Results 1 to 26 of 26

Thread: Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

  1. #1
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel



    Squashed Philosophers - Hegel - The Philosophy of History

    A large component of Hegel's philosophy entails a sense of eschatological progression in history (). While should not be confused strictly with mysticism, his writings certainly seems to suggest an almost mystical conception of philosophy that would influence the transcendentalists. He also had no problems with making logical contradictions while still valuing logical rationalism ( > valuing). This may be because he essentially sought to convert to an sphere where his strengths were. Furthermore, he also used a "master/slave dialectic", which has a / component that also plays into a Beta NF comfortability in constructed dialogue (see Nietzsche: IEI).

    Verdict: EIE


    Last edited by silke; 10-08-2014 at 09:09 AM. Reason: updated links
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  2. #2
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That would make sense.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  3. #3
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,635
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yes, EIE I agree completely.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos View Post
    A large component of Hegel's philosophy entails a sense of eschatological progression in history ().
    Historicism in general, and this aspect of Hegel's philosophy in particular, is poorly understood by most socionists, and that has resulted in some mistypings of famous people. It is common to attribute this kind of historicist thinking to , but it is not. It is -- perhaps combined with some other function, like . The exact nature and the most precise functional explanation for this phenomenon is open for debate, but historicist thinking is not .

    It is very common that INTjs are historicist in their thinking, which is a natural consequence of strong tendency to embrace relativistic frameworks and theories. Tcaudilllg is an example of this phenomenon; he is both a relativist and a historicist.

    thinkers, on the other hand, tend to be critics of historicist ideas, for example Bertrand Russell and Karl Popper. And as an INTp I am also strongly opposed to relativism and historicism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    While should not be confused strictly with mysticism, his writings certainly seems to suggest an almost mystical conception of philosophy that would influence the transcendentalists.
    Yes, you are right that should not be confused with mysticism. In fact, it has nothing to do with mysticism. The kind of mysticism and transcedentalism that is immanent in Hegel's philosophy can only be found in thinkers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    He also had no problems with making logical contradictions while still valuing logical rationalism ( > valuing).
    Yes, and the exact same phenomenon can be clearly seen in other thinkers. Exactly this aspect of the functions is totally misunderstood by most people on this forum. thinkers (for example INTjs) are much more prone to accept logical contradictions while still valuing logical rationalism than thinkers (for example INTps). And that's why it is so incorrect to assume that because a person points out logical contradictions and comes across as very focused on logical correctness that person is probably INTj. The truth is that it is very unlikely that the person is INTj and much more likely that the person is an INTp.

    This aspect of the types is correctly described in MBTI type profiles, where INTPs are described as objective and focused on logical correctness, whereas the INTJs are described as focused on their subjective ideas that they try to implement in the real world through their theoretical systems. The INTj is commonly accepted by both Socionics and MBTT as the most theoretical of the types, but it is not the most objective and it is not the most logical.

  5. #5
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If you typed a philosopher you hated as some other type than INTj, I would be surprised. Your desire to essentially paint every philosopher you disagree with as being ego clouds your judgment considerably. There are more types out there for philosophers apart from Alpha and Gamma NTs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    Historicism in general, and this aspect of Hegel's philosophy in particular, is poorly understood by most socionists, and that has resulted in some mistypings of famous people. It is common to attribute this kind of historicist thinking to , but it is not. It is -- perhaps combined with some other function, like . The exact nature and the most precise functional explanation for this phenomenon is open for debate, but historicist thinking is not .
    It is + a weak role and it is as plain as day. Hegel's philosophy was dynamic > static, so why you would try to paint evident as static + is beyond crazy.

    It is very common that INTjs are historicist in their thinking, which is a natural consequence of strong tendency to embrace relativistic frameworks and theories. Tcaudilllg is an example of this phenomenon; he is both a relativist and a historicist.
    It is also common for EIEs to be historicist in their thinking. Hegel happens to be an EIE example right in front of your eyes.

    thinkers, on the other hand, tend to be critics of historicist ideas, for example Bertrand Russell and Karl Popper. And as an INTp I am also strongly opposed to relativism and historicism.
    Your desire to continue bringing up this irrelevant material is stupid.

