Podcast #128: We chat with Kent C Dodds about why he loves React and discuss what life was like in the dark days before Git. Listen now.
11

Both of the answers are correct to point out that the dialogues are fictitious. It is extremely unlikely any section of any length is a transcript of an actual conversation between Socrates and anyone. This, however, should not surprise us because the idea of making dialogue in a written work a transcript is a modern concept. No one would have done so until ...


10

In very broad strokes: All of the definitions you propose for "dialectic" share a common, crucial factor: that truth is not static, but something that unfolds via a back-and-forth process. Plato, the scholastics, Hegel, and Kierkegaard all subscribe to this notion, and the differences in usage between them are secondary when viewed in this manner. ...


7

This sounds like the Hegel's view of speculative thought. According to Hegel, it is a natural movement of thought to turn to its opposite ("negation"), and for the two to coexist until the opposition is resolved in negation of negation, "sublation":"Hegel calls on speculative thought: two contradictory elements are held together, uplifted and sublated ...


7

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it," is a statement erroneously attributed to Aristotle, possibly a misquote of the Nicomachean Ethics. To my best knowledge, a sentiment somewhat akin to this statement could be found in JS Mill's On Liberty, a utilitarian argument on why society should not silence the ...


6

You may be referring to the motto extracted from Spinoza: Omnis determinatio est negatio, every determination is negation. As applied to knowledge, it means that we know something by knowing what it is not, what it differs from. Spinoza's wording is not as succinct: "...he who says that he apprehends a figure, thereby means to indicate simply this, that ...


6

As far as I know Plato's dialogues are fictitious. E.g., Parmenides died at about 460 BCE in the South of Italy, while Socrates was born at 470 BCE in Athens. Hence the meeting of Parmenides with a young Socrates, teaching Plato's theory of forms, cannot be historical. Even when the dialogues are fictitious, some of the interlocutors in Plato's dialogues ...


6

You might be interested in Alexandre Kojève's Introduction to the Reading of Hegel. The first chapter is available on the site DBK recommended (www.marxists.org). Kojève has a few other works of note (though only the Introduction and Outline of a Phenomenology of Right have been translated into English--though The Concept, Time, and Discourse is supposed to ...


6

The site you link to (marxism.org) has lots of freely available material: Index of Marxists.org Hegel Archives Some Helpful Reference Materials from Marxists.org In particular you might want to have a look at these real classics: Marxists.org Criticisms of Hegel Marx and Engels wrote copiously on Hegel themselves. Marxists.org Archive of Marx on Hegel ...


6

There is no "synthesis" in Hegel, it is Fichte's term later adopted by Marx and Engels. Hegel specifically discards Fichte's thesis-antithesis-synthesis triad and replaces it with his own: abstract-negative-concrete. Sublation (not synthesis) is the concretization of the abstract through a successive pair of determinate negations, another of Hegel's special ...


5

I am not at all familiar with Rollo May's work (I just looked at the wikipedia entry to get grasp on who he was). In philosophy, the term "dialectic" can have several meanings. One meaning is just two things that engage each other -- think "dialogue." Another meaning is a dialectical method -- meaning that you arrive at a resolution by the interaction of ...


5

The myth of thesis-antithesis-synthesis " Dialectic" does not for Hegel mean " thesis, antithesis, and synthesis." ... Hermann Glockner's reliable Hegel Lexikon (4 volumes, Stuttgart, 1935) does not list the Fichtean terms "thesis, antithesis, synthesis " together. In all the twenty volumes of Hegel's " complete works " he does not use this ...


5

I'll consider that your question is two-fold, one relating to the relationship between Deleuze & Hegel, and secondly, the source of inspiration of Difference & Repetition. With regard to the first question, Gilles Deleuze (1925-1995) had an educational formation steeped in the history of philosophy. From major to minor characters in the history of ...


4

Hegel himself can be read as materialistic (in a very, very weak sense): In the sense that the general in which the particular being is thought, the concept ("Begriff"), is always "grounded" in the very being of this particular, as it is the generality of the being. BUT he descriminates between being ("Dasein") and reality ("Wirklichkeit"), where reality is ...


4

I believe Marx proposed Dialectic materialism by "reversing" the Hegelian dialectic idealism so to make it stand with "the feet on the ground". As i know "material" for Hegel is an idea. But "idea" is not something just in man's head, but the whole spirit of the world, so some times an "idea" is pure materialistic. Correct me if i 'm wrong.


