Our website: www.justandsinn... Patreon: / justandsinner This program overviews the thought of G.W.F. Hegel as part of our Makers of the Modern World Series
Пікірлер: 46
@richardfrerks8712 Жыл бұрын
Happy Reformation Day. Dr Cooper
@dialogos585 Жыл бұрын
Your videos are wonderful. Your humility in presenting Hegel is unwarranted; you have so much clarity and organization on this dense topic. Thank you so much for sharing your wisdom.
@TheAustinDockery3 ай бұрын
I think we need a lecture on Hume and Locke based on your frequent referencing of them.
@quinnwindsor8718 Жыл бұрын
Dr. Cooper, do you plan on covering Kierkegaard in this series?
@DrJordanBCooper Жыл бұрын
Yessir.
@quinnwindsor8718 Жыл бұрын
@@DrJordanBCooper I eagerly await that video
@dagwould Жыл бұрын
Also Jaspers, Heidegger...and you thought Hegel was unreadable 🙂
@luistoomuch Жыл бұрын
I love this series!
@arthurbrugge2457 Жыл бұрын
You do good work. I really appreciate your defense and promotion of orthodox lutheranism. Your pronunciation of Tübingen, on the other hand, is highly suspect🙂 Your videos are great, and greatly informative. As a man of education in the natural sciences, I still find you very clear, precise and understandable. Keep it up!😃
@LilachLavy5 ай бұрын
Your delivery is relaxing :)
@fantafan02 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for the video. I think the reading is too focused on (a certain understanding of) the notion of Geist from the Phenomenology. But Hegel developed a mature system where the Phen. (and specifically the overly 'historical' elements which you find questionable) plays a way less central role (in can either be seen as the 'introduction' to the system, the manner in how one must think in order to do philosophy, or as one of the episodes of subjective mind). In contrast, Hegel grounds his mature philosophy in the Science of Logic, which is supposed to be concerned with a pure, atemporal, formal thought in its pure, atemporal self-developing movement. Hegel even describes this Logic as 'the exposition of God as he is in his eternal essence before the creation of nature and a finite mind'. It is very significant that this is the groundwork for all of Hegel's mature philosophy: it tells us that it is not historical or material reality that is true (or the measure of the truth) but whatever is true in 'empirical reality', Hegel would say, is true in virtue of its expressive display of what he (quite Platonistically, i.e. 'anti-nominalistically') referrs to as the Idea, which is the culminating moment of the Logic. (Simplifying a lot) Of course maybe one could say it does not matter what Hegel's system is actually about, but (for the purposes of conceiving him as a 'maker of the modern world') how his ideas were taken up and developed in history. But that sounds like it could likewise be said about Luther....
@JayTaylor3dollarfilmsКүн бұрын
this is Amazing, thank you. I'm so excited to explore your channel. Is it possible to find your PPTs online?
@dagluterek2563 Жыл бұрын
These lectures are great!
@truthisbeautiful7492 Жыл бұрын
Hope you do a video on theology of john locke and Hume. Video on the counter reformation theologians/lutheran scholastics/reformed scholastics and the Lutheran/Roman polemic wouod be great too.
@truthisbeautiful7492 Жыл бұрын
Max Weber and Sigmund Freud, and George Frazer (golden bough) would be helpful too. The book" 7 theories of religion," covers them well. Your series has helped connect the dots on the influence of Kant and Hegel. I do wish you had more tine for critique after taking the time to describe the philosophy and its history.
@nicford1486 Жыл бұрын
43:37 so does Hobbes. I hated reading him in college, he was so full of himself. But I guess he wasn't totally wrong either? Lol. Thanks for the great content Dr. Cooper. Not sure I would dig into Hegel myself, so this is very helpful!
@hegellogicanddialectic26195 ай бұрын
Hi Doctor Cooper, Great presentation. I was very much impressed with your presentation of the relationship between Logic, Nature and Geist. That is the best definition and explanation of Geist I have ever heard in such a clear explanation. Thank you. As far as explanation of Dialectic is concerned, to my humble opinion and with all due respect, any mention of Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis is already a distortion of Hegelian Dialectic and honestly it does not explain anything substantial about the subject matter. Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis rips Dialectic of its revolutionary content and it successfully renders Dialectic as the most useless thing. I wished you would have explained dialectic in terms of “being-in-itself”, “being-for-another”, “being-in-and-for-itself” and “returning-back-to-itself” notions which Hegel himself uses extensively in his Science of Logic book. I enjoyed your presentation.
@Barnabas942 ай бұрын
Do you know of translations, editions, volumes, or readers of Hegel I should look at getting in my library? What would be a good order to read Hegel in inorder to get a good understanding of him?
