Difference between revisions of "Dialectic"
(3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[File:N-27525217.jpg|thumb|250px|]] | [[File:N-27525217.jpg|thumb|250px|]] | ||
− | '''[[Dialectic]]''' (also [[dialectics]] and the [[dialectical]] method) is a method of argument for resolving disagreement that has been central to European and [[Indian]] [[philosophy]] since antiquity. The word [[dialectic]] originated in {{Wiki|ancient Greece}}, and was made popular by {{Wiki|Plato}} in the Socratic dialogues. The [[dialectical]] method is {{Wiki|discourse}} between two or more [[people]] [[holding]] different points of [[view]] about a [[subject]], who wish to establish the [[truth]] of the matter guided by reasoned arguments. | + | '''[[Dialectic]]''' (also [[dialectics]] and the [[dialectical]] method) is a method of argument for resolving disagreement that has been central to {{Wiki|European}} and [[Indian]] [[philosophy]] since antiquity. The [[word]] [[dialectic]] originated in {{Wiki|ancient Greece}}, and was made popular by {{Wiki|Plato}} in the Socratic dialogues. The [[dialectical]] method is {{Wiki|discourse}} between two or more [[people]] [[holding]] different points of [[view]] about a [[subject]], who wish to establish the [[truth]] of the [[matter]] guided by reasoned arguments. |
− | The term [[dialectics]] is not {{Wiki|synonymous}} with the term [[debate]]. While in {{Wiki|theory}} [[debaters]] are not necessarily [[emotionally]] invested in their point of [[view]], in practice [[debaters]] frequently display an [[emotional]] commitment that may cloud [[rational]] [[judgement]]. [[Debates]] are won through a combination of persuading the opponent; proving one's argument correct; or proving the opponent's argument incorrect | + | The term [[dialectics]] is not {{Wiki|synonymous}} with the term [[debate]]. While in {{Wiki|theory}} [[debaters]] are not necessarily [[emotionally]] invested in their point of [[view]], in practice [[debaters]] frequently display an [[emotional]] commitment that may cloud [[rational]] [[judgement]]. [[Debates]] are won through a combination of persuading the opponent; proving one's argument correct; or proving the opponent's argument incorrect. |
− | + | [[Debates]] do not necessarily require promptly identifying a clear winner or loser; however clear winners are frequently determined by either a [[judge]], jury, or by group consensus. The term [[dialectics]] is also not {{Wiki|synonymous}} with the term [[rhetoric]], a method or [[art]] of {{Wiki|discourse}} that seeks to persuade, inform, or motivate an audience. Concepts, like "{{Wiki|logos}}" or [[rational]] appeal, "[[pathos]]" or [[emotional]] appeal, and "[[ethos]]" or [[ethical]] appeal, are intentionally used by rhetoricians to persuade an audience. | |
− | + | The [[Sophists]] [[taught]] [[aretē]] ({{Wiki|Greek}}: [[ἀρετή]], quality, [[excellence]]) as the [[highest]] value, and the determinant of one's [[actions]] in [[life]]. The [[Wikipedia:Sophism|Sophists]] [[taught]] artistic quality in oratory ([[motivation]] via [[speech]]) as a [[manner]] of demonstrating one's [[aretē]]. | |
− | [[ | + | Oratory was [[taught]] as an [[art form]], used to please and to [[influence]] other [[people]] via {{Wiki|excellent}} [[speech]]; nonetheless, the [[Wikipedia:Sophism|Sophists]] [[taught]] the pupil to seek [[aretē]] in all endeavors, not solely in oratory. |
+ | {{Wiki|Socrates}} favored [[truth]] as the [[highest]] value, proposing that it could be discovered through [[reason]] and [[logic]] in [[discussion]]: ergo, [[dialectic]]. {{Wiki|Socrates}} valued {{Wiki|rationality}} (appealing to [[logic]], not [[emotion]]) as the proper means for {{Wiki|persuasion}}, the discovery of [[truth]], and the determinant for one's [[actions]]. | ||
− | [[Buddhism]] has developed sophisticated, and sometimes highly institutionalized [[traditions]] of [[dialectics]] during its long {{Wiki|history}}. [[Nalanda]] University, and later the [[Gelugpa]] [[Buddhism]] of [[Tibet]], are examples. The historical development and clarification of [[Buddhist]] [[doctrine]] and polemics, through [[dialectics]] and formal [[debate]], is well documented. [[Buddhist]] [[doctrine]] was rigorously critiqued (though not ultimately refuted) in the 2nd century by [[Nagarjuna]], whose uncompromisingly [[logical]] approach to the [[realization]] of [[truth]], became the basis for the development of a [[vital]] stream of [[Buddhist]] [[thought]]. This [[dialectical]] approach of [[Buddhism]], to the elucidation and articulation of an account of the [[Cosmos]] as the [[truth]] it really is, became known as the [[Perfection]] of [[Wisdom]] and was later developed by other notable thinkers, such as [[Dignaga]] and [[Dharmakirti]] (between 500 and 700). The [[dialectical]] method of truth-seeking is evident throughout the [[traditions]] of [[Madhyamaka]], [[Yogacara]], and [[Tantric]] [[Buddhism]]. [[Trisong Detsen]], and later [[Je Tsongkhapa]], championed the value of [[dialectic]] and of formalised training in [[debate]] in [[Tibet]]. | + | To {{Wiki|Socrates}}, [[truth]], not [[aretē]], was the [[greater]] good, and each [[person]] should, above all else, seek [[truth]] to guide one's [[life]]. Therefore, {{Wiki|Socrates}} opposed the [[Wikipedia:Sophism|Sophists]] and their [[teaching]] of [[rhetoric]] as [[art]] and as [[emotional]] oratory requiring neither [[logic]] nor [[proof]]. Different [[forms]] of [[dialectical]] {{Wiki|reasoning}} have emerged throughout {{Wiki|history}} from the {{Wiki|Indosphere}} ([[Greater]] [[India]]) and the {{Wiki|West}} ({{Wiki|Europe}}). These [[forms]] include the Socratic method, [[Hindu]], [[Buddhist]], {{Wiki|Medieval}}, [[Hegelian dialectics]], [[Marxist]], [[Talmudic]], and Neo-orthodoxy. |
