Message from @Doc

Discord ID: 778452263349649428


2020-11-18 02:44:29 UTC  

so Hegel is wrong too?

2020-11-18 02:44:32 UTC  

explain?

2020-11-18 02:46:08 UTC  

Humans are not driven by ideas nor are they driven by materials. They irrationally choose from either under conditions which always fail to have adequate information. Humans are never rational, only rationalizing. That their rationalizations sometimes are pragmatic does not change the randomness of their approach.

2020-11-18 02:46:19 UTC  

Ehhhhhhhhh.

2020-11-18 02:46:24 UTC  

that is a statement.

2020-11-18 02:46:29 UTC  

Humans are pretty material.

2020-11-18 02:46:30 UTC  

explain how that disproves Hegel?

2020-11-18 02:48:34 UTC  

I never said either were disproven. I said they made an emphasis that was based on a false premise. The false premise that humans are rational, and that humans make rational decisions based on thoughtful analysis of material or ideal observations. Those happen, but the human is not rational and all thought is subjective, never objective. Objective thought is a myth.

2020-11-18 02:48:59 UTC  

rationality is not a prerequisite for hegelian dialectics, no.

2020-11-18 02:49:05 UTC  

Debateable in philosophy.

2020-11-18 02:49:11 UTC  

No mind thinks outside itself. All though is subjective.

2020-11-18 02:49:17 UTC  

You are just repeating your own slogans, it would seem.

2020-11-18 02:49:55 UTC  

if you feel rationality is necessary for hegelian dialectics, you are pretty much alone on that. Please do elaborate?

2020-11-18 02:50:11 UTC  

Hello

2020-11-18 02:50:16 UTC  

I am stating conceptual facts in the Harmony of the Spheres.

2020-11-18 02:50:26 UTC  

Hello and welcome @Apollo

2020-11-18 02:50:47 UTC  

@Whithers I see. Then discussing anything seems pointless.

2020-11-18 02:51:00 UTC  

For the dialectic to work, for either, the operator must be a rational and correctly informed person. Humans are neither.

2020-11-18 02:51:11 UTC  

I see where you would collide with academia now, but I suspect it isnt really about politics.

2020-11-18 02:51:22 UTC  

It is the same failing that Ayn Rand makes.

2020-11-18 02:51:22 UTC  

@Whithers why would it have to be rational?

2020-11-18 02:51:38 UTC  

Philosophy is just that, philosophy. There is no real concreteness to philosophy, in my honest opinion.

2020-11-18 02:51:44 UTC  

you still need to explain why rationality is needed for dialectics, or you will fail this course. 😄

2020-11-18 02:52:15 UTC  

@Maw It lies in its ability to predict.

2020-11-18 02:52:25 UTC  

Agreed on that point.

2020-11-18 02:52:40 UTC  

And its ability to create models which makes it possible to successfully influence the world around it.

2020-11-18 02:52:59 UTC  

There are philosophical systems that are more popular than others, agreed.

2020-11-18 02:53:06 UTC  

Because they are pre-Existentialists. They are fundamentally observing all arguments as rationally occurring - as reasoned.

2020-11-18 02:53:07 UTC  

Hegel, for instance, can be used to predict a lot of momentum in culture.

2020-11-18 02:54:18 UTC  

Or you can apply Nietzsche unto the 20th century, and beyond the last man.

2020-11-18 02:54:26 UTC  

That doesn't make it correct, only coincidental.

2020-11-18 02:54:48 UTC  

@Whithers You must explain first, why rationality is needed for dialectics.

2020-11-18 02:54:49 UTC  

😄

2020-11-18 02:55:16 UTC  

as dialectics are pr. definition a fluctuation in irrational behaviour.

2020-11-18 02:55:31 UTC  

If everyone were completely rational computers, I don't think philosophy would exist.

2020-11-18 02:55:40 UTC  

aspergers

2020-11-18 02:55:54 UTC  

They are pretty close to rational.

2020-11-18 02:56:15 UTC  

Problem is, the world isnt rational. That is why the brain calculates behaviour according to Baysian statistics.

2020-11-18 02:56:29 UTC  

It produces less prediction errors.

2020-11-18 02:56:39 UTC  

Because it is a comparative analyzing for syncretic accretion to an end point.

2020-11-18 02:57:17 UTC  

The myth of invariance, the fundamental golden calf of science.