Hegelian dialectic

For simplicity I am going to start from Nanse and the birds to the bible but is it just me or can anyone else see a "Hegelian dialectic" going on? I mean compare every religious text since Sumeria and it would seem that we have being building up to some kind of eventual synthesis -Could that be Light perhaps?
I love this song by Mary Chapin Carpenter - Transcendental Reunion - we are travelers traveling we are Gypsies together -
www.youtube.com...

a reply to: DpatC

Dialectic...yes
Hegelian? ... there are many dialectic structures

Thats the name of the album released by Prodigy. He is no longer alive. I thought this what this thread was gonna be ablout.

I love this thinking about it.

Like light and Illuminati. Light is good illumanti bad right?

Serpent and wisdom. Wisdom is good and serpent is bad.

You don't think there's something there do you?

Almost like something hidden in plain sight. Intentionally obfuscated perhaps.

a reply to: ElOmen

Do you know what a dialectic is?

a reply to: BlueJacket

No.....wait, now i do. Why?

Can you tell me what Hegelian is ?....I am a non religious follower, but am curious as to what you are talking about.

a reply to: Meldionne1

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel 1770-1831 a German Philosopher who influenced Marx and Nietzsche, among many others and other philosophical movements.

Hegelian dialectic

Hegelian dialectic, usually presented in a threefold manner, was stated by Heinrich Moritz Chalybäus as comprising three dialectical stages of development: a thesis, giving rise to its reaction, an antithesis, which contradicts or negates the thesis, and the tension between the two being resolved by means of a synthesis. In more simplistic terms, one can consider it thus; problem->reaction->solution. Although this model is often named after Hegel, he himself never used that specific formulation. Hegel ascribed that terminology to Kant.[35] Carrying on Kant's work, Fichte greatly elaborated on the synthesis model, and popularized it.

On the other hand, Hegel did use a three-valued logical model that is very similar to the antithesis model, but Hegel's most usual terms were: Abstract-Negative-Concrete. Hegel used this writing model as a backbone to accompany his points in many of his works.

The formula, thesis-antithesis-synthesis, does not explain why the thesis requires an antithesis. However, the formula, abstract-negative-concrete, suggests a flaw, or perhaps an incomplete-ness, in any initial thesis—it is too abstract and lacks the negative of trial, error, and experience. For Hegel, the concrete, the synthesis, the absolute, must always pass through the phase of the negative, in the journey to completion, that is, mediation. This is the essence of what is popularly called Hegelian Dialectics.

According to the German philosopher Walter Kaufmann:

"Fichte introduced into German philosophy the three-step of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, using these three terms. Schelling took up this terminology. Hegel did not. He never once used these three terms together to designate three stages in an argument or account in any of his books. And they do not help us understand his Phenomenology, his Logic, or his philosophy of history; they impede any open-minded comprehension of what he does by forcing it into a scheme which was available to him and which he deliberately spurned [...] The mechanical formalism [...] Hegel derides expressly and at some length in the preface to the Phenomenology.[36][37]

a reply to: DpatC

Hegalian Dialectic:

Step 1, make up a really out-there thesis.

Step 2, entirely contradict that first thesis with its exact opposite.

Step 3, mix bits of the two thesies together to make up a third thesis.

Step 4, assume that the third thesis must be right because the other two are rubbish.

Step 5, congratulate self on being so clever.

a reply to: chr0naut

You are wrong because we are talking philosophy here, not science. So THESIS not THEORY.

a reply to: BlueJacket

Hegelian dialectic is a three fold one. a thesis, giving rise to its reaction, an antithesis, which contradicts or negates the thesis, and the tension between the two being resolved by means of a synthesis. Quoted from rnaa in his post to this OP.

Personally, I don't see that happening in what the OP presents. And that may be because he presents so little in his OP. Only is title catches our interests only to let us down with no real information just a short opinions calling it a "Hegelian Dialectic" of which it isn't in its current form. He needs to add more info for us to follow his reasoning for calling and seeing it as such.

a reply to: chr0naut

I am disappointed that this thread petered out before you came back at me with a synthesis statement to go with my antithesis.

I think the OP vanished ....maybe " He-Gel-Ian " some trouble ? ...but that's just a theory ....( I know, bad joke ...bad play on words )