The pinnacle of Western philosophy is 100% Marxism. Marxism represent a qualitative leap of Western philosophy. The problem is that since academia tries very hard to pretend Marx doesn’t exist, they are forced to teach Western philosophy without teaching the pinnacle of Western philosophy, which is why you are forced either read about dudes who have been dead for centuries or a bunch of bunk bullshit by some dude talking nonsense. The rationale they give to teaching Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Kant, and so on is some bullshit about “being a better critical thinker” when the real reason why you should read them is because their works are the foundation in which Marx, who was also Western philosopher, would use for his works. You read Hegel so when you get to Marx, you can appreciate how Marx took Hegel’s incomprehensible bullshit and turn it into something that even illiterate workers can understand and more importantly, apply towards a liberatory political project.
The analytic vs continental divide in academic philosophy is basically a divide between a branch of Western philosophy that pretends Marx doesn’t exist vs a branch of Western philosophy that at least acknowledges Marx exists but isn’t itself Marxism. And it should come as no surprise that in the completely reactionary environment that is the Anglosphere, it’s the branch of Western philosophy that rejects Marxism that is completely dominant where you get to read philosophers who spend 200+ pages to prove that 1+1=2 or argue about qualia. It’s only recently that students are starting to get taught influenced-by-Marx-but-not-actually-Marxist philosophy.
You read Hegel so when you get to Marx, you can appreciate how Marx took Hegel’s incomprehensible bullshit and turn it into something that even illiterate workers can understand and more importantly, apply towards a liberatory political project.
I had some fun moments when i read Lenin’s notes about philosophy and in all other cases he notes something to explain things to himself making it easier to understand, but in case of Hegel he was like a low key “wtf”.
The pinnacle of Western philosophy is 100% Marxism. Marxism represent a qualitative leap of Western philosophy. The problem is that since academia tries very hard to pretend Marx doesn’t exist, they are forced to teach Western philosophy without teaching the pinnacle of Western philosophy, which is why you are forced either read about dudes who have been dead for centuries or a bunch of bunk bullshit by some dude talking nonsense. The rationale they give to teaching Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Kant, and so on is some bullshit about “being a better critical thinker” when the real reason why you should read them is because their works are the foundation in which Marx, who was also Western philosopher, would use for his works. You read Hegel so when you get to Marx, you can appreciate how Marx took Hegel’s incomprehensible bullshit and turn it into something that even illiterate workers can understand and more importantly, apply towards a liberatory political project.
The analytic vs continental divide in academic philosophy is basically a divide between a branch of Western philosophy that pretends Marx doesn’t exist vs a branch of Western philosophy that at least acknowledges Marx exists but isn’t itself Marxism. And it should come as no surprise that in the completely reactionary environment that is the Anglosphere, it’s the branch of Western philosophy that rejects Marxism that is completely dominant where you get to read philosophers who spend 200+ pages to prove that 1+1=2 or argue about qualia. It’s only recently that students are starting to get taught influenced-by-Marx-but-not-actually-Marxist philosophy.
I had some fun moments when i read Lenin’s notes about philosophy and in all other cases he notes something to explain things to himself making it easier to understand, but in case of Hegel he was like a low key “wtf”.