Hey Eduardo, you know what? There are segments in this video where your passion makes you look like an insane person. And let’s be clear about this: I love it.
Our lecturer for contemporary philosophy has advised us to watch this video before we begin studying Hegel. I honestly believe that this video has set the tone, and I am definitely looking forward to learn more about the works of Hegel.
Camera review and books that you like is the best format for you to navigate your RUclips consciousness... it’s the act of creating and the processes behind these videos that directs absolute knowledge of the format on to your conscience and on to your viewers hence the sharing of knowledge... lol just kidding I like these videos a lot keep it up!
Ayy si que me ha gustado mucho! La manera en la que dices los facts no son para que alguien aprenda en un vídeo todo sobre Hegel, sino que exista la diminuta posibilidad de que alguien se sienta identificado y vaya a buscar por su propio camino ese conocimiento. Que lindo, y muy buenas referencias de otros libros 10/10
I think it's more important to read Smith and Ricardo in order to understand Marx. Hegel is a nice cherry on top for Marxist thought, but not the main guy. But yeah, now is a good time to go for the dialectical thought of the Absolute Spirit!
You point out Marx's critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right and his critique of the Young Hegelians in The German Ideology, but forget to mention his Critique of Hegel's Philosophy in General in 1844, before the German Ideology, where he directly engages with the Phenomenology, calling it "the true point of origin and the secret of the Hegelian philosophy", and Hegel's project. His primary critique is that Hegel recapitulates science, the study of actuality, to theology by finding reconciliation as a product of the process of philosophy itself, whereas Marx sees this reconciliation as only possible through practical revolutionary activity. Marx explicitly argues to move beyond the realm of philosophy by actualizing it, as the working class can produce real reconciliation between the contradiction of human needs with the inhuman way in which we reproduce humanity through its particular position in society, its self-activity, and its further association.
I am very familiar with his critiques of the Young Hegelians. Again, my point stands. There is no textual evidence that Marx engaged with Hegel in any important or systematic fashion. The fact that the Phenomenology is the origin of Hegelian philosophy is claimed by Hegel himself in his introduction. Marx's comments on Hegel are either far off the mark, or a recycled comment on Feuerbach. If you read his comments on Hegel, he is clearly not familiar with the author. There are some comments that are just academic horrors hahaa. And this is coming from me, that I identify myself as a Hegelian-Marxist. I had an exchange about this with someone else in the comment section. Look through the comments and you'll find the conversation and some more info on how and why I make these claims. :)
@@edpavez I referred to Marx’s Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy in General, did you not read that? He deals not with Young Hegelians but with Hegel here and it’s free to search for yourself. I don’t know what Hegelian-Marxist means, or care what philosophic sympathies you have with Marx, an author explicitly claiming to do something other than and in contradiction with philosophy. You didn’t engage with the content of my comment and your own reply below is irrelevant to what I said. Unless you hope to suggest Hegel was a communist, Marx and Hegel’s “projects” are irreconcilable and Hegelian-Marxist seems like the latest philosophic “innovation” which hope to syncretically advance some nonsense position into academic legitimacy.
@@DugongClock well, if you think both projects are "irreconcilable" it is because you have not read Hegel directly, otherwise you would know both authors are about the development of contradictions in the world of experience and the development of ideology in relation to a transpersonal subject that is logically and historically previous to the individual. I'm sorry you think I didn't engage enough with the content of your comment, but it would take me too long to correct and add comments... and since you are not familiar with Hegel, it will be a waste of time. if you actually want to learn and not try to show how much you think you know, then read some of the other comments: they might be interesting to you. have a good week. :)
@@edpavez I won’t lie, I’ve only recently begun my study of Hegel and I’m by no means well versed, but in my ongoing study the question of his relation to Marx is important to me. Thus, aside from cursory reading and limited study, my knowledge of Hegel comes completely from Marx, including his critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right (as you mentioned), Philosophy in General (which you continue to dodge, likely because you haven’t read it), the German Ideology, and The Holy Family. I am wholly versed in Marx and communism (his “project”), so if you hope to pretend Hegel and Marx were doing the same thing, or Marx was simply “out-Hegelling”/continuing Hegel (or otherwise reframe communism in enough Hegelian language as to obscure their practical demands and turn it to a philosophical abstract) then you hope to either situate communism in the realm of philosophy, and thus contradict Marx and abandon communism, or you hope to argue Hegel was a communist, as there is no reading of Marx’s critique of Hegel and Hegelians which doesn’t focus on the practical difference in activity between the philosophers and critical-scientific communism. To engage in “communist philosophy” or “communist economics” is as ridiculous as “communist bricklaying”, which is likely why you hope to use “Marxist” instead, the overabused title of a century disowned by Marx even in his time. If their projects are identical, then you must either attach Hegel to the labor movement or divorce Marx from it. Again, none of the comments you refer to are particularly helpful or relevant (again are you not reading my comment?), and it’s not that you didn’t engage enough, it’s that you didn’t engage at all with the content of my first comment, but just repeated what you said previously in the video.
@@DugongClock yeah, the issue is there’s nothing to engage from your original comment because, as you say, all your knowledge of Hegel comes from Marx, who had no understanding of the Hegelian project. Any connection we can make between both authors is merely academic, as their projects are not equal, but they (unknowingly to Marx) share many commonalities. It is within those commonalities that a Hegelian-Marxist notion of history’s progress can be established. Sadly, Marx’s critiques of Hegel are absolutely external and fully ignorant of Hegel’s project. I’m sorry you don’t like that answer, but it’s the only real answer… maybe read Hegel and figure it out yourself!
That question presupposes there actually is something we might call “the epicenter of human history” and I don’t agree with that premise, so your question can’t be answered under those terms. But the point I was making was that the French revolution was a pivotal moment in our modern way of thinking, so when reading people theorizing about it, we may track that person’s political perspective. :)
The myth about Hegel being an Idealist in the sense that the world is not real or he built a fake 'world of Ideas' like some people talk about when they refer to Plato is indeed infuriating.
I went to your channel and was surprised to see most of the videos are about cameras. I'd love to hear you review books, but I'd subscribe only if you had a channel dedicated to that, not interspersed with mostly photography content. It's totally cool a photography nerd is so well read in philosophy. Love that!
I'm very interested in you putting out more content based on books you enjoy. I've recently begun getting deeper into post-modern literature (fiction that is) so I'm curious about who some of your favorite fiction writers might be.
