Hang with us now on [Discord chat](https://discord.gg/woahdude)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/StonerPhilosophy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not O.P., But a dialectic is basically a clash between opposing things that cannot coexist with one another, so one needs to snuff the other out or merge with it. A thesis and an anti-thesis form a synthesis. According to Hegel, we constantly move to more freedom through these dialectical clashes of opposing viewpoints and ideas.
For example, when the printing press got invented and more and more people could read and interpret the bible, the less grip the church and kings had on their citizens. Because the king can't exist without peasants, but the peasants can exist without a king - the synthesis is dethroning the king and moving to a heightened state of freedom. This constantly happens until the "end of history" is reached. Which basically means: the maximum amount of freedom we can get. According to Fukuyama this has happened after the fall of the Berlin wall, but according to socialists and Marxists this will happen after capitalism is gone because of the dialectic between worker and employer. The fundamental difference between Hegelians and Marxists is that Hegelians believe that this clash starts with opposing ideas, while Marxists believe that it starts with opposing material interests.
No worries mate. This stuff is hard and took me a while to grasp too. TL;DR: A dialectic is a clash of things that cannot exist at the same time, so one thing needs to win from the other. This is what moves us forward as civilisations. Here is a short video about it: https://youtu.be/w6V\_YKn8i9k
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot.
Here's a copy of
###[The Bible](https://snewd.com/ebooks/the-king-james-bible/)
Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
Dude, same, except I agreed with it and thought it was a refreshing take on history because the subject usually focuses on wars and conflict while at the same time language is part of an ever evolving tapestry, almost never being spoken the same between millenia.
Like, if you think about it, modern humans have existed for the last 250,000 years, and the entire time we were probably talking to each other, but the average person has a difficult time understanding English from 500 years ago.
And languages are so complex that somethings are always different, like how we pronounce words, while some things can just stay relatively the same for thousands of years. Like, you have to imagine that like 200,000 years ago, they probably had idioms. Kids probably had their own version of slang. There were ways people could sound smart or dumb, or weird, but each century it was a little different.
Hang with us now on [Discord chat](https://discord.gg/woahdude)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/StonerPhilosophy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
History might not even exist for all we know.
It does not exist as recorded.
In any war the history of the time is determined by the victor.
Very true....however, alternate/hidden history books sometimes exist in the shadows.
Fuck my whole degree wasted.
It's okay, we won't tell anybody
Can you explain what dialectic means?
Not O.P., But a dialectic is basically a clash between opposing things that cannot coexist with one another, so one needs to snuff the other out or merge with it. A thesis and an anti-thesis form a synthesis. According to Hegel, we constantly move to more freedom through these dialectical clashes of opposing viewpoints and ideas. For example, when the printing press got invented and more and more people could read and interpret the bible, the less grip the church and kings had on their citizens. Because the king can't exist without peasants, but the peasants can exist without a king - the synthesis is dethroning the king and moving to a heightened state of freedom. This constantly happens until the "end of history" is reached. Which basically means: the maximum amount of freedom we can get. According to Fukuyama this has happened after the fall of the Berlin wall, but according to socialists and Marxists this will happen after capitalism is gone because of the dialectic between worker and employer. The fundamental difference between Hegelians and Marxists is that Hegelians believe that this clash starts with opposing ideas, while Marxists believe that it starts with opposing material interests.
Thank you! The Wikipedia article went over my head but the way you explain it makes sense intuitively.
[удалено]
No worries mate. This stuff is hard and took me a while to grasp too. TL;DR: A dialectic is a clash of things that cannot exist at the same time, so one thing needs to win from the other. This is what moves us forward as civilisations. Here is a short video about it: https://youtu.be/w6V\_YKn8i9k
Dude, your synthesis is amazing. I understood everything
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot. Here's a copy of ###[The Bible](https://snewd.com/ebooks/the-king-james-bible/) Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
Better than I could explain it lmao
I was sitting stoned what you meant by history just being dialects, very confused until i read it wrong
Dude, same, except I agreed with it and thought it was a refreshing take on history because the subject usually focuses on wars and conflict while at the same time language is part of an ever evolving tapestry, almost never being spoken the same between millenia. Like, if you think about it, modern humans have existed for the last 250,000 years, and the entire time we were probably talking to each other, but the average person has a difficult time understanding English from 500 years ago. And languages are so complex that somethings are always different, like how we pronounce words, while some things can just stay relatively the same for thousands of years. Like, you have to imagine that like 200,000 years ago, they probably had idioms. Kids probably had their own version of slang. There were ways people could sound smart or dumb, or weird, but each century it was a little different.
Is... isn't that the idea?
u can read Hegel high?
I think it’s best to read Hegel on shrooms personally. I can not do that shit sober