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | ===[[Buddhist dialectic]]=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | [[Buddhism]] has developed sophisticated, and sometimes highly institutionalized [[traditions]] of [[dialectics]] during its long {{Wiki|history}}. [[Nalanda]] {{Wiki|University}}, and later the [[Gelugpa]] [[Buddhism]] of [[Tibet]], are examples. The historical [[development]] and clarification of [[Buddhist]] [[doctrine]] and {{Wiki|polemics}}, through [[dialectics]] and formal [[debate]], is well documented. [[Buddhist]] [[doctrine]] was rigorously critiqued (though not ultimately refuted) in the 2nd century by [[Nagarjuna]], whose uncompromisingly [[logical]] approach to the [[realization]] of [[truth]], became the basis for the [[development]] of a [[vital]] {{Wiki|stream}} of [[Buddhist]] [[thought]]. | ||
+ | |||
+ | This [[dialectical]] approach of [[Buddhism]], to the elucidation and articulation of an account of the [[Cosmos]] as the [[truth]] it really is, became known as the [[Perfection]] of [[Wisdom]] and was later developed by other notable thinkers, such as [[Dignaga]] and [[Dharmakirti]] (between 500 and 700). | ||
+ | |||
+ | The [[dialectical]] method of [[truth]]-seeking is evident throughout the [[traditions]] of [[Madhyamaka]], [[Yogacara]], and [[Tantric]] [[Buddhism]]. [[Trisong Detsen]], and later [[Je Tsongkhapa]], championed the value of [[dialectic]] and of formalised {{Wiki|training}} in [[debate]] in [[Tibet]]. | ||
{{W}} | {{W}} | ||
− | [[Category:Buddhist | + | [[Category:Buddhist Logic]] |
Latest revision as of 03:09, 8 February 2015
Dialectic (also dialectics and the dialectical method) is a method of argument for resolving disagreement that has been central to European and Indian philosophy since antiquity. The word dialectic originated in ancient Greece, and was made popular by Plato in the Socratic dialogues. The dialectical method is discourse between two or more people holding different points of view about a subject, who wish to establish the truth of the matter guided by reasoned arguments.
The term dialectics is not synonymous with the term debate. While in theory debaters are not necessarily emotionally invested in their point of view, in practice debaters frequently display an emotional commitment that may cloud rational judgement. Debates are won through a combination of persuading the opponent; proving one's argument correct; or proving the opponent's argument incorrect.
Debates do not necessarily require promptly identifying a clear winner or loser; however clear winners are frequently determined by either a judge, jury, or by group consensus. The term dialectics is also not synonymous with the term rhetoric, a method or art of discourse that seeks to persuade, inform, or motivate an audience. Concepts, like "logos" or rational appeal, "pathos" or emotional appeal, and "ethos" or ethical appeal, are intentionally used by rhetoricians to persuade an audience.
The Sophists taught aretē (Greek: ἀρετή, quality, excellence) 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's aretē.
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 aretē in all endeavors, not solely in oratory.
Socrates favored truth as the highest value, proposing that it could be discovered through reason and logic in discussion: ergo, dialectic. Socrates valued rationality (appealing to logic, not emotion) as the proper means for persuasion, the discovery of truth, and the determinant for one's actions.
To Socrates, truth, not aretē, 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. Different forms of dialectical reasoning have emerged throughout history from the Indosphere (Greater India) and the West (Europe). These forms include the Socratic method, Hindu, Buddhist, Medieval, Hegelian dialectics, Marxist, Talmudic, and Neo-orthodoxy.
Buddhist dialectic
Buddhism has developed sophisticated, and sometimes highly institutionalized traditions of dialectics during its long history. Nalanda University, and later the Gelugpa Buddhism of Tibet, are examples. The historical development and clarification of Buddhist doctrine and polemics, through dialectics and formal debate, is well documented. Buddhist doctrine was rigorously critiqued (though not ultimately refuted) in the 2nd century by Nagarjuna, whose uncompromisingly logical approach to the realization of truth, became the basis for the development of a vital stream of Buddhist thought.
This dialectical approach of Buddhism, to the elucidation and articulation of an account of the Cosmos as the truth it really is, became known as the Perfection of Wisdom and was later developed by other notable thinkers, such as Dignaga and Dharmakirti (between 500 and 700).
The dialectical method of truth-seeking is evident throughout the traditions of Madhyamaka, Yogacara, and Tantric Buddhism. Trisong Detsen, and later Je Tsongkhapa, championed the value of dialectic and of formalised training in debate in Tibet.