    Yes, you are right that should not be confused with mysticism. In fact, it has nothing to do with mysticism. The kind of mysticism and transcedentalism that is immanent in Hegel's philosophy can only be found in thinkers.
    In this case, Hegel's philosophy contains a great deal of . While you are seeing Ti in his philosophy, it is weak Ti that is noticeably weaker than other Ti-ego philosophers and thinkers (Kant, Spinoza, Einstein).

    Yes, and the exact same phenomenon can be clearly seen in other thinkers. Exactly this aspect of the functions is totally misunderstood by most people on this forum. thinkers (for example INTjs) are much more prone to accept logical contradictions while still valuing logical rationalism than thinkers (for example INTps). And that's why it is so incorrect to assume that because a person points out logical contradictions and comes across as very focused on logical correctness that person is probably INTj. The truth is that it is very unlikely that the person is INTj and much more likely that the person is an INTp.
    Last time I checked, EIE is still in a -valuing quadra. Your point is moot.

    This aspect of the types is correctly described in MBTI type profiles, where INTPs are described as objective and focused on logical correctness, whereas the INTJs are described as focused on their subjective ideas that they try to implement in the real world through their theoretical systems. The INTj is commonly accepted by both Socionics and MBTT as the most theoretical of the types, but it is not the most objective and it is not the most logical.
    I'm sorry, but your system of understanding Socionics is whack.
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    4,833
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos View Post
    If you typed a philosopher you hated as some other type than INTj, I would be surprised.
    I have not typed Hegel as INTj. Maybe he is an ENFj, but we don't understand his type correctly if we don't realize that he has a lot more in common with INTjs than with INTps. Hegel has a strong > bias for some reason.

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    Your desire to essentially paint every philosopher you disagree with as being ego clouds your judgment considerably.
    Most philosophers (of any importance) are either ego or ego. If Hegel and Nietzsche are examples of a non- ego philosophers, then I disagree with them too. But there is a problem here that you and others are taking too lightly. It is a certainty that Jung understood very well, and it is a fact that he was an INTj himself. So what was it that Jung saw in Nietzsche that made him say that Nietzsche was a very clear and accentuated example of an Introverted Thinking type?

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    There are more types out there for philosophers apart from Alpha and Gamma NTs.
    Name one clear example of an important philosopher that is not either Alpha or Gamma NT.

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    It is + a weak role and it is as plain as day.
    No, it is not plain as day. Where is the ? It is not in the historicist part you mentioned.

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    Hegel's philosophy was dynamic > static, so why you would try to paint evident as static + is beyond crazy.
    The Static/Dynamic dichotomy cannot be used to type philosophers in the simple way you seem to assume. Karl Popper had in his ego block, and his philosophy is in total opposition to Hegel's.

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    It is also common for EIEs to be historicist in their thinking. Hegel happens to be an EIE example right in front of your eyes.
    It is common for NFs in general to be brainwashed philosophically speaking. They believe in mumbo-jumbo to a much larger extent than NTs. Hegel's philosophy is the king om mumbo-jumbo, so I have no very strong reason to be opposed to a typing of Hegel as EIE. But we still need a good and likely explanation for the fact that Jung saw Nietzsche as an Introverted Thinker.

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    Your desire to continue bringing up this irrelevant material is stupid.
    Your desire to not wanting to see the truth is even more stupid.

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    In this case, Hegel's philosophy contains a great deal of .
    Where is it? Where is he hiding it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos
    While you are seeing Ti in his philosophy, it is weak Ti that is noticeably weaker than other Ti-ego philosophers and thinkers (Kant, Spinoza, Einstein).
    Perhaps.

    I'm sorry, but your system of understanding Socionics is whack.
    I'm sorry, but my understanding of the types is superior to yours.

