Hegel's Reason by Why Theory
soundcloud.com
This episode is the fourth in a series of episodes that Ryan and Todd are devoting to Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit. Here, we go through what Hegel understands by the term "reason" and how it develops in this major section of the book.

Very approachable episode about some aspects of Hegel. I particularly appreciated their discussion about making the subjective more of a factor in both science and everyday life—not just in quantum physics, although I think Todd mixes up Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle with the Observer Effect.

Ryan and Todd have done other great episodes on Hegel where they talk about how the Haitian Revolution influenced his ideas and generally how Hegel is good, actually, and may deserve much more credit than he gets from vulgar Marxists like myself.

When I first attempted to study Hegel a year or two ago I had no idea what I was getting into, and I still don't, but podcasts like Why Theory and Red Library have helped so much.

  • carbohydra [des/pair]
    ·
    4 years ago

    It's possible that I just don't understand the lingo properly, but when the discussion is about "subjectivity" and "lack" it just gets way too abstract for me

    • CptKrkIsClmbngThMntn [any]
      ·
      4 years ago

      That's part of the problem with Hegel - one of his biggest contributions to philosophy, if I could distill my sketchy understanding down to very lay terms, is basically an exercise in digging as deep into the abstract waters of subjectivity and epistemology as possible. He's notoriously one of the most difficult philosophers to read.

    • duderium [he/him]
      ·
      4 years ago

      I google a lot of the terms that they use since you're right, it can be really confusing. Subjectivity I think I get now, but I think I knew and then forgot what Lacan meant when he was talking about lack, das ding, objet-a, voice, the Big Other, etc. Hegel and Kant also use lots of weird terms like things-in-themselves as well, but a lot of the time it may seem more complex than it actually is. At some point on this podcast I think they said that Lacan uses a more obscure style because Freud actually wrote in a very plain manner and as a result was widely misunderstood. Ironically, if you adopt a more obscure writing style, it may mean that your ideas are only understood by the "right" people...?

      I sometimes study this shit early in the morning with my first cup of coffee, reading it aloud to myself. It seems to be a lot more rewarding and easier to comprehend at that point. McGowan's book about Hegel is really good (even if you read just like the introduction), as is his book Capitalism and Desire, which Red Library has a whole series on. Lionel Bailly's book on Lacan is also very very approachable. This shit, I find, isn't just useful for understanding society; it can also help a lot to understand myself.