Dialectical Thinking (Part 2): Principle of Dialectical Negativity; the Beyond of Religion-Science

in the second lecture on dialectical thinking we are going to be covering part two principle of dialectical negativity and the beyond of religion and science in using the dialectical principle of negativity in order to go beyond both religion and science we hope to approach a frontier of totally new thinking University discourse as a general matrix operates on positive knowledge that is presented to subjects as coherent consistent and complete in terms of representing a type of pre Kantian numinous substance often presented by a form of subjectivity that presents as if they know the truth Socratic knowledge on the other hand is a subtractive gesture the Socratic subject pays attention to incoherence inconsistency an incompletion of all positive knowledge and operates as a passive reflector of pure negation to all positive knowledge I do not know do you thus we see the main difference between the matrix of university discourse and the Socratic subject as operating between positive knowledge that is coherent consistent complete presented as if the subject knows the absolute truth and a type of negative knowledge where incoherence inconsistency and incompletion gained focus from a subject who claims to not know the active constructive dimension of dialectics is discovered in this same historical motion presented by the same type of Socratic subject where the original negativity is positive eyes where the truth is found in divisions failures antagonisms and imbalances from divisions failures antagonisms imbalances the identity does not cling to positive knowledge of what is instead becomes in relationship to a historical absence where the absence of perfect knowledge in some sense is the very motivating drive to produce new understanding this reversal of absence in the positivity is a good example of how dialectics mobilizes a key mechanism negation of negation this mechanism negation of negation can be applied on a meta level let's consider the traditional world the traditional world operates on a positive presupposition of absolute reality where absolute reality exists independent of human observers or rational opinions this reality was understood to have properties of oneness eternity infinity immortality it was coherent it was consistent and it was complete internal to itself thus from this understanding of the absolute reality we have the traditional world's fundamental triad or formula of man world God also could be formulated as body's language and truths in contrast to the traditional worlds formula the postmodern world operates on a negativity the negation of this positive presupposition and an explicit challenge and a totally opposite conception of the world where there is no positive absolute reality independent of human observers or rational opinions reality has the property of multiplicity heterogeneity alterity and contingency we can say that the formula for this meta perspective on reality is that there are only bodies and languages or there are only humans and the world dialectics in relation to the traditional world in the postmodern world does not cling to either conception but attempts to mobilise the contradictions in coherence and opposition between the two in order to formalize an approach to the truth that is not positive and independent of human observers but the consequence of the introduction of human observers and their subjective becoming in the form of the negativity of division failure antagonism and imbalance the result is that in contrast to the traditional knowledge which has no room for subjective becoming and postmodern knowledge which has no room for truth the dialectical knowledge focuses on the of subjective becoming as a negativity this mechanism accepts the initial negation and mobilizes negation as positivity or the classical mechanism negation of negation thus the starting point for absolute knowledge and dialectics is the following one there is no positive one as in the traditional world the one is replaced by a series of ones as in this one consciousness the problem for the series of ones is the other nests or the multiplicity of multiplicities which is complex confusing disorganized and chaotic this is the postmodern world and the postmodern world identifies this in a positive dimension dialectics claims that because there is no one the traditional world and only other nests the postmodern world in relation to a series of ones then nothing is positive izing negativity nothing is not a passive state but an active historical force the same mechanism we accept the initial negation and mobilize negation as a positivity consequently the absolute as a series of ones is always to one and the other the desire to close this two with a complete closed substance is always reflected in either a past or a future mediation the past is a retro topia and the future is a type of progressive future topia both desires whether past or present the desire to close the two is a projection to obfuscate tension instead of working tension in contradiction opposition and incoherence and so forth where one of the two is always an empty one in this case the missing other this dialectical formula for the absolute can be used to approach historicity specifically the historicity of religion and science in this way we can understand the historicity of religion and science from the perspective of the truth of subjective becoming as a series of ones and other necessities we ought to do and how we should act we're a science is about facts and nature what is objectively true and what is the nature of the universe let us first consider in its traditional form religion in its traditional form is grounded in a type of traditional morality where God goodness what is right and who the master are are seen as informing what we ought to do and how we should act over and above things like the devil evil what is wrong or even the slave or who is lower in a social category of course this form of religion can be negated for a balanced synthesis or a new-age balance where God and the devil good and evil right and wrong master and slave are seen as equal however if we use the dialectical principle the mechanism negation of negation then we mobilize this negativity where the forces that are called devil evil wrong and slave are in fact the ultimate motivational power of action and how we should act is instead to cultivate these as a positivity instead of covering them up and pretending they're not there with a type of religious morality from a type of psychoanalytic perspective then we should instead try to approach the dimension of devil evil wrong and slave from the point of view of sublimation and transform these forces into an authentic motivating drive science in contrast is the ground of traditional naturalism in the traditional conception or the classical science the object externality outside and nature are seen as informing understanding of what objectively is the nature of the universe over and above subject internality the inside and spirituality this system of classical science can of course be negated for a balanced synthesis or a new-age science where object and subject external and internal outside and inside nature and spirit are seen as balancing each other and equal to each other however dialectics again mobilizes the mechanism of negation of negation mobilizing negativity and the forces that are called subjective internal inside and spirit are seen as informing understanding of what objectively is the nature of the universe in this perspectival shift the classical science of objectivity external the outside and nature are always already spirits process of returning back to itself back to the subjective internal the inside and spirit as such in this dialectical mediation of the opposites between religion what we ought to do and science what objectively is we have a meta-level reconciliation that is a meta-level pure coincidence of the opposites where our moral action the highest good and the most authentic drive as well as objective nature what is the truth about reality coincide as the same thing and this is achieved through the absolute annihilation of both social law and natural substance in other words the foundation of traditional religion social law as well as the foundation of classical science natural substance become nothing at all but the mediation of subjective spirit in the authentic mediation of subjective spirit what is indeed at stake is nothing but historical freedom that is that the foundation of religion is social law and the foundation of classical science is natural law is nothing but the way in which the subject and collectives of subjects are mediating their own historical freedom as a process of becoming and this is the beyond of both religion and science as historical categories the beyond of religion and science as historical categories is the spirits own freedom and thinking the real of this freedom in itself and that brings us to the end of part 2 of dialectical thinking the principle of dialectical negativity and the beyond of religion and science I would also like to thank all of my patreon supporters for making these videos possible if you want to help support this channel please check out the link in the description thanks for watching

Channel: Cadell Last

Views: 1,446

Rating: 5 out of 5

Keywords: dialectics of enlightenment, dialectics explained, dialectics hegel and marx, dialectics of nature, dialectics of liberation, dialectics hegelian, dialectics meaning, dialectics philosophy, philosophy of science, philosophy of life, philosophy hegel, hegel phenomenology of spirit, hegel dialectical method, hegel philosophy, philosophy religion and ethics, philosophy vs religion, philosophy religion difference, religion and science conflict, religion and science sociology, law

Id: 17vqeNSbuAg

Length: 10min 51sec (651 seconds)

Published: Thu Mar 05 2020