Hegelian Dialectic Research Articles

Psychoanalysis and Interdisciplinarity With Non-analytic Psychotherapeutic Approaches Through the Lens of Dialectics.

Psychoanalysis, in its purist mainstream sense, tends to be considered as an isolationist discipline that steers clear of interdisciplinary connections with other psychotherapies. Its drive for purity does not open up to influences that cast as alien and a threat to its core principles. We refer to Hegelian dialectics in an attempt to offer an alternative approach to interdisciplinarity in clinical psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis entertains a complex dialectical relationship with the major theories it opposes. In this dynamic, psychoanalysis begins by negating the non-psychoanalytic theory as a part of self-negation (Hegel calls this phase self-alienation). But in its own process of growth, it negates this negation and reabsorbs the alienated self part. Reabsorbing the negated component, psychoanalysis does not revert to its original identity but becomes sublated into a different, more complex idea. In this epistemological process, psychoanalysis deals with its own practical and theoretical anomalies and lacunas. The paper illustrates this process using three central developments in the history of psychoanalysis: empathy in self psychology (connection with Rogers' humanist psychology), short-term dynamic psychotherapy (connection with short, intensive therapies), and mentalization-based psychotherapy (connection with cognitive-behavioral therapies). In all of these cases, psychoanalysis integrates components it previously opposed and changes these components to their own, specific characteristics. We address the epistemological shifts in the scientific status of psychoanalysis and show their connection to dialectics. Finally, we conclude that dialectical development is what allows psychoanalysis to remain relevant and up to date, to be open to interdisciplinary influences without its identity and tradition coming under threat.

On the Notions of Police/State (of Situation): An Economic Perspective in Light of Hegel's Philosophy of Right

ABSTRACT The article discusses the Hegelian opposition between institutions of Police and Corporation, leading to the objective spirit formed in the notion of the State. Juxtaposing both of Hegel's institutions against the usage of these notions proposed by Jacques Rancière (Police) and Alain Badiou (State of the Situation) opens a critical dividing line. We emphasize the inadequate handling of economic factors inherent in both notions, consequently obfuscating the economic conditioning of the political dimension in the social body. Moreover, we supplement both of the institutions with an economic-counterpart notion; to Police we add “Private Property” and to Corporation “State of Technology”. Further, we apply Badiou's handling of Hegel's dialectics as the dialectics of “constitutive scission”. The dialectical play of private property and state of technology is distinguished in the dialectics of algebra of places and topology of localizations. The resulting intersection is shown to be the place of torsion – corresponding to the place of the Subject – an interval, where we confront an uttered “wrong”, an interruption in the smooth counting of parts in a social body. This torsion is an immanent backside operation of the economic structure as far as it is a necessary factor in the upsurge of political subjectivity.

What Remains of the Person: Civil Death and Disappearance in Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit

ABSTRACT English-language commentary on the role of the French Revolution in Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit tends to equate the so-called “fury of destruction” (Furie des Verschwindens) with the violent dialectic of rival factions’ rush for power. Here it is argued that “Absolute Freedom and Terror” ought instead to be read in the light of a “fury of disappearance”, namely in terms of the extinction of dissenting citizens’ legal personhood. This is achieved by recourse to civil death, a criminal sentence that declares the individual, who is very much alive, legally dead. While there are some actual and quite painful consequences for recipients of such a sentence, civil death is effective mainly on the philosophical and constitutional planes, where it maintains the illusion of a unanimous general will, fleetingly securing the state from failure. A focus on personhood and civil death also taps into the larger Hegelian dialectic of legalism and tradition, and into the various shapes community life takes therein, beginning with Greek Ethical Life, and ending in Absolute Freedom and Terror.