Hey, Eduardo! Loved your video! I think it dissipates many cliches associated with Hegel, and that's excellent! I think, however, that there is something not very much spoken about Hegel that should be more known: his idea of immanent critique. For instance, in your video, you give the impression that Hegel dismisses sense certainty because he thinks of it as a poor form of knowledge. I think it would be worthwhile to point out that sense certainty, in a way, dismisses itself. Hegel is not importing a external criteria to critique sense certainty. At least that is what he says. He is simply letting the internal logic of consciousness unfold itself, by its own necessities, in front of the reader. So yeah, that specific claim of Hegel many times is ignored and I think it is a worthwhile discussion to have. But, anyway, great video, man! Thanks!
I met Espinosa through António Damásio (a well known neuro scientist) , and I liked his idea of God and nature, the same way that I liked Descartes and his Cogito Ergo Sum thought. These three (Espinosa, Descartes and Damásio) started me venturing on more and more philosophers... Kant, Hegel, Hume, Sartre, Agostinho, Nietzsche, the greek classics like: Aristoteles; Plato, and than Karl Marx (who brought me to socialism isch type of society ). I managed to read the greek ones really fast, Descartes, Nietzsche, Hume and Agostinho were pretty fun to read but Kant and Hegel those took me a bit of time sure (Sarte I fail to understand and fail to like it).
An excellent, a very engaging, accessible and eloquent introduction. Not sure if I'll ever get around to opening that book, which I have, that very one you show. I tried. But "sense phenomena," just too boring. I'm drawn very much to his lectures, his philosophy of history. I've even read the first volume of his lectures on the philosophy of religion. Yes, I think he is the greatest, and one day hope to graduate to "The Phenomenology of Spirit." And thank you for explaining "the negative." Hard for me to understand this, but you helped me.
I would need a citation of that. Words in Hegel have specific contexts. "Revolutionary" (in the sense of going about and establishing a system where the absolute will is the collective will) then sure, Hegel advocates the complexities and impossibilities of such a project in the section "Absolute Freedom and Terror" of the Phenomenology. But "revolutionary" (in the sense of presenting the steps towards a radical erosion of the current system and how it can be pushed forward), then he is probably the most revolutionary philosopher there is. He dismantles the modern atomist point of view and serves as a radical critique of our current understanding of social sciences. :)
Judging by your name and your particular copy of ‘Hegel’ from Fink I presume you are a native Spanish speaker as well as myself. On that note, I was wondering if you have read Hegel’s books in Spanish too. If so, in your opinion, in which of said languages do you recommend me to start reading his works? I feel quite comfortable with English and most of the philosophical works I’ve read (very few if I’m honest) were English translations, but still I wonder if you have any input in the matter. Ideally I would’ve prefer to read them in German (obviously) but I’m far from fluent, and based on the apparent complexity of Hegel’s style and line of thought I would want to read a translation that is as practical and smooth as may be, but while still being as closest to the original as posible. I suppose English shares more similarities with German than the latter does with Spanish so English will probably be the way to go about it but I was just wondering if there were any good translations in Spanish, since you seem like someone (as clearly outlined throughout the video) that has read Hegel many a time. Anyway, thanks for the video!!
Buddy, no one is an expert on Hegel because his musings and writings were convoluted, complicated and barely made any sense. Sadly the French socialist 'intellectuals' followed the same aristocratic nonsense path, as had Marx too!
what a treat to go between photography and philosophy, Eduardo! and kudos for attempting to articulate such complex ideas in a foreign language. soy profe de cultura hispánica y muchos veces me enredo intentando articular conceptos teóricos o filosóficos a mis alumnos!
German philosophy ---- Peirce -- lady Welby -- C. Ogden -- Ramsey -- Wittgenstein- --- Vienna circle ---- US analytic philosophy ---- Neo pragmatism ---Neo hegelism : Big uroboros panorama
This is excellent. I wasn't expecting to learn much in 30 mins, but there are some gems here. What you said about Marx only having had a cursory understanding of Hegel blew my mind! (I say that as a Marxist myself). EDIT: By the way, what's your source for how much (or little) of Hegel, Marx actually read?
My main source is Hegelian-Marxist specialist Carlos Perez Soto, who made a research regarding Hegel’s influence in Marx. But aside from him, it’s a fairly established fact in Marxist scholarship, since there is no textual support of Marx studying Hegel’s major works. Marx was an obsessive reader who kept notes of every book he touched. There are almost no notes about Hegel’s books aside from a letter where he thanks his friend for giving him a copy of the Science of Logic, and in the letter he says “this book has helped me to write Capital”, but he never stated how much he used it or what he used it for. There’s no evidence he read much of it. No footnotes, no paper evidence. And if you know Hegel and you read Marx’s German Ideology it’s absolutely obvious Marx doesn’t know what he’s talking about. As much as I like the guy.
@@MegaLotusEater I know it because I am familiar with Hegel, but it’s an established academic fact among Hegelians: Marx never wanted to publish a book called “The German Ideology” because it’s just a bunch of hand written notes. When traditional Marxists wanted to make a scientific and rigurous edition of it, they reached the conclusion that said book never existed as such. It’s just a bunch of handwritten notes sewed together and stored in a chest in Amsterdam. When Dimistri Riazanov (around 1920-1926) was looking through Marx’s notes he found a sewed handwritten collection of papers which had written “The German Ideology” in its first page. But that’s not a real title, and that’s not a real book. That title was adopted by Engels, 40 years later, when he got the papers from Riazanov. So much so, that in The German Ideology there’s even a chapter written by Karl Grün, and not by Marx or Engels. It’s just a bunch of notes. The section of Feuerbach is composed of 9 different manuscripts that were designed as sepparated articles. So, Riazanov edited the text, changed words, modified parts, and made a “pedagogical version” which is the one we usually read. Sorry about the long reply.
@@edpavez Thanks for the insights. Im guessing im not going to be able to find anything by Carlos Pérez Soto in English, specifically on his analysis of Hegel and Marx?
