Andrew: “So my personal section is it: By itself, “X is Y” (where Y is not same as X) is not contradictory

• step 3 Rosa Lichtenstein said within step three:twenty two pm into : Regrettably, the writer of this article has actually forgotten many blazing mistakes into the Hegel’s ‘logic’ – mistakes that have been uncritically duplicated across the into the ‘Materialist Dialectics’ (in spite of the ‘materialist flip’ Hegel’s dialectic is alleged for got inflicted abreast of it).You will find intricate Hegel’s more severe problems right here:
• 4 Andrew Kliman said in the step one:58 pm towards the : A reaction to Rosa Lichtenstein:For the fresh alleged non-contradiction inside the “John is a man” otherwise “the newest rose is reddish,” their situation appears to me to count towards pursuing the (with the web page you mention):”Hegel … obviously thought he may disregard the logical/grammatical differences that exist between the various words he used, or, at least, within jobs they occupied in the language – we.elizabeth., anywhere between naming, saying, detailing and you may predicating (i.age., saying some thing throughout the anything or some body).”However, as you typed shortly before one to, Hegel are trying reveal “you to motion is actually built-into Our Rules, once the envision passes from a single pole to some other” (my personal limits).These won’t be the same thing.Maxims pertain to understanding; research of the characteristics one terms gamble inside a words really does maybe not.Therefore, as an example, it’s certainly possible while making a logical difference between the newest “is” of term therefore the “is” away from predication, however, I accidentally possess discovered many individuals who was so you’re able to describe things by providing types of him or her (I am a teacher). The comments from what anything “are” hold the contradiction which you say actually expose, zero?And it is not clear in my opinion you to definitely a meaningful meaning-instead of a listings off attributes (predicates)-can always get. Identify “Goodness,” like.
• 5 Rosa Lichtenstein told you in the dos:forty-eight pm on the : Andrew, first of all, the latest web page your read try a basic introduction on my ideas designed for novices. We write my disagreement within the a lot more detail at links noted at the bottom:”Although not, because you typed eventually just before you to, Hegel are trying inform you “you to definitely activity is built into All of our Maxims, once the consider seats from a single rod to another” (my personal caps).Maxims pertain to awareness; studies of properties you to terminology play in the a vocabulary does maybe not.Therefore, including, it is certainly you’ll be able to and come up with an analytical difference in the newest “is” off label and also the “is” away from predication, however, We occur to possess encountered many people whom was so you can describe some thing by giving samples of him or her (I’m a teacher). Its statements of what things “are” support the contradiction which you state actually introduce, zero?”I really don’t see it alleged ‘contradiction’, and you may none you nor Hegel demonstrate that there’s you to definitely here.”Therefore actually clear in my opinion you to a significant definition-in lieu of a directories out of features (predicates)-can still be given. Describe “Goodness,” such as for example.”And, I’m not sure how you get put the expression “definition” right here, since i failed to utilize this term.Finally:”Maxims have to do with consciousness; research of your properties one terms play when you look at the a language does perhaps not.”

I’m from convinced that your (otherwise Hegel) tends to make so it variation – actually Hegel had jswipe mobile to explore words (and illegitimately therefore, while i have demostrated) to try to generate their point

He may possess *thought* he was discussing ‘concepts’, exactly what we really discover him starting try balancing with jargonised linguistic words. Hence, my personal criticism away from their entry to vocabulary is legitimate.

It’s accurately once the Hegel indulged in such a “distortion” from ordinary-language that he believe he may obtain a great ‘contradiction’ (and this wasn’t you to definitely anyway).

But is (it?) try a contradiction if the whenever brand new Meant “is” is the “is” regarding title. It’s much like, if not a genuine exemplory case of, a paradox with regards to (such “bullet rectangular”) otherwise classification mistake (reddish logarithm).” However,, you’ve got but really to show these are ‘contradictions’, and you can, obviously, the term ‘contradiction within the terms’ is good misnomer. [If you’d like me to explain as to the reasons, I could.]