Towards an expansive object and a restrictive experience in Everyday Aesthetics: A Chestertonian metaxological approach

This article proposes to resolve an internal ambiguity in the subdiscipline called Everyday Aesthetics (EA), systematized by the researcher Horacio Pérez-Henao, according to whom the extension of aesthetics to the everyday has been done, on the one hand, by means of a consideration of an expansive object and subject according to aesthesis itself, as mainly proposed by Katya Mandoki, and, on the other hand, by means of a restrictive object and subject according to the parameters of an authentic aesthetic experience, a theory headed by John Dewey. Methodology: To resolve this tension, a hermeneutic methodology known as the fourfold sense of being, related to Hegelian dialectic, albeit with important modifications supplied by William Desmond was used. This methodology allows a suitable way to explore and discuss different approaches in everyday aesthetics epitomized by Mandoki and Dewey, and makes possible the proposal of a third way, epitomized by G. K. Chesterton. Results: Bearing in mind the original intention of EA—according to which the everyday must be revitalized from an aesthetic perspective, as explained by Joseph Kupfer, it is argued that the two alternate positions of Mandoki and Dewey are unsatisfactory; an attempt is therefore made to respond to this through the analysis of the aesthetic approach of G. K. Chesterton. From his aesthetic reflections, it can be ascertained that to revitalize daily life, the object must be expansive and the subject, restrictive, from a certain méthodos and according to patterns that qualify an everyday aesthetic experience. All of this seeks to pave the way for subsequent investigations of EA being both expansive and restrictive. Finally, it is argued that this Chestertonian EA converges with and extends the aesthetics of design of Jane Forsey, and thus shows that design itself can be revitalized in keeping with a restrictiveexpansive approach to everyday aesthetics. Conclusion: aesthetics should be expansive every day, in that it should concern itself with any aspect of daily life, and restrictive, in that it should set certain limits on the self and its intentions with regard to the possibilities of aesthetic experience.

Hölderlin e a poética do paradoxo

This article seeks to clarify and expose the principle of Hölderlin's “poetic logic”, as it appears in the “poetological” texts, mainly in the Observations on Oedipus and Antigone. As we try to show here, Hölderlin's “poetic logic” does not follow the principles of formal logic, but it comes close to dialectical logic, although it cannot be reduced to Hegelian dialectics. The logic here is not aimed at standardizing the rules of the use of thought, but at poetic practice, whose nature, in Hölderlin's sense, consists in the paradoxical apprehension of existence as such. Although it can be more clearly observed in the tragic genre, this paradoxical logic of poetry also permeates Hölderlin's so-called late hymns, such as Patmos and Bread and wine, in which tragic oppositions are coated in the elegiac form.

The Empirical and the Holistic Turn: A Hegelian Dialectics of Technoscience Revisited

My effort to address the comments made by the two distinguished scholars (to “negate their negations” as it were), consists of three steps. I will start with a brief resume of Hegel’s dialectical logic, to provide a scaffold for the debate. Subsequently, I will address the comments made. In the case of Hans-Jörg Rheinberger, I will focus on his reference to Althusser. In the case of Bart Gremmen, I will focus on the dialectics of biology (on biology as an inherently dialectical science), notably on his reference to Mendel. Finally, I will address the tension between the conceptual and the empirical dimension of philosophical scholarship.

Лики русского гегельянства: С.Л. Франк между Гегелем и Ницше

This article dwells on S.L. Frank’s philosophical views in the context of the crisis of European metaphysics and compares his ontological and religious views with the teachings of G.W.F. Hegel and F. Nietzsche. The author critically examines Frank’s attempt to synthesize Hegelianism and Orthodoxy. The methodology of this research is based on the key principles and attitudes of comparative philosophy and historical and philosophical reconstruction. The article substantiates the thesis that the reception of Hegel’s works by Frank is a product of the pseudomorphosis of Russian culture. The main conclusion of the study is that Frank’s intention to go beyond Hegelian dialectic leads to the convergence of his ideas with the philosophy of life, in particular with Nietzsche’s teaching. Within the framework of the comparative analysis of the teachings of Frank, Hegel and Nietzsche, the paper focuses on the problem of the border. It demonstrates that, according to both Frank and Hegel, the border acts as the main condition for the constitution of being as a certainty. At the same time, the border is an ontological condition for a certain and limited being to go beyond its limits. The author concludes that, in this regard, Frank follows the fundamental principles of Hegelian dialectic. At the same time, Frank goes beyond the philosophy of Hegel’s attitude towards the philosophical comprehension of the irrational, incomprehensible depths of being. In this sense, Frank comes close to the principles of Nietzsche’s teaching and turns to the study of the borderline phenomena of human existence.

