“Hegel overflexed on moral reasoning, which was then inverted by the young Hegel

–“Hegel overflexed on moral reasoning, which was then inverted by the young Hegelians to become a progressive/materialistic philosophy. Post-modernists thought the answer was to reject moral reasoning (using moral reasoning, lol) by deconstructing it and/or flexing emotion instead. By almost totally overlooking empiricism, there is a lack of balance”– @nomad_dissident

^Correct.

But everything comes from somewhere. So where do anglo empiricism, german rationalism, and french pseudo-moralism come from? And why was each country persisting that vision? And what were the consequences?

This broader origin of causality explains more than comparison of the philosophers themselves.

All groups develop strategies. These strategies begin with group formation. They’re usually ancient. And these strategies are unconscious presumptions (premises) – metaphysical, conveyed as norms, traditions, values, institutions, and mythos.

A such, what are those strategies that manifest in each as arguments in favor of ‘the good’ – and in doing so persist those strategies, despite dramatic changes in energy conversion and consumption (prosperity), and therefore both new opportunity and choice.

First principles and all that. 😉

Feminine Authoritarian French, Masculine Duty Germany, Ascendant Masculine Entrepreneurial Britain.

What I find humorous or Ironic, given the strategies of England, France, and Germany, is that there are only three means of coercion, three variations of personality bias (from neutral), three categories of elites, three categories of formal institutions, and that western civilization is unique in practicing both class and elite trifunctionalism.

Cheers
CD