@twarozek14104 ай бұрын
22:50
@rmarcusshort Жыл бұрын
Francis Parker's book "The Story of Western Philosophy" ends with Hegel due to exactly what you describe around minute 44. His successors do not try to explain all of reality. In Parker's view, philosophy fractalizes after Hegel.
@Parsons4Geist Жыл бұрын
The greatest Lutheran of all time
@collettewhitney2141 Жыл бұрын
Problem reaction solution @dr Jordan Cooper Another enlighten content once again 🙏
@TravisD.Barrett6 ай бұрын
1:26 "Give you some Kant-ext"
@groundfloorguthrie Жыл бұрын
Am I noticing a bit of Francis Shaeffer in your work? ;) Also, I would suggest examining Georges Sorel, to whom both Gramsci and Mussolini look...
@davidgraphos Жыл бұрын
45:15 the plot of 'edge of tomorrow' :-P
@dagwould Жыл бұрын
Would the English word 'ethos' be a better translation of Hegel's 'geist' than 'spirit'? Ethos tends to have an impersonal character, but is something that has general effect, as in 'the ethos of the age', or 'a good work ethos'?
@Occhiodiargento Жыл бұрын
I know you don't like John Frame but I was reading about his immanence/trancendence structure he has about God's Inmutability. Maybe some future lecture about all this dinamic Inmutability theologial contra a more classical approach?
@CJ2345ish Жыл бұрын
Hello Dr. Cooper. I was curious. I made a suggestion you look at the philosophers of much of modern western government. Do you plan to talk about any of them like you did for many of the Marxists? Ie: John Locke, Voltaire, Rousseau
@DrJordanBCooper Жыл бұрын
Likely.
@PresbyterianPaladin Жыл бұрын
@@DrJordanBCooper you had mentioned Mises in your Marx video. A Mises video would be dope. 😁
@martianuslucianus4485 Жыл бұрын
Would be interested to hear your take on Heidegger, particularly as I am writing a PhD thesis on him with reference to theological concerns.
@martianuslucianus4485 Жыл бұрын
@lofikohai If you are interested in Heidegger and theology I could recommend some reading. I think the most accessible is Judith Wolfe, she wrote two books on Heidegger's general relationship to theology and his eschatology. There is also a more advanced book by Sean McGrath; and one by Benjamin Crowe that examines Heidegger's indebtedness to Luther in particular on the theology of the cross.
@D.E.Metcalf Жыл бұрын
Any plans for Derrida?
@Wesley_Todd Жыл бұрын
He did a good episode back in March/April on the Just and Sinner podcast.
@DrJordanBCooper Жыл бұрын
Yes, there will be a Derrida video in this series.
@bionicmosquito2296 Жыл бұрын
You mentioned how many of these thinkers in your series are Lutheran. Perhaps nothing more than a curiosity for me, but do you believe there is a causal connection, for good and / or ill: that something in Lutheran thought / theology / philosophy has given birth to the ideas that have come forth from these makers of the modern world?
@janurbanek1127 Жыл бұрын
can some1 please explaint to me, why fascism should be cathegorized as far right? as far as i know, right = less and less goverment untill the point of anarchy, which is the extreme of right. Fascism is just a huge state power + corp duo. Or is this some US version of left / right?
@edwardrhodes1331 Жыл бұрын
I think that this is a US definition of left/right. From what I understand, the right/left distinction originally comes from the French Revolution and the seating arrangements of the French Legislative Assembly with the ultra divine-right monarchists sitting on the far right and the ultra radicals who want to start again from first principles on the far left. This link between authoritarian monarchy and fascism is, in part, I think, why Fascism is seen as far-right in Europe. In addition ethno-nationalism which is prominent in much of fascism is also seen as right wing, with internationalism being seen as on the left. Of course, as you note, the far left can also be very authoritarian (as the far-left radicals in the French Revolution certainly were). I personally tend to prefer to use collectivist v individualist and nationalist v internationalist rather than left v right since people's understanding of what is left-wing and what is right-wing varies widely from place to place and time to time (e.g. when I was a student back in the 90's in the UK, the right to say things which others find offensive was seen as left-wing, whereas today this view could be used to identify someone as being right-wing or even far-right). I hope that this helps.
@groundfloorguthrie Жыл бұрын
Edward Rhodes provides a good thumbnail of the history of the two-dimensional paradigm of modern politics. After that, it should be noted that both Fascism and Communism are revolutionary movements, consciously opposed to Western Liberalism. They both find their root in the Socialist movements of France and Germany, and more specifically in the work of Georges Sorel.