Dialectic

For varieties of language, seedialect.

Dialectic(Greek:διαλεκτική,dialektikḗ;German:Dialektik), also known as thedialectical method,refers originally todialoguebetween people holding differentpoints of viewabout a subject but wishing to arrive at thetruththroughreasonedargumentation.Dialectic resemblesdebate,but the concept excludessubjectiveelements such asemotional appealandrhetoric.It has its origins inancient philosophyand continued to be developed in theMiddle Ages.

Hegelianismrefigured "dialectic" to no longer refer to a literal dialogue. Instead, the term takes on the specialized meaning of development by way of overcoming internalcontradictions.Dialectical materialism,a theory advanced byKarl MarxandFriedrich Engels,adapted the Hegelian dialectic into amaterialisttheory of history. The legacy of Hegelian and Marxian dialectics has been criticized by philosophers such asKarl PopperandMario Bunge,who considered it unscientific.

Dialectic implies a developmental process and so does not naturally fit withinclassical logic.Nevertheless, some twentieth-century logicians have attempted to formalize it.

History

There are a variety of meanings ofdialecticordialecticswithinWestern philosophy.

Classical philosophy

Inclassicalphilosophy,dialectic (διαλεκτική) is a form ofreasoningbased upon dialogue of arguments and counter-arguments, advocatingpropositions(theses) andcounter-propositions(antitheses). The outcome of such a dialectic might be the refutation of a relevant proposition, or of a synthesis, or a combination of the opposing assertions, or a qualitative improvement of the dialogue.

The term "dialectic" owes much of its prestige to its role in the philosophies ofSocratesandPlato,in the GreekClassicalperiod (5th to 4th centuries BC).Aristotlesaid that it was the pre-Socratic philosopherZeno of Eleawho invented dialectic, of which the dialogues of Plato are examples of the Socratic dialectical method.

Socratic method

Main article:Socratic method

TheSocratic dialoguesare a particular form of dialectic known as themethod of elenchus(literally, "refutation, scrutiny") whereby a series of questions clarifies a more precise statement of a vague belief, logical consequences of that statement are explored, and a contradiction is discovered. The method is largely destructive, in that false belief is exposed and only constructive in that this exposure may lead to further search for truth.The detection of error does not amount to a proof of the antithesis. For example, a contradiction in the consequences of a definition ofpietydoes not provide a correct definition. The principal aim of Socratic activity may be to improve the soul of the interlocutors, by freeing them from unrecognized errors, or indeed, by teaching them the spirit of inquiry.

In common cases, Socrates usesenthymemesas the foundation of his argument.

For example, in theEuthyphro,Socrates asksEuthyphroto provide a definition of piety. Euthyphro replies that the pious is that which is loved by the gods. But, Socrates also has Euthyphro agreeing that the gods are quarrelsome and their quarrels, like human quarrels, concern objects of love or hatred. Therefore, Socrates reasons, at least one thing exists that certain gods love but other gods hate. Again, Euthyphro agrees. Socrates concludes that if Euthyphro's definition of piety is acceptable, then there must exist at least one thing that is both pious and impious (as it is both loved and hated by the gods)—which Euthyphro admits is absurd. Thus, Euthyphro is brought to a realization by this dialectical method that his definition of piety is not sufficiently meaningful.

In another example, in Plato'sGorgias,dialectic occurs between Socrates, the Sophist Gorgias, and two men, Polus and Callicles. Because Socrates' ultimate goal was to reach true knowledge, he was even willing to change his own views in order to arrive at the truth. The fundamental goal of dialectic, in this instance, was to establish a precise definition of the subject (in this case, rhetoric) and with the use of argumentation and questioning, make the subject even more precise. In theGorgias,Socrates reaches the truth by asking a series of questions and in return, receiving short, clear answers.

Plato

In Platonism and Neoplatonism, dialectic assumed an ontological and metaphysical role in that it became the process whereby the intellect passes from sensibles to intelligibles, rising from idea to idea until it finally grasps the supreme idea, the first principle which is the origin of all. The philosopher is consequently a "dialectician".In this sense, dialectic is a process of inquiry that does away with hypotheses up to the first principle.It slowly embraces multiplicity in unity. The philosopherSimon Blackburnwrote that the dialectic in this sense is used to understand "the total process of enlightenment, whereby the philosopher is educated so as to achieve knowledge of the supreme good, the Form of the Good".

Medieval philosophy

Logic, which could be considered to include dialectic, was one of the three liberal arts taught inmedieval universitiesas part of thetrivium;the other elements wererhetoricandgrammar.

Based mainly onAristotle,the first medieval philosopher to work on dialectics wasBoethius(480–524).After him, many scholastic philosophers also made use of dialectics in their works, such asAbelard,William of Sherwood,Garlandus Compotista,Walter Burley,Roger Swyneshed,William of Ockham,andThomas Aquinas.

This dialectic (aquaestio disputata) was formed as follows:

1. The question to be determined ( "It is asked whether..." );
2. A provisory answer to the question ( "And it seems that..." );
3. The principal arguments in favor of the provisory answer;
4. An argument against the provisory answer, traditionally a single argument from authority ( "On the contrary..." );
5. The determination of the question after weighing the evidence ( "I answer that..." );
6. The replies to each of the initial objections. ( "To the first, to the second etc., I answer that..." )

Modern philosophy

The concept of dialectics was given new life at the start of the 19th century byGeorg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel,whose dialectical model of nature and of history made dialectics a fundamental aspect of reality, instead of regarding the contradictions into which dialectics leads as evidence of the limits of pure reason, asImmanuel Kanthad argued.Hegel was influenced byJohann Gottlieb Fichte's conception of synthesis, although Hegel didn't adopt Fichte's "thesis–antithesis–synthesis" language except to describe Kant's philosophy: rather, Hegel argued that such language was "a lifeless schema" imposed on various contents, whereas he saw his own dialectic as flowing out of "the inner life and self-movement" of the content itself.

In the mid-19th century, Hegelian dialectic was appropriated byKarl MarxandFriedrich Engelsand retooled in what they considered to be a nonidealistic manner. It would also become a crucial part of later representations of Marxism as a philosophy ofdialectical materialism.These representations often contrasted dramatically and led to vigorous debate among different Marxist groups.

Hegelian dialectic

"Hegelian dialectic" redirects here. For the Prodigy album, seeHegelian Dialectic (The Book of Revelation).

See also:Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel § Dialectics, speculation, idealism

TheHegelian dialecticdescribes changes in the forms of thought through their own internal contradictions into concrete formsthat overcome previous oppositions.

This dialectic is sometimes presented in a threefold manner, as first stated byHeinrich Moritz Chalybäus,as comprising three dialectical stages of development: athesis,giving rise to its reaction; anantithesis,which contradicts or negates the thesis; and the tension between the two being resolved by means of asynthesis.

By contrast, the termsabstract,negative,andconcretesuggest a flaw or an incompleteness in any initial thesis. For Hegel, the concrete must always pass through the phase of the negative, that is, mediation. This is the essence of what is popularly called Hegelian dialectics.

To describe the activity of overcoming the negative, Hegel often used the termAufhebung,variously translated into English as "sublation" or "overcoming", to conceive of the working of the dialectic. Roughly, the term indicates preserving the true portion of an idea, thing, society, and so forth, while moving beyond its limitations. What is sublated, on the one hand, is overcome, but, on the other hand, is preserved and maintained.

As in the Socratic dialectic, Hegel claimed to proceed by making implicit contradictions explicit: each stage of the process is the product of contradictions inherent or implicit in the preceding stage. On his view, the purpose of dialectics is "to study things in their own being and movement and thus to demonstrate the finitude of the partial categories of understanding".

For Hegel, even history can be reconstructed as a unified dialectic, the major stages of which chart a progression from self-alienation asservitudeto self-unification and realization as therationalconstitutional stateof free and equal citizens.

Marxist dialectic

Marxist dialecticis a form of Hegelian dialectic which applies to the study ofhistorical materialism.Marxist dialectic is thus a method by which one can examine social and economic behaviors. It is the foundation of the philosophy ofdialectical materialism,which forms the basis of historical materialism.

In the Marxist tradition, "dialectic" refers to regular and mutual relationships, interactions, and processes in nature, society, and human thought.

A dialectical relationship is a relationship in which two phenomena or ideas mutually impact each other, leading to development and negation.Development refers to the change and motion of phenomena and ideas from less advanced to more advanced or from less complete to more complete.Dialectical negation refers to a stage of development in which a contradiction between two previous subjects gives rise to a new subject.In the Marxist view, dialectical negation is never an endpoint, but instead creates new conditions for further development and negation.

Karl MarxandFriedrich Engels,writing several decades after Hegel's death, proposed that Hegel's dialectic is too abstract.Against this, Marx presented his own dialectic method, which he claimed to be "direct opposite" of Hegel's method.

Marxist dialectics is exemplified inDas Kapital.As Marx explained dialectical materialism,

it includes in its comprehension an affirmative recognition of the existing state of things, at the same time, also, the recognition of the negation of that state, of its inevitable breaking up; because it regards every historically developed social form as in fluid movement, and therefore takes into account its transient nature not less than its momentary existence; because it lets nothing impose upon it, and is in its essence critical and revolutionary.

Class struggleis the primary contradiction to be resolved by Marxist dialectics because of its central role in the social and political lives of a society. Nonetheless, Marx and Marxists developed the concept of class struggle to comprehend the dialectical contradictions between mental and manual labor and between town and country. Hence, philosophic contradiction is central to the development of dialectics: the progress from quantity to quality, the acceleration of gradual social change; the negation of the initial development of thestatus quo;the negation of that negation; and the high-level recurrence of features of the originalstatus quo.

Friedrich Engels further proposed that nature itself is dialectical, and that this is "a very simple process, which is taking place everywhere and every day".

In Marxism, the dialectical method of historical study is intertwined withhistorical materialism,the school of thought exemplified by the works of Marx, Engels, andVladimir Lenin.

For Lenin, the primary feature of Marx's "dialectical materialism" (Lenin's term) is its application of materialist philosophy to history and social sciences. Lenin's main contribution to the philosophy of dialectical materialism is his theory of reflection, which presents human consciousness as a dynamic reflection of the objective material world that fully shapes its contents and structure.

Later, Stalin's works on the subject established a rigid and formalistic division of Marxist–Leninist theory into dialectical materialism and historical materialism. While the first was supposed to be the key method and theory of the philosophy of nature, the second was the Soviet version of the philosophy of history.

Dialectical naturalism

Dialectical naturalismis a term coined by American philosopherMurray Bookchinto describe the philosophical underpinnings of the political program ofsocial ecology.Dialectical naturalism explores 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 the "empyrean, basically antinaturalistic dialectical idealism" of Hegel, and "the wooden, often scientistic dialectical materialism of orthodox Marxists".

Theological dialectics

Neo-orthodoxy,in Europe also known as theology of crisis and dialectical theology,is an approach totheologyinProtestantismthat was developed in the aftermath of theFirst World War(1914–1918). It is characterized as a reaction against doctrines of19th-centuryliberal theologyand a more positive reevaluation of the teachings of theReformation,much of which had been in decline (especially in western Europe) since the late18th century.It is primarily associated with twoSwissprofessors and pastors,Karl Barth(1886–1968) andEmil Brunner(1899–1966),even though Barth himself expressed his unease in the use of the term.

In dialectical theology the difference and opposition between God and human beings is stressed in such a way that all human attempts at overcoming this opposition through moral, religious or philosophical idealism must be characterized as 'sin'. In the death of Christ humanity is negated and overcome, but this judgment also points forwards to the resurrection in which humanity is reestablished in Christ. For Barth this meant that only through God's 'no' to everything human can his 'yes' be perceived. Applied to traditional themes of Protestant theology, such asdouble predestination,this means that election and reprobation cannot be viewed as a quantitative limitation of God's action. Rather it must be seen as its "qualitative definition".As Christ bore the rejection as well as the election of God for all humanity, every person is subject to both aspects of God's double predestination.

Dialectic prominently figured inBernard Lonergan's philosophy, in his booksInsightandMethod in Theology.Michael Shutewrote about Lonergan's use of dialectic inThe Origins of Lonergan's Notion of the Dialectic of History.For Lonergan, dialectic is both individual and operative in community. Simply described, it is a dynamic process that results in something new:

For the sake of greater precision, let us say that a dialectic is a concrete unfolding of linked but opposed principles of change. Thus there will be a dialectic if (1) there is an aggregate of events of a determinate character, (2) the events may be traced to either or both of two principles, (3) the principles are opposed yet bound together, and (4) they are modified by the changes that successively result from them.

Dialectic is one of the eight functional specialties Lonergan envisaged for theology to bring this discipline into the modern world. Lonergan believed that the lack of an agreed method among scholars had inhibited substantive agreement from being reached and progress from being made compared to the natural sciences.Karl Rahner,S.J., however, criticized Lonergan's theological method in a short article entitled "Some Critical Thoughts on 'Functional Specialties in Theology'" where he stated: "Lonergan's theological methodology seems to me to beso generic that it really fits every science,and hence is not the methodology of theology as such, but only a very general methodology of science. "

Criticisms

See also:Category:Critics of dialectical materialism

Friedrich Nietzscheviewed dialectic as a method that imposes artificial boundaries and suppresses the richness and diversity of reality. He rejected the notion that truth can be fully grasped through dialectical reasoning and offered a critique of dialectic, challenging its traditional framework and emphasizing the limitations of its approach to understanding reality.He expressed skepticism towards its methodology and implications in his workTwilight of the Idols:"I mistrust all systematizers and I avoid them. The will to a system is a lack of integrity".In the same book, Nietzsche criticized Socrates' dialectics because he believed it prioritized reason over instinct, resulting in the suppression of individual passions and the imposition of an artificial morality.

Karl Popperattacked the dialectic repeatedly. In 1937, he wrote and delivered a paper entitled "What Is Dialectic?" in which he criticized the dialectics of Hegel, Marx, and Engels for their willingness "to put up with contradictions".He argued that accepting contradiction as a valid form of logic would lead to theprinciple of explosionand thustrivialism.Popper concluded the essay with these words: "The whole development of dialectic should be a warning against the dangers inherent in philosophical system-building. It should remind us thatphilosophyshould not be made a basis for any sort of scientific system and that philosophers should be much more modest in their claims. One task which they can fulfill quite usefully is the study of the criticalmethods of science".Seventy years later,Nicholas Rescherresponded that "Popper's critique touches only a hyperbolic version of dialectic", and he quipped: "Ironically, there is something decidedly dialectical about Popper's critique of dialectics."

The philosopher of science and physicistMario Bungerepeatedly criticized Hegelian and Marxian dialectics, calling them "fuzzy and remote from science"and a "disastrous legacy".He concluded: "The so-called laws of dialectics, such as formulated by Engels (1940, 1954) and Lenin (1947, 1981), are false insofar as they are intelligible."Poe Yu-ze Wan,reviewing Bunge's criticisms of dialectics, found Bunge's arguments to be important and sensible, but he thought that dialectics could still serve someheuristicpurposes for scientists.

Even some Marxists are critical of the term "dialectics". For instance,Michael Heinrichwrote, "More often than not, the grandiose rhetoric about dialectics is reducible to the simple fact that everything is dependent upon everything else and is in a state of interaction and that it's all rather complicated—which is true in most cases, but doesn't really say anything."

Formalization

Since the late 20th century, European and Americanlogicianshave attempted to provide mathematical foundations for dialectic through formalisation,although logic has been related to dialectic since ancient times.There have been pre-formal and partially-formal treatises on argument and dialectic, from authors such asStephen Toulmin(The Uses of Argument,1958),Nicholas Rescher(Dialectics: A Controversy-Oriented Approach to the Theory of Knowledge,1977),andFrans H. van EemerenandRob Grootendorst(pragma-dialectics,1980s).One can include works of the communities ofinformal logicandparaconsistent logic.

Defeasibility

Building on theories ofdefeasible reasoning(seeJohn L. Pollock), systems have been built that define well-formedness of arguments, rules governing the process of introducing arguments based on fixed assumptions, and rules for shifting burden.Many of these logics appear in the special area ofartificial intelligence and law,though the computer scientists' interest in formalizing dialectic originates in a desire to builddecision supportand computer-supported collaborative work systems.

Dialog games

Main articles:Game semanticsandDialogical logic

Dialectic itself can be formalised as moves in a game, where an advocate for the truth of a proposition and an opponent argue.Such games can provide asemantics of logic,one that is very general in applicability.

Mathematics

MathematicianWilliam Lawvereinterpreted dialectics in the setting ofcategorical logicin terms ofadjunctionsbetweenidempotent monads.This perspective may be useful in the context oftheoretical computer sciencewhere the duality betweensyntaxandsemanticscan be interpreted as a dialectic in this sense. For example, theCurry-Howard equivalenceis such an adjunction or more generally the duality betweenclosed monoidal categoriesand theirinternal logic.

See also

• Dialectica– A philosophical journal
• De Dialectica– Various works on dialectics and logical reasoning
• Dialectical behavior therapy– Psychotherapy for emotional dysregulation
• Dialectical research– Form of qualitative research which utilizes the method of dialectic
• Dialogic– Use of conversation to explore the meaning of something
• Doublethink– Simultaneously accepting two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct
• False dilemma– Informal fallacy involving falsely limited alternatives
• Reflective equilibrium– State of balance among a set of beliefs, arrived at by considering general principles
• Relational dialectics– Interpersonal communication theory
• Tarka sastra– Indian science of dialectics, logic and reasoningPages displaying wikidata descriptions as a fallback
• Unity of opposites– Central category of dialectics, said to be related to non-duality in a deep sense
• Universal dialectic

External links

• v:Dialectic algorithm– An algorithm based on the principles of classical dialectics
• "Hegel's Dialectics"entry in theStanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
• "Dialectic".Encyclopædia Britannica.Vol. 8 (11th ed.). 1911. p. 156.
• Studies in the Hegelian DialecticbyJ. M. E. McTaggart(1896) at marxists.org