{"id":738,"date":"2012-01-24T12:25:50","date_gmt":"2012-01-24T11:25:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.silverstarproductions.nl\/?p=738"},"modified":"2012-01-25T00:21:36","modified_gmt":"2012-01-24T23:21:36","slug":"dialectiek-een-nieuwe-manier-van-benaderen","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.silverstarproductions.nl\/?p=738","title":{"rendered":"Dialectic a different approach"},"content":{"rendered":"

Dialectic<\/h1>\n
\n
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n
\n
\"\"<\/a><\/div>\n

The School of Athens<\/em>, by\u00a0Raphael<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Dialectic<\/strong>\u00a0(also\u00a0dialectics<\/em>\u00a0and\u00a0the dialectical method<\/em>) is a method of argument for resolvingdisagreement<\/a>\u00a0that has been central to Indic and European philosophy since antiquity. The worddialectic<\/em>\u00a0originated in\u00a0Ancient Greece<\/a>, and was made popular by\u00a0Plato<\/a>\u00a0in the\u00a0Socratic dialogues<\/a>. The dialectical method is\u00a0dialogue<\/a>\u00a0between two or more people holding different points of view about a subject, who wish to establish the truth of the matter by dialogue, with\u00a0reasoned<\/a>\u00a0arguments.[1]<\/a><\/sup>Dialectics is different from\u00a0debate<\/a>, wherein the debaters are committed to their points of view, and mean to win the debate, either by persuading the opponent, proving their argument correct, or proving the opponent’s argument incorrect \u2014 thus, either a judge or a jury must decide who wins the debate. Dialectics is also different from\u00a0rhetoric<\/a>, wherein the speaker uses\u00a0logos<\/a>,\u00a0pathos<\/a>, or\u00a0ethos<\/a>\u00a0to persuade listeners to take their side of the argument.<\/p>\n

The\u00a0Sophists<\/a>\u00a0taught\u00a0ar\u00eate<\/a><\/em>\u00a0(Greek:\u00a0\u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03ae,\u00a0quality<\/em>,\u00a0excellence<\/em>) as the highest value, and the determinant of one’s actions in life. The Sophists taught artistic quality in oratory (motivation via speech) as a manner of demonstrating one’sar\u00eate<\/em>. Oratory was taught as an art form, used to please and to influence other people via excellent speech; nonetheless, the Sophists taught the pupil to seek\u00a0ar\u00eate<\/em>\u00a0in all endeavours, not solely in oratory.<\/p>\n

Socrates<\/a>\u00a0favoured\u00a0truth<\/em>\u00a0as the highest value, proposing that it could be discovered through reason and logic in discussion: ergo,\u00a0dialectic<\/em>. Socrates valued\u00a0rationality<\/a>\u00a0(appealing to logic, not emotion) as the proper means for persuasion, the discovery of truth, and the determinant for one’s actions. To Socrates,\u00a0truth<\/em>, not\u00a0ar\u00eate<\/em>, was the greater good, and each person should, above all else, seek truth to guide one’s life. Therefore, Socrates opposed the Sophists and their teaching of rhetoric as art and as emotional oratory requiring neither logic nor proof.[2]<\/a><\/sup>Different forms of dialectical reasoning emerged from the\u00a0Indosphere<\/a>\u00a0(Greater India) and in\u00a0the West<\/a>\u00a0(Europe), and throughout history;Socratic method<\/a>, Hindu,\u00a0Buddhist<\/a>, Medieval,\u00a0Hegelian dialectics<\/a>, Marxist, Talmudic, and\u00a0Neo-orthodoxy<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n

Contents<\/h2>\n

[hide<\/a>]<\/p>\n<\/div>\n