Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel was a difficult man. Even his name is a mouthful to say.
With more layers than a wedding cake, the German philosopher was the human equivalent of quantum theory.
As physicist Richard Feynman famously said[1], “Anyone who claims to understand quantum theory is either lying or crazy.” The same accusation can be applied to Hegel’s philosophies. If anyone claims to fully understand Hegel, they are either lying or crazy, or quite possibly both. Just like the works of James Joyce, no one[2] actually reads Hegel’s works, not because he had nothing to say, but because he was a linguistic enigma. Deciphering Hegel is like trying to baptize a cat. Stressful and somewhat traumatic.
But, somewhat mercifully, at least for the purposes of this article, Hegel’s dialectical method is easy to digest. Presented in a threefold manner, first comes the thesis, an established narrative of sorts. Think of the thesis as conventional norms: nuclear families, monotheistic religions, traditional political parties, etc. A reaction to the thesis comes in the form of the antithesis, which seeks to undermine or supersede the thesis. An obvious tension between the two arises, which, we’re told, is then resolved by the synthesis, the final part of the Hegelian triad.
With the basics established, how can the German’s method be applied to the world of Bitcoin? More specifically, how can it be applied to the contrasting worlds of fiat currencies and Bitcoin?
Fiat Vs. Bitcoin, In Hegelian Terms
As you have no doubt surmised, fiat currencies represent the thesis.
A sound thesis is supported by sound evidence. The current arguments in favor of traditional fiat are highly unsound, to say the very least. Firstly, fiat money is backed by governments, not by a physical commodity like gold, for example. Furthermore, fiat is a product of