@@MegaLotusEater no. It’s all in Spanish, sadly. But the historicity of this “Marx put Hegel on his head” can be traced to the following authors: Plekhanov invented the “dialectical materialism” as a supposed science Marx had established (he didn’t), and is the big responsible for the myth. Later on Lenin takes from Plekhanov this idea and simply repeats it and accepts it, because he was focused on politics, not on philosophy. Lenin actually read bits and pieces of Hegel’s “Science of Logic” in prison. The copy with his outlines can be seen and researched, but if we compare his notes (manuscripts that he never intended to be published, which were later on published as “Lenin’s philosophical notebooks”) with Hegel’s “Science of Logic”, we find that he was a great reader, but he didn’t understand Hegel at all. It’s all a political use of Hegel, without the philosophical and metaphysical context.
Love the video... please do more videos on books along with your amazing photography videos. You have surely ignited in me a spark to read about Hegel. Stay safe .
Hey Eduardo! Thank you really much for the video :) pls more! i have been willing to get into philosophy for a really long time but have always been kinda scared of doing so. Your video encouraged me to start reading more about it but i guess i better start with a general introduction before starting a deep dive into Hegel & friends. btw i just ordered a copy of Uexküls Foray in to the worlds of animals and humans :) stay save and keep up the good videos!
Wow, that year went by fast. I noticed this video the day it was uploaded, and immediately thought "wow, this is the perfect introduction to Hegel for me!", as I really enjoy all your other work... But I was too scared, having heard Hegel named the most difficult philosopher to read. It's only now, after having heard even more podcasts on philosophy and read works by amongst others Simone de Beauvoir and Hannah Arendt, who constantly refer to "Hegel's mistakes" (heavily nuanced of course), I feel like I'm gonna have to approach him. This video was absolutely amazing, and I regret not watching it sooner. I still didn't understand most of it, but small steps I guess 😛
Eduardo, many thanks for this, a really good and informal introduction to Hegel. I enjoyed this very much, and it came as a surprise after getting to know your photography videos - all very enjoyable, by the way! I must ask, have you read "In The Spirit Of Hegel" by Robert C. Solomon? I found this both profound and exciting and sometimes humorous in tackling and illuminating the Phenomenology.
TL; DR: Nobody has read Hegel. Nobody knows what the fuck Hegel was talking about. But you need to convince everyone else that you've read Hegel. So never admit to not reading Hegel.
I know the meme. But I think it’s worth dealing with these difficult texts, as I’ve found the avenues they open in our reasoning cannot be opened by any other means I am aware of.
Here's my deepest and most treasured insight from Hegel: True enlightenment can only come if we dissect the idealities of matter at the apposite meta conscious level. The one where chronotopical concurrences, so to speak, _reveal_ themselves. But this is if - and only if - the spirit of the world has developed to the ontological phase characterized by von Bülenhof as "exuberant".
I think Hegel’s argument is, precisely, that the spirit is already at that stage. Hegel’s phenomenology does not end on a prediction about the future: it is describing the state of being. It is the subject as substance.
Fantastic video, how refreshing to get your thoughts and perspective on classical European philosophy. I'm so glad I found your channel, just cause you shoot interesting cameras!
12:12 where does Hegel say that? also as far as I’m aware (from secondary sources) Marx did read Phenomenology and discusses some if the ideas of the book im 1844 manuscripts. I think you’re reading Hegel through Kojeve and french tradition, and already assuming Marx.
I’ve discussed Marx’s lack of understanding of Hegel so many times in the comment section. His manuscripts only show a terrible missunderstanding of even basic elements of Hegel’s ideas. Secondary sources are never a good source. It’s better to engage with the authors directly. Hegel does go in detail about what I mention here in the Spirit section of the Phenomenology of Spirit.
Yeah i agree hegels views are about ideology and not seeing things properly, anyone who thinks it is about the dialetics and thesis ans synthesis has just comsumed youtube @edpavez
Nice video and a good personal introduction to this complex text. I don’t know if you have read this book in German but it is a nightmare to do so, probably reads much more comprehensive in English... now, there are so many points you are talking about in this nice flowing overview that I have difficulty to answer properly. First, yes, Nietzsche was not a Nazi, he even wrote letters opposing the anti-jewish ideas of his sister Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche, who unfortunately published all of his remaining scrips by editing them the way it gave her attention with Nationalists antisemitic movements of the time. Not to mention letters of her brother written to her, which she cut up to her favor. The photographs we know of the Syphilis-taken Nietzsche and her sister were carefully arranged by her. And Heidegger, if you have read „Die Selbstbehauptung der deutschen Universität“ you will have noticed, that he probably thought he could be THE national philosopher for the Nazis, but when he found out they were just using him, he just shut his mouth. I think that speaks by itself... a very conservative German protestant... Let’s not forget also, he had a long lasting affair with Hannah Ahrend, a great philosopher herself. Now, I have difficulty believing in the absolute spirit idea of Hegel... I don’t think he solved the mind-body-problem. And I would consider Schopenhauer to be much more inspired by Buddhism than Hegel, sorry. If you like, have a look at Masao Abe‘s (a philosopher from the Nishida-Kyoto-phenomenological school) „Zen and Comparative Studies“. Sorry, if I don’t go really in to the arguments of your nice and brilliant introduction, but that would blow up this comment too much. And then, I read Hegel sooo many years ago... Now here’s one for the logician: the incomprehensive will always be incomprehensible, as it is its nature. For myself I am more orientated in evolutionary theory and sociology, recently enjoying Zizek... but in the end I will remain a pataphysician, vive le docteur Faustroll! 😉 keep up making people think, that’s what it’s all about, thanks for sharing.
I AM into this. I totally listened to it while loading film onto reels in a dark bag, so some cross pollination was also appreciated. I am well aware I am not the only one to say this, but in light of the state of the world and recent events especially, I think it's time we all read Marx.
Herr Hegel and I were born on 27 August. That I understood. I take my hat off to you for understanding a fraction of Hegel’s writings, which I’m completely dumbfounded. Stay healthy and safe.
Odd to think of a Hegelian overview as refreshing, but it was nice to see and think over. As a sort of casual onlooker into things "philosophical", I find myself more drawn to Wittgenstein lately. Perhaps that would melt away if I took the time to read into in depth, but barring that, here I am at present :)
I got a bit traumatized at university, but what with one thing and another I find myself reading The Science of Logic nearly forty years later and making sense of it. A bit of encouragement is still necessary though so thank you for that.
Hegel's presumption of upper dialectical movement of the spirit or the society as a whole due to tension between thesis and antithesis is confusing. The history will tell in many part of the society just collapsed due to internal tension between two or different ideologies..So there is no guarantee that this upper movement will take place.
