Hegel vs. Kierkegaard

Cypress

Well-known member
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, (1770–1831): The most inflluential philosopher of the 19th century, he constructed an idealist system in which Spirit or God actualizes itself through the course of human history through progressive revelations until the true science of Spirit, the perspective of the Whole, is eventually revealed.

Hegel’s influence was incomparable. He had presented a total system of the world, which included not only physics and the sciences, religion, ethics, but even a history of the world; a total system that was supposed to be ultimately religious, while at the same time actually describing in scholarly detail what had happened in the history of the world. It was truly a theory of everything—not only everything metaphysical, but everything historical. We could really say this was the last great system, and the rest of the 19th century was a period of dealing with Hegel, either pro or con.

Søren Kierkegaard (1813–1855): A religious philosopher who was one of the early influences on existentialism.

Kierkegaard loathed Hegel; he is one of the clearest examples of the anti-Hegelian reaction of the mid-19th century. Kierkegaard once famously quipped that “If Hegel had written his whole Logic,” one of the crucial works of Hegel, “and in the preface disclosed the fact that
it was merely a thought experiment,” then Hegel “would have been the greatest thinker than has ever lived; as it is he is merely comic.” That’s about the worst put-down one can hear of one philosopher by another. Kierkegaard wrote that rationality is fundamentally social, but religion is a matter of the individual’s relation to the Absolute. The name of that relation is faith, and faith is literally irrational and asocial: The knight of faith cannot explain or justify herself. For Kierkegaard, the role of philosophy is to bring us to the point of recognizing the mystery of faith, not to explain it. Kierkegaard remains the most radical philosophical critic of Reason itself.


Source credit: Professor Lawrence Cahoone, Holy Cross College
 
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, (1770–1831): The most inflluential philosopher of the 19th century, he constructed an idealist system in which Spirit or God actualizes itself through the course of human history through progressive revelations until the true science of Spirit, the perspective of the Whole, is eventually revealed.

Hegel’s influence was incomparable. He had presented a total system of the world, which included not only physics and the sciences, religion, ethics, but even a history of the world; a total system that was supposed to be ultimately religious, while at the same time actually describing in scholarly detail what had happened in the history of the world. It was truly a theory of everything—not only everything metaphysical, but everything historical. We could really say this was the last great system, and the rest of the 19th century was a period of dealing with Hegel, either pro or con.

Søren Kierkegaard (1813–1855): A religious philosopher who was one of the early influences on existentialism.

Kierkegaard loathed Hegel; he is one of the clearest examples of the anti-Hegelian reaction of the mid-19th century. Kierkegaard once famously quipped that “If Hegel had written his whole Logic,” one of the crucial works of Hegel, “and in the preface disclosed the fact that
it was merely a thought experiment,” then Hegel “would have been the greatest thinker than has ever lived; as it is he is merely comic.” That’s about the worst put-down one can hear of one philosopher by another. Kierkegaard wrote that rationality is fundamentally social, but religion is a matter of the individual’s relation to the Absolute. The name of that relation is faith, and faith is literally irrational and asocial: The knight of faith cannot explain or justify herself. For Kierkegaard, the role of philosophy is to bring us to the point of recognizing the mystery of faith, not to explain it. Kierkegaard remains the most radical philosophical critic of Reason itself.


Source credit: Professor Lawrence Cahoone, Holy Cross College

Is this another thread where you claim to be an expert without having read a single word of either philosopher? Have you no self respect?
 
Is this another thread where you claim to be an expert without having read a single word of either philosopher? Have you no self respect?

Talk to a mental health counselor about your resentment of me.

I would like you to specifically point to anywhere I have pronounced myself an expert.

Problem is you won't be able to do it.

There are maybe ten thousand people in the entire United States and Europe who have actually read the works Hegel and Kierkegaard.

Fewer still have read the original research papers of Albert Einstein.

That does not prevent curious people from learning from books and scholars about Einstein, Hegel, or John Stuart Mill.
 
Childish.

So you cannot actually point to anytime I have ever proclaimed myself to be an expert.

In that case I accept your tacit admission you lied about me. Why do you do that?

Wrapping up, I totally reject your implication that unless someone has actually read the original research papers of Albert Einstein, they are never allowed to talk about Einstein, write about him, post about him
 
So you cannot actually point to anytime I have ever proclaimed myself to be an expert.

In that case I accept your tacit admission you lied about me. Why do you do that?

Wrapping up, I totally reject your implication that unless someone has actually read the original research papers of Albert Einstein, they are never allowed to talk about Einstein, write about him, post about him

you are just not interesting
 
So you cannot actually point to anytime I have ever proclaimed myself to be an expert.

In that case I accept your tacit admission you lied about me. Why do you do that?

Wrapping up, I totally reject your implication that unless someone has actually read the original research papers of Albert Einstein, they are never allowed to talk about Einstein, write about him, post about him

Here is my question. Would you start a discussion of Faulkner if you never read Faulkner? What is the motivation to discuss a novel of Faulkner if you never read the novel?
Similarly, what is your motivation to discuss Hegel if you never read anything by Hegel?
 
Here is my question. Would you start a discussion of Faulkner if you never read Faulkner? What is the motivation to discuss a novel of Faulkner if you never read the novel?
Similarly, what is your motivation to discuss Hegel if you never read anything by Hegel?
I did not even post my own words in the OP. I posted and credited the words of am emminent scholar.

Why would you get mad at me for posting the words and thoughts of a scholar??

Yes, I feel no obligation whatsoever to have to become a subject matter expert before I post a topic. If we have to wait to become experts before we can post on a topic, there would be almost no threads on jpp.

I have started discussions about Albert Einstein without ever having read one of his original research papers in special relativity or Brownian motion

I would bet a weeks salary most physics majors with a bachelors degree have never actually read Einstein's landmark 1905 paper on special relativity.

I have a basic working knowlege of general relativity without ever having read a single original research paper of Einstein.

This may shock and amaze you, but a lot of learning can be done by reading books" listening to experts, and taking classes.
 
I find the philosophies of Hegel and Kierkegaard extremely difficult to digest and grasp. But I feel like I have to make a stab at it before working my way up to Heidegger.
 
I did not even post my own words in the OP. I posted and credited the words of am emminent scholar.

Why would you get mad at me for posting the words and thoughts of a scholar??

Yes, I feel no obligation whatsoever to have to become a subject matter expert before I post a topic. If we have to wait to become experts before we can post on a topic, there would be almost no threads on jpp.

I have started discussions about Albert Einstein without ever having read one of his original research papers in special relativity or Brownian motion

I would bet a weeks salary most physics majors with a bachelors degree have never actually read Einstein's landmark 1905 paper on special relativity.

I have a basic working knowlege of general relativity without ever having read a single original research paper of Einstein.

This may shock and amaze you, but a lot of learning can be done by reading books" listening to experts, and taking classes.

You are a neophyte who thinks you're a master.
 
Back
Top