Materialism vs Dialectic: Marx and Hegel's Philosophical Clash

#thepoliticalclassroom #marx #hegel

In this thought-provoking video, we delve into the clash of philosophical titans: Karl Marx's materialism and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel's dialectic. Join us as we explore the fundamental differences between these influential thinkers and their contrasting views on reality, history, and human society. Discover Marx's emphasis on material conditions as the driving force of historical change and Hegel's intricate dialectical method of understanding the unfolding of ideas. Through engaging discussions and insightful analysis, we navigate the complexities of their philosophical frameworks and their profound impact on modern thought.
________________________________
#thepoliticalclassroom
#MarxMaterialism
#HegelDialectic
#PhilosophicalShowdown
#MaterialConditions
#DialecticalMethod
#HistoricalChange
#IdeasAndReality
#InfluentialThinkers
#UnderstandingSociety
#ModernThought
________________________________

[ytjoemoore]

The fact that the b roll of a business man kicking the homeless man’s cup was written directed and produced is at least a little funny

[matheuspinho]

Marx was a confused Hegelian – Giovanni Gentile

[btmbangalore]

Hegel rejected the all good or all bad nature of people. So there is no perpetual Saint or no perpetual bad man. People are in general in-between, they are is as good as it is feasible, as bad as it is productive not unproductive. Till Hegel, people would believe in all good, perfection was real and ultimate goal. Religion promoted the life of clergy as ideal to the rest of the world. Hegel did not subscribe to vain idealism, he thought human has negatives in him all the time, it is certain rewards that keep him from opting his positive over his negative. Unlike religion, Hegel did not believe in voluntary idealism.

Marx saw materialism as big force acting in nature and man, there is no will that guides progress, but opposite forces shaping our world and mind. To think of nature is predetermined is flawed, prederminism is not acceptable because it always assumes a super conscious helm, a mind that wants big outcomes. No outcome is predetermined, human life and nature is created by opposite forces. Earth was not predetermined, Earth is evolved not created or predetermined. In extension he concludes human society is not a natural given, our society will be sustainable if and only when individual interest is not against common. Marx predicts fall of monarchy, not causes it as some say, due to it restricting progress. Our society TOO like our natural world seeks higher refinement. Our natural world and human society share the same laws of development, the law of evolution applies to all, the sun too has evolved from collosal forces acting in favor of evolution.

Human being per Marx came into being due to work. He was animal without the ability to use instruments, his ability to use instruments helped him to create human wealth and human society. Our consciousness evolved from work. Human would become animal if society is undermined. Any system like monarchy rejects higher productivity, there fore the evolution of capitalism. He says capitalism will collapse too if it fails to be productive as desired.