Hegel never says society moves “up” via “internal conflict”. Moreover: he never talks about thesis or antithesis. I talk about this in the video. That’s just a myth, and is never mentioned by Hegel in any book.
@@manaschakraborty9192 have any of those professors or RUclips “experts” ever read Hegel? If they did, they would know Hegel never uses those words. Those are from Fichte, which then Feuerbach attributed to Hegel and Marx simply repeated it. Many “experts” don’t have the time to read Hegel, so they just repeat lies. I’m sorry you have been lied to.
@@edpavez Can't agree with your last word. No two youtube video say the same thing on Hegel's philosophy. All of them have their own explanation. Who knows, what you are saying is correct or not !!
@@manaschakraborty9192 I mean, PLEASE don’t take my word for it. Do what the other people didn’t do and just read Hegel directly, instead of repeating what others said. Once you read him directly, you’ll be back to this video and realize how sad it is to see people talking about authors they didn’t read.
Qué cool tu video y tu canal. Te descubrí porque estoy interesado en la foto análoga y ahora me voy dando cuenta de que haces el PhD en teatro. Justo he estado pensando en empezar un canal de foto, llevándolo lo más que pueda por el video-ensayo. También estoy haciendo el doctorado, pero yo estoy en UPenn y ya sabes... el verano es el único rato del año para probar cosas nuevas.
I am really enjoying the mix of videos like this with your photography content. Would you do a video discussing any overlap between your interest in philosophy and photography? I'm fairly new to philosophy but I could imagine there being an interesting relationship. Appreciate your work!
Espero sigas haciendo vídeos así. Por cierto, espero algún día ver una obra tuya, Los paisajes invisibles y La metáfora de las aves son mis favoritas. Ojalá subas pronto nuevas obras. Saludos
Me gustan mucho estos vídeos de "reseñas" que haces sobre los libros, me motivas mucho a querer leer todo lo que explicas o mencionas, que bueno que los sigas haciendo. Ojalá me ayudarás recomendandome al menos desde tu conocimiento, por dónde empezar para llegar a un material así denso como Hegel, al menos de qué manera llegar a leer este libro. Un saludo enorme, gracias!
Dude, you are amazing! I've been reading all about Hegel recently and have heard ALL of those myths. I'm glad you've debunked all of them for me since I was beginning to believe that the man wasn't who I though the was. Well... he is who I though the was after all!
As a practicing Buddhist it was interesting listening to your a talk about the why he wrote and he taught and his ideas and , half through , I was like, hold up this the same way we explore thoughts, ideas and evolve in Buddhism and then you said it ... the argument , counter arguments, and reverse argument process is mind blowing and is the best way to rid you of your own preconceptions, thoughts, judgements and opens you up to new and different ideas and ways of thinking , its the nicest way to evolve your thinking and being ... I’m going to read some .. it will be interesting how much similar to Buddhists thought his writings are , I wonder if he studied it or eastern philosophy’s in general.. I would of thought he might have in some ways...
Yes! He was quite familiar with Hindu traditions and Buddhism, but his spiritual position can be traced back more clearly to Hermetic traditions. One way of interpreting the Phenomenology of Spirit is from the perspective of non-duality. The collapse of the subject-object dichotomy. :)
Gregg Sadler's commentaries on every section of The Phenomenology are very good. The series of RUclips videos are called "Half Hour Hegel".
Hey Eduardo, you know what? There are segments in this video where your passion makes you look like an insane person. And let’s be clear about this: I love it.
My dear man, this is that best thing I (probably) will come across during the lockdown. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
Our lecturer for contemporary philosophy has advised us to watch this video before we begin studying Hegel. I honestly believe that this video has set the tone, and I am definitely looking forward to learn more about the works of Hegel.
That's awesome. Which class and who's the lecturer?
@@edpavez Contemporary Philosophy with Professor Vaughn Fayle
Camera review and books that you like is the best format for you to navigate your RUclips consciousness... it’s the act of creating and the processes behind these videos that directs absolute knowledge of the format on to your conscience and on to your viewers hence the sharing of knowledge... lol just kidding I like these videos a lot keep it up!
I watched this video Monday and went out and bought this book today. I look forward to diving into it
I ve watched this like 40 times already and cant wait to get to read hegel!!! Gracias!
Thank you! I actually bought the book ( PoS ) but have not read it yet. Because of your introduction, I feel ready and inspired to begin! : )
Ayy si que me ha gustado mucho! La manera en la que dices los facts no son para que alguien aprenda en un vídeo todo sobre Hegel, sino que exista la diminuta posibilidad de que alguien se sienta identificado y vaya a buscar por su propio camino ese conocimiento. Que lindo, y muy buenas referencias de otros libros 10/10
Estaba esperando mucho este video 😍
I’m reading Marx atm, and he’s REALLY into Hegel, so it’s nice to get a bit more grounding on him
I think it's more important to read Smith and Ricardo in order to understand Marx. Hegel is a nice cherry on top for Marxist thought, but not the main guy.
But yeah, now is a good time to go for the dialectical thought of the Absolute Spirit!
esto es alucinante, muchas gracias
Blessings Eduardo...
More of these please :) Great Job
Por fin Ed !
Awesome video Eduardo, what about making one about Spinoza ? :)
You point out Marx's critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right and his critique of the Young Hegelians in The German Ideology, but forget to mention his Critique of Hegel's Philosophy in General in 1844, before the German Ideology, where he directly engages with the Phenomenology, calling it "the true point of origin and the secret of the Hegelian philosophy", and Hegel's project. His primary critique is that Hegel recapitulates science, the study of actuality, to theology by finding reconciliation as a product of the process of philosophy itself, whereas Marx sees this reconciliation as only possible through practical revolutionary activity. Marx explicitly argues to move beyond the realm of philosophy by actualizing it, as the working class can produce real reconciliation between the contradiction of human needs with the inhuman way in which we reproduce humanity through its particular position in society, its self-activity, and its further association.
I am very familiar with his critiques of the Young Hegelians. Again, my point stands. There is no textual evidence that Marx engaged with Hegel in any important or systematic fashion. The fact that the Phenomenology is the origin of Hegelian philosophy is claimed by Hegel himself in his introduction. Marx's comments on Hegel are either far off the mark, or a recycled comment on Feuerbach. If you read his comments on Hegel, he is clearly not familiar with the author. There are some comments that are just academic horrors hahaa. And this is coming from me, that I identify myself as a Hegelian-Marxist. I had an exchange about this with someone else in the comment section. Look through the comments and you'll find the conversation and some more info on how and why I make these claims. :)
@@edpavez I referred to Marx’s Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy in General, did you not read that? He deals not with Young Hegelians but with Hegel here and it’s free to search for yourself. I don’t know what Hegelian-Marxist means, or care what philosophic sympathies you have with Marx, an author explicitly claiming to do something other than and in contradiction with philosophy. You didn’t engage with the content of my comment and your own reply below is irrelevant to what I said. Unless you hope to suggest Hegel was a communist, Marx and Hegel’s “projects” are irreconcilable and Hegelian-Marxist seems like the latest philosophic “innovation” which hope to syncretically advance some nonsense position into academic legitimacy.
@@DugongClock well, if you think both projects are "irreconcilable" it is because you have not read Hegel directly, otherwise you would know both authors are about the development of contradictions in the world of experience and the development of ideology in relation to a transpersonal subject that is logically and historically previous to the individual. I'm sorry you think I didn't engage enough with the content of your comment, but it would take me too long to correct and add comments... and since you are not familiar with Hegel, it will be a waste of time. if you actually want to learn and not try to show how much you think you know, then read some of the other comments: they might be interesting to you. have a good week. :)
@@edpavez I won’t lie, I’ve only recently begun my study of Hegel and I’m by no means well versed, but in my ongoing study the question of his relation to Marx is important to me. Thus, aside from cursory reading and limited study, my knowledge of Hegel comes completely from Marx, including his critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right (as you mentioned), Philosophy in General (which you continue to dodge, likely because you haven’t read it), the German Ideology, and The Holy Family. I am wholly versed in Marx and communism (his “project”), so if you hope to pretend Hegel and Marx were doing the same thing, or Marx was simply “out-Hegelling”/continuing Hegel (or otherwise reframe communism in enough Hegelian language as to obscure their practical demands and turn it to a philosophical abstract) then you hope to either situate communism in the realm of philosophy, and thus contradict Marx and abandon communism, or you hope to argue Hegel was a communist, as there is no reading of Marx’s critique of Hegel and Hegelians which doesn’t focus on the practical difference in activity between the philosophers and critical-scientific communism. To engage in “communist philosophy” or “communist economics” is as ridiculous as “communist bricklaying”, which is likely why you hope to use “Marxist” instead, the overabused title of a century disowned by Marx even in his time. If their projects are identical, then you must either attach Hegel to the labor movement or divorce Marx from it. Again, none of the comments you refer to are particularly helpful or relevant (again are you not reading my comment?), and it’s not that you didn’t engage enough, it’s that you didn’t engage at all with the content of my first comment, but just repeated what you said previously in the video.
@@DugongClock yeah, the issue is there’s nothing to engage from your original comment because, as you say, all your knowledge of Hegel comes from Marx, who had no understanding of the Hegelian project. Any connection we can make between both authors is merely academic, as their projects are not equal, but they (unknowingly to Marx) share many commonalities. It is within those commonalities that a Hegelian-Marxist notion of history’s progress can be established. Sadly, Marx’s critiques of Hegel are absolutely external and fully ignorant of Hegel’s project. I’m sorry you don’t like that answer, but it’s the only real answer… maybe read Hegel and figure it out yourself!
Nice video but was the french revolution really like the epicenter of human history?
That question presupposes there actually is something we might call “the epicenter of human history” and I don’t agree with that premise, so your question can’t be answered under those terms. But the point I was making was that the French revolution was a pivotal moment in our modern way of thinking, so when reading people theorizing about it, we may track that person’s political perspective. :)
¿Por qué crees que desde los feminismos materialistas se critica a Butler por haber hecho su tesis sobre Hegel?
No estoy familiarizado con esas críticas. ¿Cuáles son, en específico?
Dear sir ,I am new on your channel .
welcome. we have cookies. :)
10:34
More Book reviews!
13:04 >:]
You're right to re-read and re-re-read the Phenomenology because the introduction to the Phenomenology is the Phenomenology itself...
Yep. The preface is a summary of the whole thing. Hahaha
Wouldn't this mean that the body of the Phenomenology is in some way an introduction to the preface?
It's all loops of loops, man
@@jay76richardson And now, you finally grasp the idea of Hegel..."THE END IS THE BEGINNING"
"Imagine you're a consciousness."
*googles how to ctrl+alt+delete the human brain.
The myth about Hegel being an Idealist in the sense that the world is not real or he built a fake 'world of Ideas' like some people talk about when they refer to Plato is indeed infuriating.
Nietzsche next!!! then Chomsky pls . (Based on the books seen over years behind on photography videos ) stay safe .
I'd give thumbs up twice if I could on this comment
I went to your channel and was surprised to see most of the videos are about cameras. I'd love to hear you review books, but I'd subscribe only if you had a channel dedicated to that, not interspersed with mostly photography content. It's totally cool a photography nerd is so well read in philosophy. Love that!
Thank you. Would love to hear more of your thoughts on other philosophers/critical theorists.
I'm very interested in you putting out more content based on books you enjoy. I've recently begun getting deeper into post-modern literature (fiction that is) so I'm curious about who some of your favorite fiction writers might be.
I don't read much fiction, but I can certainly give that a try. :)
Hey, Eduardo! Loved your video! I think it dissipates many cliches associated with Hegel, and that's excellent! I think, however, that there is something not very much spoken about Hegel that should be more known: his idea of immanent critique. For instance, in your video, you give the impression that Hegel dismisses sense certainty because he thinks of it as a poor form of knowledge. I think it would be worthwhile to point out that sense certainty, in a way, dismisses itself. Hegel is not importing a external criteria to critique sense certainty. At least that is what he says. He is simply letting the internal logic of consciousness unfold itself, by its own necessities, in front of the reader. So yeah, that specific claim of Hegel many times is ignored and I think it is a worthwhile discussion to have. But, anyway, great video, man! Thanks!
I met Espinosa through António Damásio (a well known neuro scientist) , and I liked his idea of God and nature, the same way that I liked Descartes and his Cogito Ergo Sum thought. These three (Espinosa, Descartes and Damásio) started me venturing on more and more philosophers... Kant, Hegel, Hume, Sartre, Agostinho, Nietzsche, the greek classics like: Aristoteles; Plato, and than Karl Marx (who brought me to socialism isch type of society ). I managed to read the greek ones really fast, Descartes, Nietzsche, Hume and Agostinho were pretty fun to read but Kant and Hegel those took me a bit of time sure (Sarte I fail to understand and fail to like it).
I failed to like Sartre, too!
I feel like I'm back in my Philosophy 110 class, circa Fall 2001. Thanks Ed!
No inventes, además de ser de mis fotográfos favoritos narras de una forma pulcra las ideas! Eres grande Eduardo
Y me resolviste una duda que te puse en instagram, gracias por ello
We need more of this, also about theater. Ed, you're great, thank you so much for your content
An excellent, a very engaging, accessible and eloquent introduction. Not sure if I'll ever get around to opening that book, which I have, that very one you show. I tried. But "sense phenomena," just too boring. I'm drawn very much to his lectures, his philosophy of history. I've even read the first volume of his lectures on the philosophy of religion. Yes, I think he is the greatest, and one day hope to graduate to "The Phenomenology of Spirit." And thank you for explaining "the negative." Hard for me to understand this, but you helped me.
Hegel says quite explicitly that he is NOT a revolutionary.
I would need a citation of that. Words in Hegel have specific contexts. "Revolutionary" (in the sense of going about and establishing a system where the absolute will is the collective will) then sure, Hegel advocates the complexities and impossibilities of such a project in the section "Absolute Freedom and Terror" of the Phenomenology. But "revolutionary" (in the sense of presenting the steps towards a radical erosion of the current system and how it can be pushed forward), then he is probably the most revolutionary philosopher there is. He dismantles the modern atomist point of view and serves as a radical critique of our current understanding of social sciences. :)
Judging by your name and your particular copy of ‘Hegel’ from Fink I presume you are a native Spanish speaker as well as myself. On that note, I was wondering if you have read Hegel’s books in Spanish too. If so, in your opinion, in which of said languages do you recommend me to start reading his works? I feel quite comfortable with English and most of the philosophical works I’ve read (very few if I’m honest) were English translations, but still I wonder if you have any input in the matter. Ideally I would’ve prefer to read them in German (obviously) but I’m far from fluent, and based on the apparent complexity of Hegel’s style and line of thought I would want to read a translation that is as practical and smooth as may be, but while still being as closest to the original as posible. I suppose English shares more similarities with German than the latter does with Spanish so English will probably be the way to go about it but I was just wondering if there were any good translations in Spanish, since you seem like someone (as clearly outlined throughout the video) that has read Hegel many a time. Anyway, thanks for the video!!
Buddy, no one is an expert on Hegel because his musings and writings were convoluted, complicated and barely made any sense. Sadly the French socialist 'intellectuals' followed the same aristocratic nonsense path, as had Marx too!
Great video, thank you very much , note to self(nts) watched all of it 25:27
what a treat to go between photography and philosophy, Eduardo! and kudos for attempting to articulate such complex ideas in a foreign language. soy profe de cultura hispánica y muchos veces me enredo intentando articular conceptos teóricos o filosóficos a mis alumnos!
German philosophy ---- Peirce -- lady Welby -- C. Ogden -- Ramsey -- Wittgenstein-
--- Vienna circle ---- US analytic philosophy ---- Neo pragmatism ---Neo hegelism
: Big uroboros panorama
This is excellent. I wasn't expecting to learn much in 30 mins, but there are some gems here. What you said about Marx only having had a cursory understanding of Hegel blew my mind! (I say that as a Marxist myself).
EDIT: By the way, what's your source for how much (or little) of Hegel, Marx actually read?
My main source is Hegelian-Marxist specialist Carlos Perez Soto, who made a research regarding Hegel’s influence in Marx. But aside from him, it’s a fairly established fact in Marxist scholarship, since there is no textual support of Marx studying Hegel’s major works. Marx was an obsessive reader who kept notes of every book he touched. There are almost no notes about Hegel’s books aside from a letter where he thanks his friend for giving him a copy of the Science of Logic, and in the letter he says “this book has helped me to write Capital”, but he never stated how much he used it or what he used it for. There’s no evidence he read much of it. No footnotes, no paper evidence. And if you know Hegel and you read Marx’s German Ideology it’s absolutely obvious Marx doesn’t know what he’s talking about. As much as I like the guy.
@@edpavez Fascinating! Is there anything I can read on where Marx got Hegel wrong in German Ideology or elsewhere?
@@MegaLotusEater I know it because I am familiar with Hegel, but it’s an established academic fact among Hegelians: Marx never wanted to publish a book called “The German Ideology” because it’s just a bunch of hand written notes. When traditional Marxists wanted to make a scientific and rigurous edition of it, they reached the conclusion that said book never existed as such. It’s just a bunch of handwritten notes sewed together and stored in a chest in Amsterdam. When Dimistri Riazanov (around 1920-1926) was looking through Marx’s notes he found a sewed handwritten collection of papers which had written “The German Ideology” in its first page. But that’s not a real title, and that’s not a real book. That title was adopted by Engels, 40 years later, when he got the papers from Riazanov. So much so, that in The German Ideology there’s even a chapter written by Karl Grün, and not by Marx or Engels. It’s just a bunch of notes. The section of Feuerbach is composed of 9 different manuscripts that were designed as sepparated articles. So, Riazanov edited the text, changed words, modified parts, and made a “pedagogical version” which is the one we usually read.
Sorry about the long reply.
@@edpavez Thanks for the insights. Im guessing im not going to be able to find anything by Carlos Pérez Soto in English, specifically on his analysis of Hegel and Marx?
@@MegaLotusEater no. It’s all in Spanish, sadly.
But the historicity of this “Marx put Hegel on his head” can be traced to the following authors: Plekhanov invented the “dialectical materialism” as a supposed science Marx had established (he didn’t), and is the big responsible for the myth. Later on Lenin takes from Plekhanov this idea and simply repeats it and accepts it, because he was focused on politics, not on philosophy. Lenin actually read bits and pieces of Hegel’s “Science of Logic” in prison. The copy with his outlines can be seen and researched, but if we compare his notes (manuscripts that he never intended to be published, which were later on published as “Lenin’s philosophical notebooks”) with Hegel’s “Science of Logic”, we find that he was a great reader, but he didn’t understand Hegel at all. It’s all a political use of Hegel, without the philosophical and metaphysical context.