  7. #7
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phaedrus View Post
    I have not typed Hegel as INTj. Maybe he is an ENFj, but we don't understand his type correctly if we don't realize that he has a lot more in common with INTjs than with INTps. Hegel has a strong > bias for some reason.
    You need to stop viewing all types through a comparison between LIIs and ILIs. It gains you nothing and harms you substantially.

    Most philosophers (of any importance) are either ego or ego. If Hegel and Nietzsche are examples of a non- ego philosophers, then I disagree with them too. But there is a problem here that you and others are taking too lightly. It is a certainty that Jung understood very well, and it is a fact that he was an INTj himself. So what was it that Jung saw in Nietzsche that made him say that Nietzsche was a very clear and accentuated example of an Introverted Thinking type?
    Socionics has evolved past a purely Jungian understanding of . Jung probably just saw what appeared to be "thinking philosophically aloud" in Nietzsche, which is what Jung's description of seems to entail. Closer examination of Nietzsche reveals obvious signs of victim mentality, -valuing, rhetorical dialogue and weakly constructed arguments. If you insist on clinging to Jung's belief that Nietzsche is a -type, you will quickly find yourself latching onto a sinking ship.

    Name one clear example of an important philosopher that is not either Alpha or Gamma NT.
    Off the top of my head? Hegel, Rousseau, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, J.S. Mill, Confucius.

    No, it is not plain as day. Where is the ? It is not in the historicist part you mentioned.

    Where is it? Where is he hiding it?
    In front of your eyes.

    The Static/Dynamic dichotomy cannot be used to type philosophers in the simple way you seem to assume. Karl Popper had in his ego block, and his philosophy is in total opposition to Hegel's.
    Believe it or not, philosophers with the same functions can, and often do, philosophically disagree.

    It is common for NFs in general to be brainwashed philosophically speaking. They believe in mumbo-jumbo to a much larger extent than NTs. Hegel's philosophy is the king om mumbo-jumbo, so I have no very strong reason to be opposed to a typing of Hegel as EIE. But we still need a good and likely explanation for the fact that Jung saw Nietzsche as an Introverted Thinker.
    Then that is a separate, albeit tangentially related, topic.

    I'm sorry, but my understanding of the types is superior to yours.
    Where is it? Where is it hiding?
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  8. #8
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    All I know about Hegel is that I tried to read his work and I got nothing out of it at all. Too strange for me. Completely foreign.
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  9. #9
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,635
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by munenori2 View Post
    All I know about Hegel is that I tried to read his work and I got nothing out of it at all. Too strange for me. Completely foreign.
    You're not alone
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  10. #10
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos View Post
    Socionics has evolved past a purely Jungian understanding of . Jung probably just saw what appeared to be "thinking philosophically aloud" in Nietzsche, which is what Jung's description of seems to entail. Closer examination of Nietzsche reveals obvious signs of victim mentality, -valuing, rhetorical dialogue and weakly constructed arguments. If you insist on clinging to Jung's belief that Nietzsche is a -type, you will quickly find yourself latching onto a sinking ship.
    Absolutely brilliant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos View Post
    Off the top of my head? Hegel, Rousseau, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, J.S. Mill, Confucius.
    I'd like to see a case for Rousseau as not IEI from anyone who read his Confessions.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  11. #11
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ifmd95 View Post
    EIE is what I thought when I commented on him in relation to Schoepenhauer. They both write in Ni, but Schoepenhauer's obscurantism charges arguably go after Hegel's Ti super-id.

    An aside: For Mill, are you thinking LSI?
    EII.
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  12. #12
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Logos View Post
    EII.
    Given the personal history of Mill's life, I can see that as very plausible.
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  13. #13
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    His concern for the maximization of utility in civilization seems to be + + .
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  14. #14
    Logos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,406
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ifmd95 View Post
    Do you know of significant Delta NF with aesthetic theories reminiscent of his? It seems to me that aesthetics and other qualities of the "good" are logical evaluations which begin to narrow one's appropriate choices and detach them from the interpersonal.
    Keep in mind that he did not originate the idea of Utilitarianism, but he just developed and elaborated on it further than Jeremy Bentham and his father.
    "Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi
    Johari Box

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    USA.
    TIM
    INTj
    Posts
    4,497
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default



    I think some type in a Ti quadra.

  16. #16
    fka lungs ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    Fi/Te 641 sp/sx
    Posts
    12,630
    Mentioned
    635 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    “For although it is commonly said that reasonable men pay attention not to the word but to the thing itself, yet this does not give us permission to describe a thing in terms inappropriate to it. For this is at once incompetence and deceit to fancy and to pretend that one merely has not the right word, and to hide from oneself that really one has failed to get hold of the thing itself, i.e. the concept. If one had the concept, then one would also have the right word.”

  17. #17
    fka lungs ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    Fi/Te 641 sp/sx
    Posts
    12,630
    Mentioned
    635 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    NIMQ

  18. #18
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I initially thought dialectic-algorithmic style, based on the way he explicated things in The Phenomenology of Spirit, though his conception of spirit (and history, for that matter) is arguably vortical. I also think Ti-valuing is more pronounced, in this regard, so I figure an Ni-sub beta NF.
    Last edited by strrrng; 07-27-2014 at 04:02 AM.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  19. #19
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Berlin
    TIM
    LSI 5w6 sx/so
    Posts
    5,421
    Mentioned
    144 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    if Hegel is not D-A cognition, I don't know who is.

    sure, if there's any relation between reinin dichotomies&cognitive styles and reality and it's not all just some nice-looking abstract theory.

  20. #20
    silke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    TIM
    Ni-IEI sx/sp
    Posts
    3,815
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    EIE-Ni so/sp

  21. #21
    Nothing in the cage of my ribcage
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,704
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Lightbulb

    Hmm... I would have thought ESTj/Delta.

    1) Hegel criticized Kant's (INTj) ethical system as being too subjective and isolated to an individual. He has proposed his own moral system called Sittlichkeit, or "ethical life". "Ethical life" is basically what (subjective) morality is "objectified" and actualized through a community and communal bonds:

    "Ethical life is a system of norms and mores belonging to a social body, made up of spheres of social interaction and interdependence in which all individuals are embedded. Whereas morality turns people away from what is toward what ought to be, ethical life is merely what is, the set of meanings and practices that guide people in everyday activities whether they are aware of it or not.

    Ethical life is present in the three important levels of social life. In its most elementary form, it is present in the family and finds expression in basic emotions such as love and altruism. In civil society, a sphere of social interaction corresponds to economic life or the “system of needs.” Civil society engages individuals as bearers of Abstract Rights, as owners of property and bearers of legal rights. In civil society, individuals relate to one another in universal terms."
    http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy...section6.rhtml

    That sounds rather like how Te views Fi.

    This sounds like everything that all the previous quadras worked through has been packaged into a neat little completion of a Delta society:

    "After the family and civil society, the third and highest moment of ethical life is the institution of the state. The state is the medium through which individuals come to realize their location in the ethical life of society, as parts of a greater whole. The state is an expression of spirit unfolding in history through dialectical development. Whereas earlier forms of the state were imperfect expressions of collective spirit, the modern state has evolved as a rational adaptation to structures of modern life. Given the image of the universal person and the emergence of the autonomous rights-bearing individual, the modern state, as the highest form of collective association, serves to integrate this vision of individual freedom and autonomy into an appreciation of common social bonds, preventing these two opposed tendencies from pulling society apart and allowing freedom and rights to coexist with a full expression of communal spirit."

    His famous quote "What is rational is real; And what is real is rational." seems Te. What he means by this is that abstract concepts like rationality must be actualized through something concrete, something that is real which is what he calls the ethical life.