4

Henri Lefebvre wrote a book Dialectical Materialism to attempt to divorce DM from its vulgarization by Stalinists and official Communist party philosophers and develop it as a form of "logic." I consider this book to be a little too Hegelian and philosophically concerned for it to be in the tradition of Engels' Anti-Duhring and Dialectics of Nature. A more ...


4

The link between the two is strong. The "dialectical method" (ἡ διαλεκτικὴ μέθοδος)was used by Plato in his dialogues as the central tool for philosophical inquiry; see Rep, 533c and see e.g. : Richard Robinson, Plato’s Earlier Dialectic, Clarendon Press (1941). For Aristotle, Dialectical arguments are different from demonstrations in : the character ...


4

I don't think there's a technique you can apply or a practically useful set of rules. The best way to learn the clear, concise and accurate expression of ideas in philosophy is to read, and assimilate from, philosophers who have these virtues of expression. Descartes has it in Meditation I; the later Meditations do not possess the same clarity. Later ...


4

In a very compressed nutshell, modern logic is concerned with relations of implication, contradiction, independence and the like between propositions and predicates. In contrast Hegel's logic operates not on propositions or predicates but on 'notions', Begriffe, or (roughly) concepts. On his account certain concepts are more adequate to the nature or ...


4

To explain Foucault's method of archaeology it might be best to work from an example. In the history of economic thought there are various systems of of ideas : mercantislism, physiocracy, 'classical' economics, Marxist economics, the Austrian marginalists and so on and on. Now, one might examine any of these theories, say physiocracy (which held, to put ...


3

Two philosophies come to mind. Pyrrhonism (see Sextus Empiricus) uses opposing arguments to leave one in a state of suspension of belief, and hence achieve ataraxia. Hegelian dialectic believed that concepts contained their contradictions and chose to reconcile the two by finding a higher concept that contained both concept and contradiction.


3

There is a footnote in Postscript which is very useful here: "There is no excluding dialectics. It may be that a generation, perhaps two, can live in the belief of having found a barricade that is the end of the world and of dialectics. That doesn’t help. Thus, for a long time it was thought possible to exclude dialectics from faith by saying that it was ...


3

There is absolutely no guarantee that anything devised by human minds or hands will survive the eventual extinction of the human race. That's the short answer - there's a myriad number of ways and reasons by which our species may be wiped out. Our current numbers and distribution may seem impressive, but the hubris of our species is vulnerable to medium-...


3

▻ AMBIGUITY OF 'PRACTICAL APPLICATION' There is no doubt that politicians, academics, activists and others have used the label, 'dialectical materialism', some in good faith and others not, to describe or justify the policies they adopted and the analyses they made. In that sense dialectical materialism has had a great deal of practical application. The ...


3

I think that it has more to do with Synchronic vs Diachronic structuralism. Synchronics look at an idea in a specific time interval while Diachronics look at the evolution of an idea. Atleast as Hegel's and Marx's use "dialectic" is concerned, the dialectical process is concerned with evolution of ideas, and hence diachronic.


2

Aristotle, says in the Metaphysics, that: All philosophers agree that the Principles of Change are Contraries And that they act on some Other; he admits it's hard to establish whether they are in toto - two, or three. I interpret this to mean, thinking Contraries are Unity of Opposites. that the Contrary being a Pair of Opposites is two, and the ...


2

I would not say that the Dialectics and Logical positivism have the same enemy Metaphysics, because they do not use this term in the same meaning. The Marxists - I guess they are the most prominent proponents of the opposition Dialectics/Metaphysics - consider them as two methods or two ways to treat the movement, the change and the evolution in the Universe....


2

The terms subject and object have a very complex history (the terms have opposite meanings in classical and modern philosophy). For the purposes of this question, I'm going to restrict myself to the modern usage (as we find it in Kant and Hegel). The basic concept is that there's a subject (let's say a self) and this self faces many particular things in its ...


2

To the contrary, the worker has to be almost completely immiserated and desparate before he will revolt on a large scale. Take for example the sailors at Kiel toward the end of WWI, they could go no further, they revolted, and then it spread across Germany very seriously as time progressed, really only the workers in Berlin and Munich knew any theory. Now ...


2

The Marxist vanguard, by virtue of it being the vanguard, will be few in number; thus, even if they tried to change the world, it wouldn't amount to much; for the force they can apply, at least directly, won't amount to much. What they require is a lever that magnifies their force, and this is where the proletariat (of all kinds come in), and this is how ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible