what does dialectical mean?

luka

Well-known member
explain what you mean when you use the word. dont quote a wikipedia entry. i want peoples personal and idiosyncratic interpretations.
its the most commonly used word on twitter but what do people really mean by it?
 

luka

Well-known member
The end of history will be a very sad time. The struggle for recognition, the willingness to risk one’s life for a purely abstract goal, the worldwide ideological struggle that called forth daring, courage, imagination, and idealism, will be replaced by economic calculation, the endless solving of technical problems, environmental concerns, and the satisfaction of sophisticated consumer demands. In the post-historical period there will be neither art nor philosophy, just the perpetual caretaking of the museum of human history. I can feel in myself, and see in others around me, a powerful nostalgia for the time when history existed. … Even though I recognize its inevitability, I have the most ambivalent feelings for the civilization that has been created in Europe since 1945 … Perhaps this very prospect of centuries of boredom at the end of history will serve to get history started once again.
 

DannyL

Wild Horses
I was using the other day to talk about magic vs science, the way that their opposition functions to defines the other. Magic people will get all uppity about the restrictions of science and rationality, science people will pour scorn on the irrationality of magicians but both discourses need the other to create their framing. I'd say recognising that is the dialectical moment.

I may well be employing the term totally inaccurately.
 

DannyL

Wild Horses
Reminiscent of Austin Spare, all this:


The Death Posture

Ideas of Self in conflict cannot be slain, by resistance they are a reality- no Death or cunning has overcome them but is their reinforcement of energy. The dead are born again and again lie in the womb of conscience. By allowing maturity is to predicate decay when by non-resistance is retrogression to early simplicity and the passage to the original and unity without idea. From that idea is the formula of non-resistance germinating “Does not matter- please yourself.”
The conception of “I am not” must of necessity follow the conception of “I am,” because of its grammar, as surely in this world of sorrow night follows day. The recognition of pain as such, implies the idea of pleasure, and so with all ideas. By this duality, let him remember to laugh at all times, recognize all things, resist nothing; then there is no conflict, incompatibility or compulsion as such.

Transgressing Conception by a Lucid Symbolism.

Man implies Woman, I transcend these by the Hermaphrodite, this again implies a Eunuch7); all these conditions I transcend by a “Neither” principle, yet although a “Neither” is vague, the fact of conceiving it proves its palpability, and again implies a different “Neither.”8)
But the “Neither-Neither” principle of those two, is the state where the mind has passed beyond conception, it cannot be balanced, since it implies only itself. The “I” principle has reached the “Does not matter- need not be” state, and is not related to form. Save and beyond it, there is no other, therefore it alone is complete and eternal. Indestructible, it has power to destroy- therefore it alone is true freedom and existence.
 

DannyL

Wild Horses
Spare is notoriously incomprehensible btw - I have no fucking idea what that third sentence means.
 

john eden

male pale and stale
It's the idea that you can smash two things together to make something better out of them.

The classic Marxist number is:

Thesis + Practice = Praxis

So you have an idea (thesis/theory). You go and try it out (practice). Does it work? Maybe it sort've does but needs improvement. Maybe it's a shit idea. Maybe it's a good idea that leads to another idea. So you then have some more theories to test out...

Your theory and practice are in a relationship with each other. And over time both improve each other.
 

martin

----
It's the idea that you can smash two things together to make something better out of them.

The classic Marxist number is:

Thesis + Practice = Praxis

So you have an idea (thesis/theory). You go and try it out (practice). Does it work? Maybe it sort've does but needs improvement. Maybe it's a shit idea. Maybe it's a good idea that leads to another idea. So you then have some more theories to test out...

Your theory and practice are in a relationship with each other. And over time both improve each other.
Isn't that just thinking about something and trying it?

Thesis: I'm hungry, it's 2pm and I've not eaten.
Practice: I will go down the Lebanese for a kebab.

In half an hour, I'm undertaking praxis to test my dialectic?
Or is the dialectic if the kebab contains a dead rat, and I think "I should have made a cheese sandwich instead"?
 

woops

is not like other people
Isn't that just thinking about something and trying it?

Thesis: I'm hungry, it's 2pm and I've not eaten.
Practice: I will go down the Lebanese for a kebab.

In half an hour, I'm undertaking praxis to test my dialectic?
Or is the dialectic if the kebab contains a dead rat, and I think "I should have made a cheese sandwich instead"?

It's two opposing ideas the thesis and antithesis that give rise to a third the synthesis. . It's 2pm i want a keban 2. Local lebanese serves dead rats synthesis: i will make a cheese sandwich
 

Clinamenic

θερμοδυναμικός καπιταλιστής
A dynamic and ongoing way of coming up with answers, rather than a static and solitary answer. As @linebaugh says, yin/yang is the most intuitive example of this, in my opinion.

I think of it as a way of mapping though, rather than the actual orientation of universal forces irrespective of our conception of them.

In giving an account, in making a decision, stating a thesis, etc, its seems one is necessarily being partial, no account is a full account, etc.

So the dialectical method is a way of incrementally mitigating this partiality, by giving an account/thesis, then identifying what that thesis doesn't account for and creating an antithesis around that, then synthesizing them to account for as much of both as possible, namely the synthesis, which is still partial and can have yet another antithesis formulated in response to it, and the process can go on and on.

Its well suited for multiple people, for words between people.

DIdn't know that praxis mean't applied thesis/theory though, I had just assumed it was greek form of practice.
 
Top