    2) Hegelian dialectic proposes two diametrically opposed and contradictory statements/thesis, and synthesizes them into a newer, higher form to say that a contradiction is no real contradiction. I find this to be anti-Ti, as well as Ne.

    3) Kierkegaard (IEI) really didn't like Hegel, and he has criticized him and Hegelian dialectic. Kierkegaard called Hegelian dialectic as synthesizing two mutually contradictory ideas and choosing "this AND that", as in "having the cake and eat it too", and called it quantitative dialectic.

    On the other hand, he has called his own method of dialectic as qualitative dialectic. He has proposed that when one is faced with two contradictory choices, one must make the difficult decision and decide for himself to choose between "either/or", without synthesizing into a newer form. This seems like a difference between Ne and Ni.
    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph Stromberg
    Let's stop using this outdated measure - which has about as much scientific validity as your astrological sign.

  22. #22
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singularity View Post
    Hmm... I would have thought ESTj/Delta.

    1) Hegel criticized Kant's (INTj) ethical system as being too subjective and isolated to an individual. He has proposed his own moral system called Sittlichkeit, or "ethical life". "Ethical life" is basically what (subjective) morality is "objectified" and actualized through a community and communal bonds:
    this could be Te vs. Ti, or Fe actuating Ti. I've noticed a lot of times betas will try to universalize alphas' logic, it's kind of part of quadra progression. regardless, it doesn't seem definitively one thing or the other.

    "Ethical life is a system of norms and mores belonging to a social body, made up of spheres of social interaction and interdependence in which all individuals are embedded. Whereas morality turns people away from what is toward what ought to be, ethical life is merely what is, the set of meanings and practices that guide people in everyday activities whether they are aware of it or not.
    while superficially this could seem delta, the lack of presumption and implication of generalizability seems more beta Fe. an LSE imo would posit something similarly 'actuated,' but wouldn't take its expression as something so easily certain. deltas espouse live and let live on condition that one adheres to certain implicit rules; the way ethical life is described here just doesn't resonate with that.

    Ethical life is present in the three important levels of social life. In its most elementary form, it is present in the family and finds expression in basic emotions such as love and altruism. In civil society, a sphere of social interaction corresponds to economic life or the “system of needs.” Civil society engages individuals as bearers of Abstract Rights, as owners of property and bearers of legal rights. In civil society, individuals relate to one another in universal terms."
    http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy...section6.rhtml

    That sounds rather like how Te views Fi.
    this is a fair point, I'll just say that the universality of it doesn't seem as particularized as I would expect it to be in delta (see above); however, the kind of standardization doesn't exactly point to Fe.

    This sounds like everything that all the previous quadras worked through has been packaged into a neat little completion of a Delta society:

    "After the family and civil society, the third and highest moment of ethical life is the institution of the state. The state is the medium through which individuals come to realize their location in the ethical life of society, as parts of a greater whole. The state is an expression of spirit unfolding in history through dialectical development. Whereas earlier forms of the state were imperfect expressions of collective spirit, the modern state has evolved as a rational adaptation to structures of modern life. Given the image of the universal person and the emergence of the autonomous rights-bearing individual, the modern state, as the highest form of collective association, serves to integrate this vision of individual freedom and autonomy into an appreciation of common social bonds, preventing these two opposed tendencies from pulling society apart and allowing freedom and rights to coexist with a full expression of communal spirit."
    this could go either way, but how it feels, is that it isn't as tacitly imposed as it would be with deltas. in phenomenology of spirit, hegel doesn't talk about the modern state and its extensions as some kind of ethical trophy that has finally triumphed in existential death; he simply lauds the collective unity, stability and, to a lesser extent, homogeneity that it creates. it's presented as a spiritual absolute. this strikes me as more NiTi.

