We read part of The Dialectic of Enlightenment (1944), specifically the parts about Homer's epic as an allegory for the merely apparent triumph of modernism (capitalism, instrumental reason) over myth (savagery, magical thinking).

Homer is odd for H&A because even stylistically, the epics present a mixture of cultures: They glorify violence, but their form is very ordered, and their very popularity makes them the first mass-culture products of the West. Throughout The Odyssey, Odysseus is in effect saying goodbye to the mythical world as he turns each challenge into a tool in his quest to get home. H&A use the episode with the Sirens as an allegory for how the workers are deafened to the call of anti-social myth (they have their work to do!), while the upper class can hear it but is helpless to actually act on it; like Odysseus tied to the mast, they too are strapped into the capitalist machine.

Read along with us; Ch. 2, "Odysseus or Myth and Enlightenment," starts on PDF p56 (p35), but we quickly backtrack to the first mention of Odysseus in Ch. 1 (the same essay we began previously) on PDF p46 (p25).

Note: This feed is likely going away soon. To keep getting your Closereads, entirely free and now ad-free, go sign up and get your private URL from patreon.com/closereadsphilosophy.

You can choose to watch this on unedited video.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On Ch. 2 "The Honest Soul and the Disintegrated Consciousness" in Sincerity and Authenticity (1972). This chapter focuses on a reading of Diderot's Rameau's Nephew and what Hegel made of it in the Phenomenology, so it's essentially for us a second opinion re. what we've been talking about on The Partially Examined Life.

Read along with us.

Watch this as unedited video.

To get future parts, subscribe at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠patreon.com/closereadsphilosophy⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On "Against Narrativity" (2004), where Galen (son of P.F.) argues that the prevalent philosophical and cultural camp is wrong. This objectionable camp (the Narratives) says that we understand our lives by telling ourselves a story about ourselves. Moreover, this is how we make meaning out of our lives, and how we thus behave ethically, taking responsibility for our past and future: how we have integrity.

Galen rejects both the descriptive claim here (that this is how we all, or at least those of us functioning as designed, process our experience) and the moral claim (that ethical comportment requires that we experience our lives narratively.

You can choose to watch this on video.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Continuing on Concluding Unscientific Postscript, now beginning the section called "Subjective Truth, Inwardness; Truth Is Subjectivity."

K. slowly unravels his thoughts on why objective thought as Hegel (or anyone else) conceives of it is inhuman: We are persons changing over time, trying to know a world that is changing over time, so knowledge claims must not avoid mention of the position of the knowing subject.

Read along with us, starting at the bottom of p198 (PDF p3).

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On an excerpt from Soren Kierkegaard's Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846) that critiques Hegel's idea of logic (dialectic) and then argues for his own conception of "truth as subjectivity."

In this first part, he's mostly focusing on Hegel. First (along with the rest of the world), K. denies Hegel's idea that logic is equivalent to physics (or biology, or any other analysis of what actually exists). Furthermore, the idea of a "system" is only one that (according to K) makes sense if you're looking down on the universe from God's perspective. Everything else is in progress: the object you're trying to know is changing, and you as subject are changing.

Follow along, starting on PDF p. 2 (document p. 196).

To get all parts of this discussion, you'll need to support us at

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We're up to sec. 208 in The Phenomenology of Spirit, still trying to figure out how and why individual consciousness is related to "The Unchangeable," which could be the Kantian thing-in-itself, or perhaps specifically the human soul as a thing-in-itself, or maybe Platonic Forms or God or some other Parmenidean One.

Because this "part two" discussion was so enthralling, I'm sharing it on this feed, but to get parts 3 and 4, you'll need to sign up to support us: patreon.com/closereadsphilosophy.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We're within the Self-Consciousness chapter of The Phenomenology of Spirit, specifically starting at sec. 206, which is the transition between two sections we've already considered on this podcast: Stoicism (and Skepticism) and Reason. The more famous part of the self-consciousness portion of the book is on the Master-Slave conflict, and in this section, we've got a similar dividedness, but it's all within one psyche, like you're being tortured by a voice in your head that you don't realize is just part of you.

We go between three different translations here: Pinkard, Inwood, and finally Miller, which is what we normally use and will use going forward.

You can choose to watch this on unedited video.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Mark and Wes read and discuss the short 2007 article, "Can We Get Our Materialism Back, Please?" Here Bruno Latour complains that materialism as modern common sense conceives of it is actually idealist: It is a social construction. Instead, a "thick" concept of material things acknowledges and details their historical (i.e. material in the Marxist sense) origins.

Read along with us.

You can choose to watch this on video.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On Franz Fanon's Black Skin, White Masks, ch. 7, B. "The Negro and Hegel." Hegel describes the abstract attainment of self-consciousness through recognition, but is this actually how it works in real slavery and its aftermath?

Read along with us, p. 216 (PDF p. 234).

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

While we modern folks have a generally clear distinction between law as in descriptive laws of nature and law as in ethical or civil commandments, these Medieval philosophers saw these as very much related if not actually the same thing, given that humans can ignore the dictates of their nature, i.e. reason, whereas the rest of nature just proceeds according to natural law, which for these theologians means God's dictates. So what actually is the relation, in general, between law and reason?

Our text includes Aquinas' presentation of this issue and his near-contemporary Duns Scotus' commentary on it. Read along with us.

You can choose to watch this on video.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices