To Hypostatize, or not to Hypostatize

Definition: to give ideas concrete existence: to treat something conceptual as if it were real

I suggest most of the Kantian schema (and those of his bastard sons Hegel and Marx) may be read as a type of hypostasis, starting with the synthetic a priori and the categories (at least viewed as transcendent), and the views on ethics and freedom based on the idealism. Tho' there exist some determinist and obviously materialist sorts of reflections in Marx, he still affirms a view of freedom closer to Kant than to, say, biological views of determinism (genetic, behavioral and cognitive). Of course theology as a whole would be closer to Kant.


Hypostasis is quite common among political writers and lit. people as well; political journalists routinely hypostatize the thinking processes of millions of people. Most people don't care for anyone interrupting their chants with some questions regarding verification, plausibility, proof; columnists and bloggers generally are content to make all sorts of generalizations about how American consumers think or the sort of mental states of both conservatives or liberals. It's like a type of conceptual intoxication, brought on by lots of social science or literary theory. But such pep rally speech or writing is preferred by both far right and leftist bloggers: once "by any means necessary" has been decided upon, vague generalizations and lies may be as effective as argumentation relying upon evidence and data.