    His famous quote "What is rational is real; And what is real is rational." seems Te. What he means by this is that abstract concepts like rationality must be actualized through something concrete, something that is real which is what he calls the ethical life.
    he does not mean that rationality must be actualized through something concrete; for hegel, the concrete is a mere extension of the rational/absolute. this statement is a tautology used to indicate the circularity and self-referentiality of his dialectical process—he's saying that there is no distinction between real and rational. a Te-valuer would never utilize a dialectical 'trick' like this to make a point.

    2) Hegelian dialectic proposes two diametrically opposed and contradictory statements/thesis, and synthesizes them into a newer, higher form to say that a contradiction is no real contradiction. I find this to be anti-Ti, as well as Ne.
    this is a misreading. the thesis-antithesis-synthesis process actually has little to do with whether or not something is a contradiction; it's more of a placeholder to illustrate progress and movement. it's Ti because there's nothing really objective or tangible about it; it's a self-contained and self-completing causality. and the way you've described it is Ti, anyway—Te would never say that a contradiction is no contradiction.

    3) Kierkegaard (IEI) really didn't like Hegel, and he has criticized him and Hegelian dialectic. Kierkegaard called Hegelian dialectic as synthesizing two mutually contradictory ideas and choosing "this AND that", as in "having the cake and eat it too", and called it quantitative dialectic.
    having cake and eating it too is a fallaciously idealistic/subjectivist reading of hegel. he's not saying that you get the white and the black in a resolved quasi-contradiction, just that each moment is subsumed in the next, such that unity can be seen clearly and grasped uniquely. and it wouldn't be out of character for an IEI, being vortical, to criticize DA cognition.

    On the other hand, he has called his own method of dialectic as qualitative dialectic. He has proposed that when one is faced with two contradictory choices, one must make the difficult decision and decide for himself to choose between "either/or", without synthesizing into a newer form. This seems like a difference between Ne and Ni.
    could be, or he could just be alluding to the inherent disjointedness of the dialectical process itself.
    Last edited by strrrng; 01-25-2017 at 05:00 PM.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  23. #23
    Jake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    TIM
    ILI
    Posts
    651
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    LII
    Last edited by Jake; 01-25-2017 at 09:40 PM.

  24. #24
    Nothing in the cage of my ribcage
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,704
    Mentioned
    94 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strrrng View Post
    this is a misreading. the thesis-antithesis-synthesis process actually has little to do with whether or not something is a contradiction; it's more of a placeholder to illustrate progress and movement. it's Ti because there's nothing really objective or tangible about it; it's a self-contained and self-completing causality. and the way you've described it is Ti, anyway—Te would never say that a contradiction is no contradiction.
    Why wouldn't it be about a contradiction...? Yes, you are right about it being the "result" of a progress, but it seems to be saying that to see a contradiction (Ti) in it would be to "only see the wood for the trees" and miss the whole point entirely.

    This is what he had to say about his dialectic:

    (The bolded parts are about contradictions, and the underlined parts seem like Ne)

    "In the same way too, by determining the relation which a philosophical work professes to have to other treatises on the same subject, an extraneous interest is introduced, and obscurity is thrown over the point at issue in the knowledge of the truth. The more the ordinary mind takes the opposition between true and false to be fixed, the more is it accustomed to expect either agreement or contradiction with a given philosophical system, and only to see reason for the one or the other in any explanatory statement concerning such a system. It does not conceive the diversity of philosophical systems as the progressive evolution of truth; rather, it sees only contradiction in that variety. The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant’s existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another. But the ceaseless activity of their own inherent nature makes them at the same time moments of an organic unity, where they not merely do not contradict one another, but where one is as necessary as the other; and this equal necessity of all moments constitutes alone and thereby the life of the whole. But contradiction as between philosophical systems is not wont to be conceived in this way; on the other hand, the mind perceiving the contradiction does not commonly know how to relieve it or keep it free from its one-sidedness, and to recognise in what seems conflicting and inherently antagonistic the presence of mutually necessary moments."
    —From Preface to the Phenomenology of Spirit (1807)

    He is basically saying that when a flower blooms from a bud, it seems to negate the bud by making it disappear and turning it into a flower. And the flower is yet again negated by turning into a fruit. But it does not change the fact that it can be conceived as a plant as a whole, and while the process seems like a series of contradictions, the negations and contradictions were necessary for the growth or the progress of the final product. This kind of inductive thinking seems like Te. It analyzes and unravels the final "result" and then begins to find the necessary logic for it.