Exploring the Preconditions for a Developmental Science: Hegelian Metaphysics and Dialectics

In this article, we explore the metaphysics of Hegelian dialectics and its implications for a developmental science. More specifically, we investigate how Hegel initiated the move from classical mechanicism to dialectics, thus rearranging the ruling scientific logic at his time. We do this by introducing some of the metaphysical assertions implied by mechanicism and showing how these assertions are scientifically inadequate in explicating the relation between the empirical matter and abstract representation of a given (developmental) phenomenon. This claim leads us to a discussion of the theory of knowledge offered by Hegel as opposed to Kant, and how these theories relate to the struggle between process and structure. Finally, we find that the subject is displaced in between observation and experience and thus epistemically constrained in its access to empirical matters. This fact draws attention to the importance of considering the metaphysical aspects of the sense-modalities, and how such aspects relate to any given developmental phenomenon. Overall the article illustrates the potentials of Hegelian dialectics for avoiding entrenched dualisms and static oppositions in future research.

Commentary to “Practicing Dialectics of Technoscience During the Anthropocene” by Hub Zwart

Hub Zwart’s article is about the idea—and the practice—of an embedded philosophy of science, that is, a philosophy participating in and at the same time reflecting about the current state of the sciences facing the Anthropocene, to which I am very sympathetic. There are, however, two caveats. The first is that participation is always in danger to end up in a more or less uncritical eulogy, in the present case of synthetic biology. The second is that I have doubts about packing the historical path of scientific development into the Procrustes bed of Hegelian dialectics. This usually leads to one or the other form of teleology.

Dialectical Methodology of the Praxis of Biology

Zwart uses Hegel’s dialectical method to develop a dialectical methodology for assessing biology as technoscience during the Anthropocene. In this paper I will evaluate this use of Hegelian dialectics in biology. I will first elaborate the meaning of Hegel’s method of “Dialectics”. This helps me to evaluate Zwart’s dialectical scientific methodology from the perspective of Hegel’s method of “Dialectics” and to evaluate Zwart’s dialectical scientific methodology from the perspective of the praxis of biology. Finally, I will oppose Zwart’s claim that the synthetic cell is an appropriate case study to demonstrate the relevance of dialectics for understanding contemporary biological research.

Practicing Dialectics of Technoscience during the Anthropocene

This paper develops a dialectical methodology for assessing technoscience during the Anthropocene. How to practice Hegelian dialectics of technoscience today? First of all, dialectics is developed here in close interaction with contemporary technoscientific research endeavours, which are addressed from a position of proximity and from an ‘oblique’ perspective. Contrary to empirical (sociological or ethnographical) research, the focus is on how basic concepts of life, nature and technology are acted out in practice. Notably, this paper zooms in on a synthetic cell project called BaSyC as a concrete instantiation of converging views of life, nature and technology currently at work in technoscience. While dialectics is used to explore the significance of this project (of this ‘experience’ in the dialectical sense), the synthetic cell as a case study also allows us to demonstrate the remarkable relevance of dialectics for understanding contemporary research, notably because it incites us to see the synthetic cell project as a concrete exemplification of life under Anthropocenic conditions. Should we assess the synthetic cell as the ultimate realisation of the technoscientific will to control and optimise life, or rather as an effort to bridge the disruptive collision between technoscience and nature, or both?