I came for the Leica, stayed for the Hegel. Yes please, more of this! Thank you, stay well.
Hah! I saw that, too. 😉
Love the video... please do more videos on books along with your amazing photography videos. You have surely ignited in me a spark to read about Hegel. Stay safe .
Hey Eduardo! Thank you really much for the video :) pls more! i have been willing to get into philosophy for a really long time but have always been kinda scared of doing so. Your video encouraged me to start reading more about it but i guess i better start with a general introduction before starting a deep dive into Hegel & friends. btw i just ordered a copy of Uexküls Foray in to the worlds of animals and humans :) stay save and keep up the good videos!
Ooh, you will LOVE that book!
Definitely, do more of these, please!
An old retired Newark New Jersey police Lieutenant found your podcast interesting! I will dive deeper into the subject! Thank you!!
Wow, that year went by fast. I noticed this video the day it was uploaded, and immediately thought "wow, this is the perfect introduction to Hegel for me!", as I really enjoy all your other work... But I was too scared, having heard Hegel named the most difficult philosopher to read.
It's only now, after having heard even more podcasts on philosophy and read works by amongst others Simone de Beauvoir and Hannah Arendt, who constantly refer to "Hegel's mistakes" (heavily nuanced of course), I feel like I'm gonna have to approach him. This video was absolutely amazing, and I regret not watching it sooner. I still didn't understand most of it, but small steps I guess 😛
Eduardo, many thanks for this, a really good and informal introduction to Hegel. I enjoyed this very much, and it came as a surprise after getting to know your photography videos - all very enjoyable, by the way!
I must ask, have you read "In The Spirit Of Hegel" by Robert C. Solomon? I found this both profound and exciting and sometimes humorous in tackling and illuminating the Phenomenology.
Hey! No, I have not read that particular book. I’m a bit swamped with reading at the moment, but I would love to check it out. Thank you!
TL; DR: Nobody has read Hegel. Nobody knows what the fuck Hegel was talking about. But you need to convince everyone else that you've read Hegel. So never admit to not reading Hegel.
I know the meme. But I think it’s worth dealing with these difficult texts, as I’ve found the avenues they open in our reasoning cannot be opened by any other means I am aware of.
I enjoyed this video,. Just getting into Hegel. It was like listening to Father Guido Sarduci explain philosophy.
Here's my deepest and most treasured insight from Hegel: True enlightenment can only come if we dissect the idealities of matter at the apposite meta conscious level. The one where chronotopical concurrences, so to speak, _reveal_ themselves. But this is if - and only if - the spirit of the world has developed to the ontological phase characterized by von Bülenhof as "exuberant".
I think Hegel’s argument is, precisely, that the spirit is already at that stage. Hegel’s phenomenology does not end on a prediction about the future: it is describing the state of being. It is the subject as substance.
maybe a good word for hegel works is zeitgeist phenomenon ...the sign of the times.
Esto podría ser un podcast perfectamente, aguante Edo! 💜
Thanks man. What do you think of Zizek interpretation on Hegel?
capo, lastima que este sea el unico video de filosofia que tienes. soy nuevo en filosofia xd
Ernst Cassirer is interesting as well. But it's XX century.
Fantastic video, how refreshing to get your thoughts and perspective on classical European philosophy. I'm so glad I found your channel, just cause you shoot interesting cameras!
Your explanation of Hegel is simply magnific!! Thank you!
Y se podrá subtitular al español? :(
Water Graves sí, por favor :(
But everyone says that dialectics thesis and antitesys is hegel. I meen all you tube. Even in fallout new Vegas.
Welp, after several years studying this subject I can confidently tell you those who repeat that myth have never read Hegel! ahah
Thoughts on Todd McGowan's book on Hegel?
12:12 where does Hegel say that? also as far as I’m aware (from secondary sources) Marx did read Phenomenology and discusses some if the ideas of the book im 1844 manuscripts. I think you’re reading Hegel through Kojeve and french tradition, and already assuming Marx.
I’ve discussed Marx’s lack of understanding of Hegel so many times in the comment section. His manuscripts only show a terrible missunderstanding of even basic elements of Hegel’s ideas. Secondary sources are never a good source. It’s better to engage with the authors directly.
Hegel does go in detail about what I mention here in the Spirit section of the Phenomenology of Spirit.
Also: I reeeeally dislike Kojeve. His version of Hegel is so far removed from the real Hegelian project it’s almost like a parody.
Yeah i agree hegels views are about ideology and not seeing things properly, anyone who thinks it is about the dialetics and thesis ans synthesis has just comsumed youtube @edpavez
Thanks for the video, it's much appreciated. I've just started reading the phenomenology and I understand very little.
I'm a Buddhist monk, btw.
Nice video and a good personal introduction to this complex text. I don’t know if you have read this book in German but it is a nightmare to do so, probably reads much more comprehensive in English... now, there are so many points you are talking about in this nice flowing overview that I have difficulty to answer properly. First, yes, Nietzsche was not a Nazi, he even wrote letters opposing the anti-jewish ideas of his sister Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche, who unfortunately published all of his remaining scrips by editing them the way it gave her attention with Nationalists antisemitic movements of the time. Not to mention letters of her brother written to her, which she cut up to her favor. The photographs we know of the Syphilis-taken Nietzsche and her sister were carefully arranged by her.
And Heidegger, if you have read „Die Selbstbehauptung der deutschen Universität“ you will have noticed, that he probably thought he could be THE national philosopher for the Nazis, but when he found out they were just using him, he just shut his mouth. I think that speaks by itself... a very conservative German protestant... Let’s not forget also, he had a long lasting affair with Hannah Ahrend, a great philosopher herself.
Now, I have difficulty believing in the absolute spirit idea of Hegel... I don’t think he solved the mind-body-problem. And I would consider Schopenhauer to be much more inspired by Buddhism than Hegel, sorry. If you like, have a look at Masao Abe‘s (a philosopher from the Nishida-Kyoto-phenomenological school) „Zen and Comparative Studies“.
Sorry, if I don’t go really in to the arguments of your nice and brilliant introduction, but that would blow up this comment too much. And then, I read Hegel sooo many years ago... Now here’s one for the logician: the incomprehensive will always be incomprehensible, as it is its nature.
