You could rewrite this book in plain man's English and it would be 150 pages long and none of the thought would be lost.
>>23619856truth
>>23619856Sounds like you have something to do now.
It's all dialectic innit
>>23619899wouldn't academiafags say it's plagiarism?
In the realm of the philosophical, one must comprehend that the dialectical movement of thought is not merely an abstract construction, but the very essence of the unfolding of the Absolute. To reduce such profound dialectical synthesis to mere plain man's English would be to strip the speculative Reason of its capacity to grasp the infinite interrelations that constitute the Truth.The Phenomenology of Spirit, in its intricate and self-referential narrative, embodies the progression of consciousness from sense-certainty to absolute knowing. It is within this progression that the Spirit actualizes itself, transcending mere empirical particularity and attaining universality. The seeming obscurity of Hegelian prose is but a reflection of the complexity of the Concept (Begriff) itself, which cannot be apprehended through simple, unmediated language.Thus, to endeavor to simplify Hegel's work is to misunderstand the very nature of philosophical inquiry, which requires rigorous engagement with the dialectical process. The reduction of Hegelian philosophy to a mere 150 pages would negate the speculative depth and the profound insights that arise from the dialectical unfolding of the Idea.Indeed, it is through the engagement with the intricate dialectical movement that one truly participates in the self-development of the Spirit, thereby realizing the unity of subject and object, thought and being. Let us, therefore, embrace the arduous yet rewarding journey of philosophical comprehension, rather than succumb to the allure of superficial simplification.
>>23619856HS Harris did something like this with Phenomenology and System (he didn't intend it to be a re-writing of the phenomenology but it's close to what one would get if one attempted that) yet he also wrote a 1500-page commentary, so no I don't think you can do what you're suggesting
>>23619946the Anglo shapecel vs Gualic wordchad
>>23619938Ah anon, you actually think you can do it. Are you a PoS Chad trying to pull a fast one on me?
>>23619938Just put a footnote at the very end.
>>23619856If you think that content is independent of the form through which it develops then I doubt you grasped much of his thought.
>>23619946Lot of words to say God the world with a hard determinist hammer
>>2361994610/10
>>23619946Irrefutably put.
that already exists, it's called Lectures on the Philosophy of History
>>23619946HegelGPT
>>23619856but if you did that, you'd suddenly realize it has no reason to exist
>>23619856Just read Hegel's Ladder if you're that lost.
>>23619946pure wank. if the main thrust of an idea can't be conveyed with a simple metaphor, it is worthless, and no amount of obscurantist self-sucking will change that.
>>23619856Wittgenstein's Tractatus style is possible, but one wouldn't be walked through the terminology adequately. >>23619946He is to philosophy what Bach was to music. Not bad for GeistGPT>>23619947>1500-page commentary,A worthwhile one.
>>23619946>but the very essence of the unfolding of the Absolute.Why do people pretend like this is philosophy and not theology?
