The Early Postmoderns on Art and Social Media

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel lived from 1770 to 1831. He was a German philosopher who used a historical perspective, coupled with idealism, to bring about paradigms that would help shape the world. His thought would lead to most of the great philosophical ideas of the last century: Marx and Nietzsche, phenomenology, German existentialism, and psychoanalysis, to name a few. One of his best known concepts is his idea that mind or spirit manifests itself in a set of contradictions or polar opposites that are ultimately integrated without losing the core concepts of either side. This can be summarized as a process that goes from a thesis and an antithesis to a synthesis.

With Descartes, there was a split between mind and body. Hegel tried to integrate those two back together. He was interested in the spirit, which we can think of as God, as embodied in the world, in all matter. But this spirit can evolve; it doesn’t stay at the lowest form of matter. Gradually, spirit can become more conscious, more aware, more articulate. For example, consider a rock. That’s physical matter, but there’s not really spirit in there. Spirit is conscious, aware, free, rational; pretty much everything a rock isn’t. Hegel says that the ultimate embodiment of this spirit is human consciousness. Human beings, for Hegel, are not just accidents of nature; they are reason itself—the reason inherent in nature—that has come to life and self-consciousness. Beyond human beings – or the hypothetical idea of other finite rational beings that might exist on other planets – there is no self-conscious reason in Hegel's universe. And he thought of the overall spirit, which is moving along and evolving, as being like God. God, to Hegel, is not completely separate from the human spirit. God develops through the creation of a thesis, which has an antithesis inherent within it, and the two form a synthesis, which becomes a new thesis. And spirit, or God, has to be embodied in the world. It’s not separate from it, as Descartes thought.

Hegel’s philosophy of aesthetics portrayed art as having one particular purpose: to allow us to contemplate and enjoy images of our own spiritual freedom—which images are beautiful precisely because they give expression to our freedom. In other words, art’s purpose is to enable us to bring to mind the truth about ourselves, to enable us to become aware of who we truly are as free human beings. Art is there not just for art's sake, but for beauty's sake, that is, for the sake of a distinctively sensuous form of free human self-expression and self-understanding. Furthermore, art is not only just a matter of form, but of content. Art must contain within itself the freedom and richness of spirit embodied and living in the world. Since the spirit is understood as “God,” the content of truly beautiful art is in one respect the divine. Yet, it's not separate from human life. As we have just seen, Hegel argues that the Idea – or  “God” – comes to consciousness of itself only in and through finite human beings. The content of beautiful art must thus be the divine in human form or the divine within humanity itself – as purely human freedom.

So what does this mean for social media? Well, it presents a surprisingly optimistic viewpoint. Due to the theme of progression through the thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, the only way for a website - or any work that is to be judged – to be considered “bad” is if it fails to be inspired and to, in turn, inspire. And the best social media websites should somehow allow us to contemplate our own spiritual freedom, and inspire us to discuss that freedom with each other. Perhaps the idea of a social media website devoted solely to discussing human freedom sounds a bit pretentious. And it is. This isn’t an explicit goal, but rather, a by-product of a marriage of form and content into beauty. That beauty will, in turn, inspire each viewer to privately ponder their own freedom and their place in the divine.

Hegel & Marx on Webphil

Hegel: The world is always changing and progressing (as a group). 

Webphil has been evolving and continues to evolve as new viewpoints (new philosophers, antitheses) are added to the mix. Along with this, he would be happy to hear us debating over certain aspects of the website. Conflict is positive and provides opportunity for growth.

He might propose the idea of an open forum where visitors of Webphil are encouraged to critique the site and propose new ideas. There could be push back from other viewers as they seek to find a synthesis of their ideas. There should also be encouragement for opposition and debate in the analysis of websites that are up for critique.

A key for Webphil is to emphasize the culture. Businesses are currently expending a lot of money and energy into setting and maintaining a strong culture. In fact, some firms have even named a chief culture officer to aid in these efforts. A key part of Webphil's culture should be the idea of straight talk - don't get offended if someone disagrees with you and don't be afraid to be honest with others.

Marx: Everything that is done should be pushing toward meaningful work.

So far, the Webphil certified critics have all (well, almost all) been engaged and have learned about philosophers outside of the ones they are assigned to. Even though each critic has a specific task, they are informed of outside viewpoints and have an idea of what the website will consist of as a whole.

Website visitors should have a similar experience; though they may be particularly interested in a single philosopher or topic, they should still be exposed to others so they understand where their task fits in with the whole.

They should feel that they are accountable and responsible for how the whole site turns out. Though the visitors and critics may have a specific task, they should be like the difference between assembly line and kaizen manufacturing. They need to understand the vision and growth of the project.

Hegel and Marx Critique of Webphil

Ipso facto, or by the very fact, that we are critiquing our own website, shows that we are working in a very Hegelian fashion, in a dialectic. Having it as it is, each critiquing it, and then synthesizing our ideas to form a better site to which we start our critique the next times is the idea of the historical dialectic, the progress of history, and the progress of a social website.

