What Is the Definition of the Word Dialectical

0

Fichte introduced into German philosophy the three-step thesis, antithesis and synthesis, using these three terms. Schelling used this terminology. Hegel doesn`t. He did not use these three terms together once to refer to three phases in an argument or report in one of his books. And they do not help us to understand his phenomenology, his logic or his philosophy of history; They impede any open-minded understanding of what he is doing by forcing him into a scheme that was at his disposal and that he deliberately rejected. Mechanical formalism […] Hegel mocks explicitly and profusely in the preface to phenomenology. [30] [31] Thesaurus: All synonyms and antonyms for dialectics See the full definition of dialectics in the dictionary of English language learners “Dialectical”. Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dialectical. Retrieved 14 January 2022.

In the middle of the 19th century, the concept of dialectics was developed by Karl Marx (see e.B. Das Kapital, published in 1867) and Friedrich Engels and converted in a way that was not idealistic from their point of view. It also became a crucial part of later representations of Marxism as the philosophy of dialectical materialism. These representations often contrasted dramatically[25] and led to fierce debates between different Marxist groups, prompting some prominent Marxists to abandon the idea of dialectics altogether. [26] Moreover, the term “dialectic” owes much of its prestige to its role in the philosophies of Socrates and Plato in Greek classicism (5th to 4th century BC). Aristotle said that it was the pre-Socratic philosopher Zeno of Elea who invented the dialectic, whose dialogues of Plato are examples of the Socratic dialectical method. [5] An important dialectical principle for Hegel is the transition from quantity to quality, which he calls measurement. The measure is the qualitative quantum, the quantum is the existence of the whole.

[36] Nglish: Translation of dialectics for Spanish speakers According to Kant, however, the ancient Greeks used the word “dialectic” to refer to the logic of false appearance or appearance. For the ancients, “it was nothing more than the logic of illusion. It was a sophisticated art of giving one`s own ignorance, even deliberate tricks, of giving the outward appearance of truth by imitating the thorough and precise method that logic always requires, and using its subject as a cover for any empty claim. [6] Dialectics tend to involve an evolutionary process and therefore do not fit naturally into formal logic (see Logic and dialectics). This process is particularly pronounced in the Hegelian dialectic, and even more so in the Marxist dialectic, which can rely on the development of ideas over longer periods of time in the real world; Dialectical logic tries to remedy this. In dialectical theology, the difference and opposition between God and man is emphasized in such a way that all human attempts to overcome this contradiction through moral, religious or philosophical idealism must be called “sin.” In Christ`s death, mankind is denied and defeated, but this judgment also indicates the resurrection in which mankind is restored in Christ. For Barth, this meant that it is only through God`s “no” to all that is human that his “yes” can be perceived. Applied to the traditional themes of Protestant theology, such as double predestination, this means that election and rejection cannot be seen as a quantitative limitation of God`s action. Rather, it should be seen as its “qualitative definition”. [59] Since Christ endured both God`s rejection and election for all mankind, every human being is subject to both aspects of God`s double predestination. Aristotle points out that rhetoric is closely related to dialectics. He proposes several formulas to describe this affinity between the two disciplines: first, rhetoric as a “counterpart” (Antistrophos) is used as dialectic (Rhet.

I.1, 1354a1); (ii) it is also called an “outgrowth” (paraphues ti) of dialectics and character study (Rhet. I.2, 1356a25f.); finally, Aristotle says that rhetoric is part of the dialectic and resembles it (Rhet. I.2, 1356a30f.). In saying that rhetoric is a counterpart to dialectics, Aristotle obviously alludes to Plato`s Gorgias (464 et seq.), where rhetoric is ironically defined as a counterpart of cooking at heart. Since Plato uses the word “antistrophos” in this passage to refer to an analogy, it is likely that Aristotle also wants to express some kind of analogy: what is dialectic for the practice (private or academic) of attacking and maintaining an argument is the rhetoric for the (public) practice of defending oneself or blaming an opponent. The analogy with dialectics has important implications for the status of rhetoric. Plato argued in his Gorgias that rhetoric cannot be an art (technê) because it does not refer to a particular theme, while the actual arts are defined by their specific themes, such as. B medicine or shoemaking are defined by their products, i.e. health and footwear. [12] Neo-Orthodoxy, also known in Europe as crisis theology and dialectical theology.[54][55] is an approach to theology in Protestantism developed after World War I (1914-1918). It is characterized as a reaction to 19th century liberal theology and a more positive re-evaluation of the teachings of the Reformation, many of which had been in decline since the late 18th century (particularly in Western Europe).

[56] She is mainly associated with two Swiss professors and pastors, Karl Barth[57] (1886-1968) and Emil Brunner (1899-1966)[54][55], although Barth himself expressed his discomfort with the use of the term. [58] Lenin describes his dialectical understanding of the concept of development: dialectical naturalism is a term coined by the American philosopher Murray Bookchin to describe the philosophical foundations of the political program of social ecology. Dialectical naturalism examines the complex interrelationship between social problems and the direct consequences they have on the ecological impact of human society. Bookchin offered dialectical naturalism as a contrast to what he saw as Hegel`s “empyrical, fundamentally antinaturalist dialectical idealism” and “the wooden dialectical materialism, often scientific, of orthodox Marxists.” Dialectics is a term used in philosophy, and the fact that it is closely related to the ideas of Socrates and Plato makes perfect sense – even from an etymological point of view. Plato`s famous dialogues often featured Socrates in a leading role, and the dialogue comes from the Greek roots dia- (âdurchâ or âacrossâ) and -logue (`discourseâ or âtalkâ). Dialect and dialectics come from dialecktos (âconversationâ or âdialectâ) and finally let`s return to the Greek word dialegesthai, which means âto converse.â Dialectic or dialectic (Greek: διαλεκτική, dialecticḗ; related to dialogue), also known as dialectical method, is basically a discourse between two or more people who represent different points of view on a subject but want to establish the truth by reasonable methods of argumentation. Dialectics is similar to debate, but the concept excludes subjective elements such as emotional attraction and the modern pejorative meaning of rhetoric. [1] [2] Dialectics can therefore be compared both to eristics, which refers to arguments aimed at successfully denying the argument of others (rather than the search for truth), and to the didactic method, in which one side of the conversation teaches the other.

Dialectics is alternately called secondary logic, as opposed to primary logic or criticism. A dialectical method was fundamental to Marxist politics, e.B the work of Karl Korsch, Georg Lukács and some members of the Frankfurt School. Soviet academics, especially Evald Ilyenkov and Zaid Orudzhev, continued to pursue unorthodox philosophical studies of Marxist dialectics; as well as in the West, especially the philosopher Bertell Ollman of New York University. Dialectically describes how someone finds the truth. If you`re an investigative journalist, you`re probably using dialectical reasoning. Socratic dialogues are a particular form of dialectics known as the elenchus method (literally “refutation, examination”[7]), where a series of questions clarify a more precise statement of a vague belief, the logical consequences of this statement are examined, and a contradiction is discovered. The method is largely destructive, because false belief is exposed[8] and constructive only to the extent that this revelation can lead to a further search for the truth. Error detection is not proof of the antithesis; For example, a contradiction in the consequences of a definition of piety does not provide a correct definition. The main purpose of Socratic activity may be to improve the soul of the interlocutors by freeing them from unrecognized errors; Or even by teaching them the spirit of investigation. Another important principle for Hegel is the negation of negation, which he also calls abolition: something is only what it is in its relationship with the other, but by denying the negation of negation, that something relates to the other in itself.

Dialectical movement involves two moments that deny each other, something and the other. As a result of the negation of negation, “something becomes its other; this other is something in itself; therefore, it will also be another, and so on to infinity.” [39] Something in his transition to the other only connects to himself, he is self-centered. [40] There are two moments in becoming:[41] Becoming and stopping: Through sublation, that is, the negation of the negation that passes into nothingness, it ceases to be, but something new appears, will arise. What is sublated (repealed) belongs on the one hand to be and is finished, on the other hand it is preserved and maintained. [42] In dialectics, a totality is transformed; He is self-centered, then forgetful of himself, releases the original tension. .

Share.

About Author

Comments are closed.