Hacker News Reader

Comment by mikhmha | Hacker News Reader

So did Fyodor Dostoevsky.

Yes, exactly, “Crime and punishment” or ”Demons” or others. Some of the dialogues are exactly about the ideologies and how different characters think and apply them, how reason manifests in violence.

This made me think of C&P as well. Specifically how Raskolnikov developed his own half baked ideology where “great men” were free to act with impunity. It’s not hard to draw parallels with “longtermism” and effective altruism.

Even Aristotle knew that reason was just an aspect of being a human and not the whole thing

To be honest the only philosopher I know of who convincingly argued that everything is reason is Hegel, but he did so more by making the idea of reason so broad that even empiricism (and emotion, humour, love, the body, etc.) falls under it...

Hegel still has a really bad reputation regarding atrocities and his Philosophy of history.

"History as the slaughter-bench" - and yet the aims of reason are accomplished."

But there are also Hegel scholars (Walter Jaeschke for example) who simply consider these accusations to be uneducated and that he does not see the atrocities of history as reasonable, but on the contrary makes criticism possible in the first place.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lectures_on_the_Philosophy_of_...

All of Hegel, and most of his descendants, are fashionable nonsense. All types of "Dialectics" are fake and don't exist. It's telling that the most common version of the term "Dialectics" that everyone thinks Hegel coined was actually coined by one of his (many butthurt) students, Fitche.

Philosophy will continue to be bankrupt for as long as Hegel's stranglehold on Philosophy remains. Kill his thought, Kill "dialectics", Kill the "world spirit" or "Geist". Otherwise philosophy continues down the "post modern neo marxism" loony world that has led so many to turn reactionary.

Edit (in response to the comment cus I can't reply faster since Dang's HN policies are bad):

I cover to cover read his shitty books. They weren't worth opening, let alone reading. This is the same for most of the rest of the "postmodern" canon.

Competitive debate meant that we weaponized these long dead idolaters for our own needs. I've (unfortunately) read Zizek, Foucault, Derrida, Deleuze, Sartre, Heidigger, etc. I regret most of the time I spent reading these authors. They are all intellectually bankrupt and many of them are straight up pseudo-scientific charlatan snake oil salespeople (Lacan).

Hegel really isn’t as difficult as you’re making out. Your inheritance of the popular idea that he is nonsense is the only thing stopping you

We can discuss nonsense.

But Hegel is definitely not fashionable.

> This is the same for most of the rest of the "postmodern" canon.

I genuinely can’t think of anyone less postmodern than Hegel. He’s a pure rational traditionalist who believed completely in objective truth and morality and grand narratives lol

So you’ve discarded a lot of modern , post modern and contemporary thinkers without offering some alternative or do you mean that there isn’t much to philosophy in general? I’m curious because I have also come to a similar conclusion but I have to admit that I have not read everyone that you’ve mentioned but I have read summaries and analysis.

At least Zizek can be funny sometimes.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com