For myself I am more orientated in evolutionary theory and sociology, recently enjoying Zizek... but in the end I will remain a pataphysician, vive le docteur Faustroll! 😉 keep up making people think, that’s what it’s all about, thanks for sharing.
i enjoy the way you broke this down. Subbed
It's not about consciousness but about reality. Which consciounesse is a part of.
That’s ontological realism, and it’s complete different from Hegel’s project. So, no: it’s not about reality, but consciousness.
I AM into this. I totally listened to it while loading film onto reels in a dark bag, so some cross pollination was also appreciated. I am well aware I am not the only one to say this, but in light of the state of the world and recent events especially, I think it's time we all read Marx.
this guy has a spanish accent, i trust him
I humbly thank you man. You have engulfed me with the incentive to read The Phenomenology... vive la commune
Hi ed, I really enjoy how you reviewing about Hegel. waiting to see next book.
Herr Hegel and I were born on 27 August. That I understood. I take my hat off to you for understanding a fraction of Hegel’s writings, which I’m completely dumbfounded. Stay healthy and safe.
Ah, the answer to my question.
Odd to think of a Hegelian overview as refreshing, but it was nice to see and think over. As a sort of casual onlooker into things "philosophical", I find myself more drawn to Wittgenstein lately. Perhaps that would melt away if I took the time to read into in depth, but barring that, here I am at present :)
I've just subscribed. Please keep doing these talks - - you are very good at it. You kept my concentration at 100%. Gracias.
I got a bit traumatized at university, but what with one thing and another I find myself reading The Science of Logic nearly forty years later and making sense of it. A bit of encouragement is still necessary though so thank you for that.
oh yeah im definitely reading hegel
5:20 lees en español? como haces para leer cosas complejas en otros idiomas?
Leo en español, Inglés y alemán. La forma de hacerlo es aprender el idioma. No hay ningún truco!
So good, thank you!
El video que todos deberían ver
Great video! From photography to Hegel, your channel really touches my own personal passions, thank you!
I’d be careful in putting a theoretical perspective on any high pedestal. I mean look what’s happened with the bible.
I have a very unusual (personal life purpose) reason for needing to understand Hegel. thank you for this.
Hegel's presumption of upper dialectical movement of the spirit or the society as a whole due to tension between thesis and antithesis is confusing. The history will tell in many part of the society just collapsed due to internal tension between two or different ideologies..So there is no guarantee that this upper movement will take place.
Hegel never says society moves “up” via “internal conflict”. Moreover: he never talks about thesis or antithesis. I talk about this in the video. That’s just a myth, and is never mentioned by Hegel in any book.
@@edpavez But I have got the same explation by many professors even in RUclips !!!
@@manaschakraborty9192 have any of those professors or RUclips “experts” ever read Hegel? If they did, they would know Hegel never uses those words. Those are from Fichte, which then Feuerbach attributed to Hegel and Marx simply repeated it. Many “experts” don’t have the time to read Hegel, so they just repeat lies. I’m sorry you have been lied to.
@@edpavez Can't agree with your last word. No two youtube video say the same thing on Hegel's philosophy. All of them have their own explanation. Who knows, what you are saying is correct or not !!
@@manaschakraborty9192 I mean, PLEASE don’t take my word for it. Do what the other people didn’t do and just read Hegel directly, instead of repeating what others said. Once you read him directly, you’ll be back to this video and realize how sad it is to see people talking about authors they didn’t read.
I was wondering if you could comment on where to go from here after viewing this video to someone who wants to get into Hegel more?
Qué cool tu video y tu canal. Te descubrí porque estoy interesado en la foto análoga y ahora me voy dando cuenta de que haces el PhD en teatro. Justo he estado pensando en empezar un canal de foto, llevándolo lo más que pueda por el video-ensayo. También estoy haciendo el doctorado, pero yo estoy en UPenn y ya sabes... el verano es el único rato del año para probar cosas nuevas.
Anyone else feel like their brain is absorbing all this information is like Mmmm yum 🤤
Because I miss college lectures 😫
Excelent video, excelent class. Do you write any paper we can read??? Please continue with this videos!!! Saludos desde chile
I am really enjoying the mix of videos like this with your photography content. Would you do a video discussing any overlap between your interest in philosophy and photography? I'm fairly new to philosophy but I could imagine there being an interesting relationship. Appreciate your work!
Me encantó el video!
Espero sigas haciendo vídeos así. Por cierto, espero algún día ver una obra tuya, Los paisajes invisibles y La metáfora de las aves son mis favoritas. Ojalá subas pronto nuevas obras. Saludos
Me gustan mucho estos vídeos de "reseñas" que haces sobre los libros, me motivas mucho a querer leer todo lo que explicas o mencionas, que bueno que los sigas haciendo. Ojalá me ayudarás recomendandome al menos desde tu conocimiento, por dónde empezar para llegar a un material así denso como Hegel, al menos de qué manera llegar a leer este libro. Un saludo enorme, gracias!
Exactly the intro I was looking for. Thanks!
Exactly what I was looking for, a guy who has read the books and engaged with the ideas. Thanks for this.
Good video!
Puede ser en español?
Came in late to this. So nice to exercise the brain a bit. thanks
Dude, you are amazing! I've been reading all about Hegel recently and have heard ALL of those myths. I'm glad you've debunked all of them for me since I was beginning to believe that the man wasn't who I though the was. Well... he is who I though the was after all!
As a practicing Buddhist it was interesting listening to your a talk about the why he wrote and he taught and his ideas and , half through , I was like, hold up this the same way we explore thoughts, ideas and evolve in Buddhism and then you said it ... the argument , counter arguments, and reverse argument process is mind blowing and is the best way to rid you of your own preconceptions, thoughts, judgements and opens you up to new and different ideas and ways of thinking , its the nicest way to evolve your thinking and being ... I’m going to read some .. it will be interesting how much similar to Buddhists thought his writings are , I wonder if he studied it or eastern philosophy’s in general.. I would of thought he might have in some ways...
Yes! He was quite familiar with Hindu traditions and Buddhism, but his spiritual position can be traced back more clearly to Hermetic traditions. One way of interpreting the Phenomenology of Spirit is from the perspective of non-duality. The collapse of the subject-object dichotomy. :)