Sobre a possibilidade de uma dialética dialógica da filosofia social de Hegel

The present paper intends to deal with the basis of the Hegelian theory of action as a discursive-normative ethics of social relations through some icons of recent critical research of Hegel’s work and whose readings are organized around the idea of historically institutionalized shared social practices. I will rely mainly on the interpretation made by Robert Pippin, investigating the possibility of advancing the thesis he points out to, concerning a dialogical reading of Hegelian dialectic in its connection with Platonic dialectic as interpreted by Gadamer. This will be done in view of the Hegelian structure given by Robert Brandom for the formation of a theoretical apparatus capable of sustaining the thesis that the reflective and practical possibilities of different forms of life come from the social horizons of reciprocal determination of the norms that support them. Based on this, I will demonstrate that the Hegelian social theory has its main support in interactions of a typically dialogical character in an interactive diversity of demands established by means of synchronic and diachronic recognitive clashes, thus opening the way for the emergence of new demands that aim for social recognition and political institutionalization. This community of normative discourses allows the possibility to argue that in Hegel’s thinking one is able to find the structures for a non-relativist perspectivism, whose dialectical opening is founded on this ethics of social practices. This, in turn, leads us back to some critical investigations concerning Platonic dialectic as anti-dogmatic and anti-metaphysical, investigations which establish the pillars of a social dialectic that relies on what can the called a community of logoi.

Before Queer Theory: Victorian Aestheticism and the Self, by Dustin Friedman

Reviewed by: Before Queer Theory: Victorian Aestheticism and the Self by Dustin Friedman Dennis Denisoff (bio) Before Queer Theory: Victorian Aestheticism and the Self, by Dustin Friedman; pp. xii + 234. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2019, $34.95. In Before Queer Theory: Victorian Aestheticism and the Self, Dustin Friedman asks us to consider aestheticism not so much as a cultural movement or an aesthetic philosophy but as a theory—a theory of sexuality preceding the institutionalized discourses of desire. As such, the book proposes a conceptual pivot to existing scholarship on the articulation of Victorian notions of sexual identity through discourses of aesthetics, particularly Paterian aestheticism. Dozens of scholars have addressed aestheticism as a crucial concept through which some non-normative identities attained conceptual cohesion and cultural recognition. Early works such as Richard Dellamora's Masculine Desire: The Sexual Politics of Victorian Aestheticism (1990) and Linda Dowling's Hellenism and Homosexuality in Victorian Oxford (1994) reflect the heavy influence of poststructuralism on queer studies, and in particular that of Michel Foucault's models of biopower. With more than a third of Before Queer Theory focusing on Walter Pater and the rest on Oscar Wilde, Vernon Lee, and Michael Field, Friedman positions his study squarely within the context of aestheticism studies. He differentiates his contribution in two key ways. First, he places particular emphasis on the influence of Hegelian dialectics on Pater's queer aesthetics and the aestheticism that developed under its influence. Second, his study is not a reading of the history and works of aestheticism through recent queer theory but a recognition of aestheticism as, in part, a queer theory in itself. When Friedman says, "Aestheticism is one of queer theory's unacknowledged ancestors," he is not denying the decades of groundbreaking scholarship that has explored the queerness of aestheticism (5). Rather, he is emphasizing a Victorian, politicized, theoretical paradigm that arose before sexology, criminology, and related discourses attained cultural coherence and, eventually, became foundational to much of what is now recognized as modern queer theory, principally under the influence of poststructuralism and psychoanalysis. Avoiding anachronism, Friedman defines the term "queer" rather loosely, allowing it to address a range of attractions, including what we might today read as gay and lesbian desire while also remaining open to forms of aesthetic desire that do not adhere to particular subject/object relations. Friedman argues that contributors to the aesthetic movement "consciously departed from the essentialist understandings of sexual identity promoted by the sexologists. They realized that the aesthetic, as a space located within the social yet not strictly bound by its rules, was a realm where sexual difference could be embraced without being pathologized" (15). It is worth noting that the field of sexology was itself inchoate when Pater began writing. It is true that Heinrich Kaan's Psychopathia Sexualis (recognized by Foucault and others as the first work using psychology to articulate sexual regimes) had appeared in Latin in 1844, but it still situated non-normative practices—which included tribadism, necrophilia, and agalmatophilia (sex with statues)—in an ambiguous notion of general excess rooted in the non-procreative act of masturbation. Pater, Simeon Solomon, Algernon Charles Swinburne, and other key contributors to early aestheticism would have been open to configurations of sexuality that were less constricted than Foucault's technology of power might imply. Aestheticism, that is, explored desires that preceded the historical moment when sexological identity [End Page 154] formation and institutionalization became dominant fixtures, maneuvering within a more ambiguous sexual "chaos," as Kaan called it (Psychopathia Sexualis, edited by Benjamin Kahan, [Cornell University Press, 2016], 44). One of Friedman's most useful insights arises from his focus on the influence of Hegelian dialectics on aestheticist notions of sexuality specifically. Hegel was perhaps the most influential German philosopher at later Victorian Oxford, although Kate Hext, Billie Andrew Inman, and William Shuter have demonstrated the importance of recognizing the various German philosophers who influenced Pater's aesthetic views. Other scholars have also richly analyzed Hegel's influence on Pater, including Giles Whiteley, whose Aestheticism and the Philosophy of Death: Walter Pater and Post-Hegelianism (2010) addresses Pater's oeuvre with particular attention to what Pater calls a Hegelian "radical dualism...

