claim that 'proofs' cannot be 'proved'.

These people, back then, went to the most absurd lengths to try to back up and support their 'currently' very tightly held onto beliefs and assumptions.

so, you may assume away, but at least have the decency to admit that
all you have are assumptions..

Kropotkin

1. There is not an assumption there, as I can back up and support all of what I have said and claimed there with irrefutable proof.

2. you come on here and claim things, like they are absolutely true, right, and correct, yet you here now expect me to admit that all I have are assumptions.

3. Have you ever here in this forum admitted that all you have are assumptions?

4. I, still, back up and stand by and behind what I say and claim here. This is because I obtained the actual things, which prove irrefutably what I say and claim here.

5. I have never seen you say nor claim that you could back up and support absolutely anything, which you have said and claimed here in this forum. Which, in itself, says a lot about what you say and claim here.