From However, when a thesis is negated for not

From a Hegelian
perspective, all knowledge is obtained through a pattern of logical resolution
to dialectical discourse. This means that a one-sided reconciliation, or synthesis,
must include aspects of a proposition and its negation to constitute an understanding.

Hegel’s immanent critique of Transcendental Idealism refutes the absoluteness
of a priori sensibility required for
synthetic judgments, as an understanding of absolute depends on the content of
its opposite. Although Kant’s model provided dialectical evidence to substantiate
preconceptual knowledge, it relied on the spurious existence of an apperceptive
“thing-in-itself” to discern absolute. Historicism considers historical and
social circumstances to be the context for theoretic interactions, where the
collective consciousness investigates the coherence and stability of opposing
concepts to synthesize more complex truths relative to its identity. According
to Hegel, human progress conforms to a similar dialectical pattern visible
throughout history, in the form of movements. Movements are postulated to be a
synthesis of reality for the collective consciousness, where theses about the
world express truth relative to the state of development. However, when a
thesis is negated for not encompassing all perspectives, it is met with an
overcompensation of the marginalized insight. The European Enlightenment, for
example, was a movement characterized by an emphasis on reason. While there is
some necessary insight in unadulterated contemplation, sensations are also
repositories for wisdom. As the period of Enlightenment continued to neglect
individuality, Romanticism responded with overreactions of artistic imagination
in an attempt to restore humanity within the intellectual sphere.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Hegel maintains
that these necessary dynamic
principles are not innate, and that human thought is contingent entirely upon
on external context for the installment of logic. In fact, these same
principles are even a prerequisite for the Self to become integrated and
perceive the world. Since consciousness necessitates a synthetic identity to
access concepts, investigations of the truth are relative to the external
content that contributes to the identity of the Self. In a similar approach,
Peirce’s Pragmatic Theory holds truth to found through logical arguments that
are verifiable in the real world. Instead of a belief being relative the
synthetic identity of consciousness, Pragmatists validate beliefs relative to its
correspondence to current available evidence, implying that any concept is
considered true unless there is an indication to doubt its relation to the
world. However, beliefs are still subject to psychological characterization,
the concept must first be treated as a hypothesis, whose relation to the world
is determined by consensus. Consensus is essential to Pragmatism because it
provides the necessary sort of
generality for clarifying a concept’s connection to reality.

Although I feel
that relying on the practical considerations of concepts provides adequate
information about a concept required for scientific inquiry, majority reaction
is not a valid approach to
understanding the world. By hailing consensual beliefs as “working truths”
rather than synthesizing an intelligible determination, a subject is forced to relent
fundamental belief systems for the sake of practicality. Moreover, the
Pragmatist basis of truth can potentially be reckless; Pragmatism exploits a
predisposition in human behavior in that people are more likely to agree on an
idea just because the majority is convinced. This susceptibility undermines the
legitimacy of a consensus to validate beliefs. Pragmatism fatalistically determines
reality to be the application of a concept to the world, meaning that the
concept’s utility decides its soundness, as opposed to a rational explanation. In
my opinion, Historicism offers a more comprehensive assessment of the complex
nature of a judgment, a description in which Pragmatism openly avoids. Since
the concept of absolute cannot be coherently distinguished from its opposite,
the thought poses an eternal contradiction. Because the foundations of thought
are inherently fluxed, all truths must be relative to some contextual
application of dialectical principles.