I must say that it has been a humbling experience. Apparently, philosophy has very stringent rules it must adhere to in order to be called philosophy. Rules that are governed by the almighty, irreducible, unforgiving, objective, and universal Reason. But first, philosophy must be defined; an explication Hegel delivers expertly and sharply before doing anything else. In effect, he points to the horizon and says "that's where I'm going," and proceeds to clear the brush in order to lay down his iron tracks.
I will not quote Hegel in this post, although I will strongly recommend you to read some of his work. He says some enlightening things, logical things, fantastic things. You could call him spiritual about his Reason, which to some may appear to be a contradiction of sorts. They would be right in thinking so.
No, instead of quoting Hegel, I will quote Kierkegaard; his counterpart, or "antithesis" (if I were to quote Hegel after all). "I am not a philosopher", said Kierkegaard. "I am not part of the system."
Here is what I believe: I claim no objective truth, and will not bar my thoughts to that which may be irrational or subjective. For if truth could be pointed to in the horizon, we would be there already, and after thousands of year of philosophy we have never agreed that we're "there." No, I'd rather wander, and marvel at whatever I might find on the way, lest it be a fragment of truth, lest it lead to a greater one. Why should Truth be bound by such established rules of thought? Rules imply limits and restrictions. Thoughts urged on by limits and restrictions bind them to a finitude of potentialities, of ideas. The dog tied to a post in the ground can only explore as far as his leash will let him.
I could write a book about truth and reason, but I have to finish reading a large chunk of Hegel's History of Philosophy before tomorrow afternoon. I'll post more about this in the future.
Objestive truth is a funny thing, I know what I see is largely a constuction of 'demons' in my mind that are really scripts that make the world intellegable. I know that coal under a bright light reflects more light then snow in a poorly lite room, but I still preserve coal as black and snow as white due to my minds schemes that create an understanding of colour.
ReplyDeleteBut goes that mean that ther eare primary and seconary qualities or that colour isn't a property of things? I'm not sure...objective proof for anything, but there really doesn't have to be..if everything keeps pointing in the same direction and allows for predictions to be made, what's the real difference?
Don't let a leach hold you down, but don't allow the freedom to pull you apart.
Don't let it hold you down, but don't allow it to pull you apart. I like that. "Reasonable", ha.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/hp/hpintroa.htm
He builds his concepts (reason, philosophy, truth) like an architect. But as we know, a finished, functional building can be built in many different ways with different purposes. I guess I am more of a Nietzschean, because I can't stand the rigidity. Although, another part of me wants to be Hegelian because of this structure led by reason alone... but he has too many rules. Like I said, I need to finish his work in order to form a better understanding. I can feel my brain change every hour I read it.
That's awesome your getting that much understanding out of it...I got some but not nearly what your getting, but I feel like I know a bit more after reading what you wrote.
ReplyDelete