Dialectic is unity of opposites in recognitions promoted by a thinking method modeled after dialogue. This is my thought. I have named my thought complex theory.
I would like to try positioning of this complex theory (a theory of dialectic) on the history of philosophy. The term dialectic of Daijirin (a Japanese dictionary) summarizes four kinds of dialectic theories chronologically. I hope to position my thought on the basis of this contents briefly.
Roughly speaking, my venture is to put the dialectic before Hegel. Both self-development of the Idea which is rooted identity of thought and existence and science about general movement law of nature, society and thought are nothing less than enlarged abnormal forms of dialectic. Dialectic is an inference. I think that this is an elemental form of dialectic.
Dialectic is an uncertain inference. But I believe that new value and meaning will be formed in the process of this inference. Dialectic is an inference which might hit on a new idea (hypothesis). My complex theory contains only an idea (a hypothesis). It has neither noble Idea nor rooted Idea.
I think that the rational kernel of Hegel dialectic will locate in the direction which is not from (3) to (4) but from (3) to (1). That is to say, I believe it will be possible to discover the rational kernel of Hegel dialectic not by succeeding to contradiction but by removing it and by introducing dialogue. I took the definition of three aspects of the logical ( Shorter Logic) apart and I planned a new theory of dialectic, in the kernel of which not contradiction but dialogue was set.
I tried to submit a new theory of dialectic by expressing dialogue of ancient Greece in term of Hegel. The complex theory includes both dialogue and embodying. Supposing that dialectic of ancient Greece is a thesis and dialectic of Hegel is an antithesis, I consider my complex theory to be a synthesis.
note. This is a translation of "５番目の弁証法".
I would like to try positioning of this complex theory (a theory of dialectic) on the history of philosophy. The term dialectic of Daijirin (a Japanese dictionary) summarizes four kinds of dialectic theories chronologically. I hope to position my thought on the basis of this contents briefly.
(1) In ancient Greece, dialectic is a method of hypothesis deduction (question and answer method) seen in Socrates and Plato , in which we will arrive at true recognition and Idea of things through dialogue. In Aristotle, dialectic means an inference based on propositions which seem to be certain but not to be true, dialectic is distinguished from real proof of learning.
(2) In Kant, dialectic means an uncertain inference without proof by experience. Kant considers dialectic to be a logic of semblance based on misuse of pure reason.
(3) In Hegel who finds positive meaning in the negation including contradiction, dialectic has become logic of movement in which a limited thing will develop into a highly advanced stage through bringing forth an opposition/contradiction in self and by embodying them. Dialectic is taken for self-development of the Idea which is rooted identity of thought and existence. (Hegel dialectic)
(4) In Marx and Engels, idealism of Hegel dialectic which considers the Idea to be subject of development is criticized. Dialectic has become science about general movement law of nature, society and thought.
Roughly speaking, my venture is to put the dialectic before Hegel. Both self-development of the Idea which is rooted identity of thought and existence and science about general movement law of nature, society and thought are nothing less than enlarged abnormal forms of dialectic. Dialectic is an inference. I think that this is an elemental form of dialectic.
an inference based on propositions which seem to be certain but not to be true
an uncertain inference without proof by experience
Dialectic is an uncertain inference. But I believe that new value and meaning will be formed in the process of this inference. Dialectic is an inference which might hit on a new idea (hypothesis). My complex theory contains only an idea (a hypothesis). It has neither noble Idea nor rooted Idea.
I think that the rational kernel of Hegel dialectic will locate in the direction which is not from (3) to (4) but from (3) to (1). That is to say, I believe it will be possible to discover the rational kernel of Hegel dialectic not by succeeding to contradiction but by removing it and by introducing dialogue. I took the definition of three aspects of the logical ( Shorter Logic) apart and I planned a new theory of dialectic, in the kernel of which not contradiction but dialogue was set.
I tried to submit a new theory of dialectic by expressing dialogue of ancient Greece in term of Hegel. The complex theory includes both dialogue and embodying. Supposing that dialectic of ancient Greece is a thesis and dialectic of Hegel is an antithesis, I consider my complex theory to be a synthesis.
note. This is a translation of "５番目の弁証法".