    I think that Ti or Ti-valuing types would be so enamored and puzzled by contradictions or paradoxes, and attempt to solve it by using more strict or rigorous logic. Basically, they'll try to solve logic with logic. But what he seems to have done is to simply observe it and call it a day ("it is obvious that this is the result, whatever they're talking about?"). This basically seems like Te with Si.

    I think the underlined parts are particularly Ne. It criticizes seeing contradictions as being one-sided and not valuing the "diversity" of differing opinions or philosophies, which is usually the criticism of Deltas (esp. against Betas). Betas are often criticized for being one-sided, ideological and absolutist, which I guess was what Kierkegaard was kind of like, which is probably why he criticized Hegel.
    Last edited by Singu; 01-25-2017 at 07:31 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph Stromberg
    Let's stop using this outdated measure - which has about as much scientific validity as your astrological sign.

  25. #25
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singularity View Post
    Why wouldn't it be about a contradiction...? Yes, you are right about it being the "result" of a progress, but it seems to be saying that to see a contradiction (Ti) in it would be to "only see the wood for the trees" and miss the whole point entirely.
    if focusing on a contradiction is missing the point, it's probably not about a contradiction, yeah?

    also, the "contradiction" you're referring to is simply an antagonism more generally, not a Ti inconsistency.

    He is basically saying that when a flower blooms from a bud, it seems to negate the bud by making it disappear and turning it into a flower. And the flower is yet again negated by turning into a fruit. But it does not change the fact that it can be conceived as a plant as a whole, and while the process seems like a series of contradictions, the negations and contradictions were necessary for the growth or the progress of the final product. This kind of inductive thinking seems like Te. It analyzes and unravels the final "result" and then begins to find the necessary logic for it.
    the inductive thinking you're referring to is actually Ni—starting from the end and reworking the premises/process. Te is inductive in a way as well, but it's more about each point of evolution in its isolation, not the kind of synthetic unity hegel endlessly talks of, i.e.:

    But the ceaseless activity of their own inherent nature makes them at the same time moments of an organic unity, where they not merely do not contradict one another, but where one is as necessary as the other; and this equal necessity of all moments constitutes alone and thereby the life of the whole.
    ...

    I think that Ti or Ti-valuing types would be so enamored and puzzled by contradictions or paradoxes, and attempt to solve it by using more strict or rigorous logic. Basically, they'll try to solve logic with logic. But what he seems to have done is to simply observe it and call it a day ("it is obvious that this is the result, whatever they're talking about?"). This basically seems like Te with Si.
    he did not just "observe and call it a day," lol. have you read phenomenology? it's a logical investigation of a logical process itself, there is no presumption of a simple result or categorization based on an externalized appraisal of a single aspect. it's about as rigorous as it gets for a non-Ti-ego.

    I think the underlined parts are particularly Ne. It criticizes seeing contradictions as being one-sided and not valuing the "diversity" of differing opinions or philosophies, which is usually the criticism of Deltas (esp. against Betas). Betas are often criticized for being one-sided, ideological and absolutist, which I guess was what Kierkegaard was kind of like, which is probably why he criticized Hegel.
    when he criticizes the one-sidedness of contradictions, he isn't implying some quaint, delta-esque "there are so many possibilities, don't limit yourself"—he's describing how to approach contradictions. this isn't incompatible with DA Ni, which is about synthesizing oppositions.
    4w3-5w6-8w7

  26. #26
    Delilah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    TIM
    ESI
    Posts
    713
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    summed up in one brief passage he suggested a function for art to society. i was impressed.
    Last edited by Delilah; 02-02-2017 at 05:42 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •