[ad_1]
Dialectic is a method of reasoned dialogue to find truth, involving critical reflection and flexibility. The Socratic method tests beliefs through questions, while the Hegelian method presents a thesis and antithesis to find a synthesis. Indian dialectics use polemic and controversy, while Jain dialectics acknowledge uncertainty. Dialectic differs from debate and rhetoric in that it does not require persuasion or a final decision.
A dialectic is a path of understanding, achieved through reasoned dialogue and the art of logical discussion. It shares many characteristics with, but is distinct from, rhetoric and debate. Also known as dialectics or dialectical method, the idea of dialectics was first developed in ancient Greece and India, and has been developed by philosophers around the world.
The purpose of dialectics is to find the truth. Key features of this research include that the participants are of equal status with each other. When discussing the topic at hand, participants refrain from persuasion and focus on finding the truth. This requires participants to engage in critical reflection – in other words, to judge their own opinions – and they need to be flexible and able to change those opinions.
Socrates and Plato defined the Socratic method of dialectics, which is one of the oldest dialectical methods. This method tests belief through questions. Any discussion begins by asking a person about his or her beliefs or by stating a common belief. Then ask participants questions about beliefs. Some believe the goal is to disprove the belief or idea, but in reality, the Socratic Method is designed to examine the structure and reason behind a belief or idea.
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel is credited with creating the Hegelian dialectic, although it was actually Immanuel Kant who developed it. In this method, the idea is presented as a thesis, which is then examined through its paradox or opposite, the antithesis. From these two ideas emerges the truth, which is the synthesis.
The idea of synthesis suggests the possibility of a compromise between ideas. This fits the idea of dialect flexibility. It also implies that the truth can only be known if the opposite notion is also examined. For example, global warming can only be tested if its absence is also tested. Creating a synthesis is not the end of the process because each synthesis becomes a new thesis, creating an evolutionary spiral.
The Hegelian dialectic sought to reflect the real world through the discussion of ideas. Marxist dialectics, on the other hand, tried to show how the real world shaped the world of ideas in the mind. Developed by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, the method has also been called diamat or dialectical materialism because the debate is shaped by the interaction of classes and practical economics in the real world. In this form of dialectic a thesis is formed, but it is its shortcomings, not its antithesis, that cause the thesis to transform itself into a new thesis.
An important difference between Western and Indian dialectics is the presence of doubt. Jain dialectic takes into account the possibility that truth may be unknowable and also realizes that truth may be impossible to describe. This notion of uncertainty is called syadvad.
Indian dialectics is much closer to the Hegelian version of dialectics than the Socratic one, but there are differences. Dharmic or Indian dialectic is built on polemic, a type of argument, rather than paradoxes. Polemical dialectic is also a fundamental part of Buddhist dialectic in which the thesis is contested and dissected, but is never rightly rejected.
The presence of controversy brings Indian dialectic closer to debate. Debates share many methods of dialectics, but they are fundamentally different. In the debate, one participant tries to convince the others of her opinion. This means that participants cannot change positions once the debate has started. Unlike debates, dialectic does not require a judge or jury to make a final decision.
Dialectic also shares elements with rhetoric. In rhetoric, a person is trying to convince passive listeners of his idea and there is no counterargument. Dialectic can be applied more broadly to intellectual and practical inquiry than rhetoric, and can be broken down into questions and answers to make it more participatory. Dialectic also uses sentences that can be scientifically verified, while sentences and ideas in rhetoric are approved or disapproved of by public reaction.
[ad_2]