But, to bring in Marx, there is a limit to our power as students to critique; both the website and the class. There is the teacher and his henchmen, the TA, who have power over the curriculum, power over our grades, and power over our experience with the class, to an extent.

This class has been completely different than I expected and I have had to adjust and be proactive in changing my own attitude towards it. I tried speaking up, or providing an antithesis, early on, but that didn't go too far. The class structure seemed pretty fixed then, though it's getting a little better now.

In part, this fixedness has been good, because I have learned things that I probably never would have, had the class been the way I expected it to be. But, I still feel alienated much of the time and maybe there is a way for us, as students, to have more input in the goals of the class.

Hegel and Marx on Social Websites

Hegel and Marx Intro

Hegel is sometimes called the beginning of postmodernism.  Marx was also a postmodern philosopher.  A really, quick, messy way to talk about modernism vs. postmodernism would be to say that the moderns believed in a fixed reality or laws of perfection, while the postmoderns believed in unfixed reality with changing laws of perfection. 

Modernism =



(Standard of perfection to measure worm against!)

Postmodernism =


(This worm is free for interpretation!)

What they Might Say About Social Websites (according to me):

 
Hegel: "There is no ideal social website with which to measure ! With each newly designed social website, there is always a thesis and an antithesis.  A thesis is the main point, and the antithesis is the anti-point! The makers should be aware of both so they can form a new synthesis or another draft out of these two contradicting points.  These drafts will continue on further and further, each time becoming something new, changing toward a new synthesis.  The idea of perfection is always changing."


Marx:  "Workers in any area should never be doing alienated, meaningless work like they might in a factory line. If the users are workers, they should always understand the bigger vision of the site and then with that inspiration be motivated to dive in and contribute and interact!"

CORRECT: Explain what alienation: if not alienated, then yourself and your values are enhanced in the thing you make. The primary form of alienation here is between the object and the human.  If not alienated, you feel connected. 
Separate what they originally said from what they would say about social websites. 

Overview: Marx and Hegel

 

Marx was Post-Hegelian, who was Post-Kantian, who was Post-Humian, who was Post- ...you get the picture.

Each of them built off the ideas of their predecessors and to an extent, through this process, verified one of Hegel's main points - the historical dialectic  -which gave birth to one of Marx's main points - historical materialism.

The historical dialectic is when an idea is presented and then refuted. Out of the refutation, and  conflict between the thesis and the anti-thesis, comes a beautiful synthesis - a merging of both ideas better than either on their own. History progressed like this up until Hegel, so he thought, who had achieved the end of rationality, unable to be refuted, negated, or anti-thesized. (Is that even a word?)

Marx on the other hand did not agree. HE ANTI-THESIZED THE UN-ANTITHESIZABLE!!! (Now I know that that ones not a word). He thought this dialectic wasn't between ideas, but between the material means one possessed or did not possess. The battle between the have's and have not's. Bourgeois vs. Proletariat. 

But, how do these two theories play out in social media?

One way is you could say that social media is a platform for these two different types of dialectics to engage.

1. For Hegel, ideas are shared, refuted, and synthesized through all forms of posting, commenting, liking, sharing, etc. You could say that social media is accelerates the process of history by making it easy for everyone to be involved in the collective conversation. A good social website, according to Hegel, would engage in this process.
2. For Marx, one way to look at it could be that some businesses use social media to advertize and those with more money can sponsor adds and become even more successful than those without money for advertizing, which would be a critique of Marx. But, a pro that Marx could see is that even those without money can still create pages and accounts for free, thus equalizing the playing field. A good social website would have both a free and a paid version.

These are two points from Marx and Hegel about what a good social website would do.

• Provide a place for people to engage in the collective and historical dialectic.
• Offer both a free and a paid version thus helping to level the playing field between have's and have not's.

 Comment below if you can think of any other ways.

Greg

Hegel & Marx

Hegel

Hegel is often thought of as the first of the post-modern philosophers. His ideas contrasted with those of his predecessors in that he argued that the world was not fixed but moving! He believed that the entire world moved together as a group in the following manner:

Thesis -> Antithesis Emerges -> Synthesis

This process repeats itself and demonstrates the importance of conflict or opposition in order to progress. Hegel also thought highly of the way that Jesus maintained His composure amidst intense trial and believed that many people emulate this in the lives they live.

Hegel would say today that there should always be something playing a role of antithesis and pushing back on the status quo or popular ideas. This could be visible on a website through forums where users debate certain ideas. There could also be a page on the website that opens it up for users to critique and criticize. This would allow the website to get better or at least for the creators to be more informed.

Marx

Marx agreed with most of Hegel's ideas and added on applications to labor. He believed that labor should not be alienating, instead it should foster individual development and encourage individuals to flourish. Everything that is done should be pushing toward meaningful work.

Even when workers are specialized, they should still know about other tasks and understand the role they place in the creation of something.

Marx would argue that users of a website should be informed as to all aspects of the website, not just they pages they frequent. They should also be able to contribute and, if they are specialized, be trained in areas not crucial for their tasks in order to better understand the role they play as part of the whole.