ОТ ИДЕАЛИЗМА К НЕОМАРКСИЗМУ. ЧАСТЬ 1. ЛЕВ ПУМПЯНСКИЙ

Lev Pumpyansky's turn at the end of the 1920s from criticism of Marxism to the full acceptance of Marxist sociology as the main working tool of the literary historian can be viewed as a capitulation, but it could also be a disclosure of the potential of previous criticism. I prove that the criticism of Marxism by Pumpyansky fully fit into the dispute of neo-Kantianism against Hegelianism, while his sociology of literature was based on neo-Kantian foundations and the acceptance of Hegel's dialectics, but not Hegelian philosophy. I reconstruct a common source for Pumpyansky and Bakhtin’s view from the outside to both the neo-Kantian and neo-Hegelian traditionsm, an episode from Plato's Phaedo. The difference in the understanding of the novel genre led Pumpyansky and Bakhtin to opposite conclusions. Pumpyansky's interpretation of the difference between the novel and the novella allowed him to accept Marxism as a metacritic of Neo-Hegelianism and Neo-Kantianism, preserving the position of the hero, which was unacceptable for Bakhtin. For Pumpyansky, Marxist sociology just realizes the intentions of neo-Kantianism as soon as it is applied not to the field of science, but to the field of literature and art. Disagreeing with the convergence of ethics and creativity, promoted by Bakhtin, Pumpyansky coined a consistent Marxist sociology of literature, claiming to be philosophical and relevant for today.

Frantz Fanon and the Creolization of Hegel

In this article, I discuss Frantz Fanon’s position regarding Hegelian dialectics. Dialektik von Herr und Knecht (Master-Servant/Servitude Dialectic) is one of the most important analytical keys of Phänomenologie des Geistes (The Phenomenology of Spirit), published by G.W.F. Hegel in Jena in 1807. However, in his Peau Noire, Masque Blancs (Black Skins, White Masks), written when he was 25 years old and published in 1952, Fanon argues that under the colonial yoke, reciprocity, a fundamental characteristic of dialectics, is not effective. The question I seek to answer in this study is: does the argument presented by the author represent a rupture, reaffirmation or transfiguration of the Hegelian dialectic? Faced with this challenge, I place some excerpts from Phenomenology, and from Black Skins, White Masks, as well as other later writings by Fanon, in dialogue, to then problematize the closeness, tensions and ruptures between both. The argument I present here will revolve around Fanon’s defense of the existence of a transfigured (calibanized) appropriation of the dialectic, based on three interdependent elements: 1. Fanon shares the Hegelian assumption that identity is produced in the reciprocal relationship with its otherness. 2. Colonial estrangement interdicts this reciprocity by promoting a decay of political domination to the level of objectifying and bestialized denial; 3. Colonial negation is not ontological, but historical and, therefore, can be overcome by a practical-sensitive negation, carried out by the colonized themselves. Throughout this paper, I discuss some implications of the argument defended here in the context of the specialized literature on the thinking of both authors.

„Listka jednego, ni ząbeczka w liściu”. Norwid – poza romantyzmem

Artykuł stanowi polemikę z dotychczasowymi ustaleniami historycznoliterackimi, które sytuują dzieło Norwida w ramach nurtu romantycznego: zwłaszcza z koncepcjami Zofii Stefanowskiej, Zofii Trojanowiczowej czy Edwarda Kasperskiego, ale także z pomysłami ks. Antoniego Dunajskiego, wyprowadzającymi historiozoficzną refleksję poety z dialektycznej myśli Hegla (albo ogólnie: tzw. filozofii niemieckiej), przyprawionej chrześcijańską tradycją i lekturą Biblii. Artykuł zwracał uwagę na niektóre cechy i właściwości poetyki Norwida, jak: oryginalna koncepcja bohatera, personalistyczna koncepcja dziejów, ironia czy ukształtowanie podmiotu lirycznego oraz wirtualnego odbiorcy lirycznego, które w sposób zdecydowany zaświadczają o funkcjonowaniu poety poza wskazanym nurtem literackim oraz ideowym epoki. Zarazem tym ustaleniom przyświeca myśl, że twórca Vade-mecum poruszając się poza romantycznymi konwencjami niekoniecznie musiał wpisywać się w jakiś inny, już istniejący nurt (jak np. pozytywizm, parnasizm), czy też taki, który dopiero zaistnieje w przyszłości (np. modernizm): jego dzieło stanowiłoby wówczas zapowiedź owego nurtu (jako premodernista, jako prekursor współczesnej liryki, jako symbolista etc.). Autorowi artykułu przyświeca zatem refleksja o odrębności, fenomenie Norwida i jego oryginalnej spuścizny przynajmniej na tle literatury polskiej.

Implementation of the strategy of sustainable development in the model of critical theory of society and education system

The call for democratic reconstruction of education should contribute to the development of the acquisition and use of knowledge and thought of as a response to emerging technologies and trends in globalization. In particular, be aware that nowadays some unfair terms communities, individuals are privileged in having access to technology, a high-tech skills and cultural capital than the less privileged communities. One way to overcome this abyss of a whole complex of new classes of inequalities, gender, race, education is restructuring so that all students have access to new technologies and new knowledge in the system democratized education and training process. Hegelian dialectics can help the efficiency of the relationship between students and teachers today in a situation where there is a lack of cultural, social experience as well as the specific subjectivity between groups, nations and generations. Teachers, students, and citizens must recognize this potential conflict and consolidate work to overcome these conflicts, making these actions more productive. Overall, the democratization of education can be enhanced in part by increasing elaboration and interactive forms of education, including such as distance education, the development of collective educational websites, online discussions and a scientific online community, shared internet research projects. But the restructuring of education also requires targeted public, values education, literacy cultivation. For teaching and learning books and printed materials based on multimedia and Internet materials should be considered as an additional, rather than as the primary means of democratization of education.

РОМАНТИЧЕСКАЯ НАТУРФИЛОСОФИЯ В БОРЬБЕ С «ПРИЗРАКОМ АБСОЛЮТА»

The article deals with the problems of the Romantics’ attitude to Kantian criticism and dogmatic rationalism. The circumstances that actualized the methodological question of the principles of the separation of “idealism” and “realism” (in the Schellingian sense) are analysed. “Action” was considered by Romantics to be a more important moment of philosophizing than the ultimate goal of this process — conditional “knowledge”. It is proved that the fundamental difference of philosophical systems is due to the importance attached to the “absolute”. It is stated that the shift of emphasis from the object to the subject legitimized the new content of the “real”. It is concluded that romantic natural philosophy (“philosophy of life”) on the eve of the publication of Hegelian dialectics became an alternative to any philosophical dogmatism.

Hegel’in Diyalektiği ve Fanon’un Tanınma Mücadelesi: Siyah Derilinin Beyaz Maskesi ya da İçselleştirilmiş Oryantalizm

Colonialism, which arose as a natural consequence of Western thought, which reduces "other" to "the same," has gained functionality especially with the process of modernisation. Non-Western societies subject to the process of modernisation had to fight for "recognition" against this "imperialism of the same". "Recognition" is also a "Hegelian idea" which is the core concept of Fanon 's thought as well. Recognition theoretical basis is based upon Hegelian thought. It is also possible to assume that Hegelian dialectical thinking took shape in the post-Hegelian world. Fanon, who is from an old colonial world where it was not yet commonplace to challenge slavery, thinks that by leaving the dialectical Hegelian circle it is possible to resist and speak for yourself. For, according to Fanon, the dialectic, which determines the necessity as the basis of its freedom, strips it from its own being from its own self. The other barrier to decolonization, which Fanon sees as a candidate for changing the world order, is that the slave, whom we see as an internalized orientalism, wants to look like the master, black skin wears a white mask in Fanon's terms. The article about Fanon's thought, in the sense of Black Skin and White Masks, aims to explore Hegel and his dialectics, Fanon and Fanon's critical dialog with Hegelian dialectics and phenomenology around the theme of internalized orientalism. The article attempts to demonstrate that by going beyond Hegelian dialectical thinking and attributing this to the necessity of removing the mask, it is possible to get rid of alienation and to speak for yourself, based on Fanon's black experience thanks to the deconstruction process.

Hegel’in Diyalektiği ve Fanon’un Tanınma Mücadelesi: Siyah Derilinin Beyaz Maskesi ya da İçselleştirilmiş Oryantalizm

Colonialism, which emerged as a natural consequence of the Western thought that reduces "the other" to "the same," has become apparent, particularly with the modernization process. Non-Western societies, who have been subjected to modernization, have had to struggle for "recognition" against the "imperial-ism of the same". "Recognition", the core idea of Fanon's thought, is also a "Hegelian concept"; the theory of recognition is based on Hegelian thought. We could assume that the post-Hegelian world took shape around the Hegelian dialectical thinking. Fanon, who is from an old colonial world where it was not yet customary to challenge slavery, thinks that stepping out of the dialectical Hegelian circle could enable you to resist and speak for yourself. This is because Fanon thinks that dialectics, which determines the necessity as the basis of freedom, strips one from his own being and own self. The other obstacle in the path of decolonization, which Fanon sees as a tool for changing the order of the world, is that the slave wants to look like the master; in Fanon's words, black skin wears a white mask, which is conceptualized as internalized orientalism. The present study focuses on Fanon's thought and aims to examine Hegel and his dialectics, along with Fanon and his critical dialogue with Hegelian dialectics and phenomenology around the theme of internalized orientalism, with a particular reference to Black Skin White Masks. Thanks to the deconstruction method it uses, and based on Fanon's black experience, the present study attempts to demonstrate that getting rid of alienation and speaking for yourself could be achieved by stepping out of Hegelian dialectical thinking and setting the removal of the mask as a precondition.