Roots of Sound Rational Thinking

[ourlongroad]

Thinking Dialectically

Aristotle:
People that can't think dialectically aren't really human beings at all, they just look like human beings

John Taylor Gatto:
It means that you don't accept any contention, that you hold them in suspension, as operating principles of your life until you've had some opportunity to test them and verify them privately. "Australian Interview (http://www.altruists.org/downloads/search/?restype=0&rescategory=0&resauthors=John+Taylor+Gatto&restitle=Enter+Keyword)" (2004-09-07 ABC)




Dialectics: Which Dialectic is Which? (http://plusroot.com/page.html?a=129)

If the fate of the mankind were to hang on one philosophical term, it would be the word ‘dialectic’. This is because the dialectic a thinker endorses is the key to the inner rooms of his hidden intensions and true values. From this point of view, the safety and sanity of the world hangs on which dialectical system a society underwrites.

There is no denying the importance of the term dialectic but scholarship in this area is fraught with confusion. We rarely discuss the issue. In conversation — even among educated people — the subject is taboo. People in the academic world talk at cross purposes while we, the lay public, remain virtually unaware of the role The Dialectic plays in shaping the fortunes of our families. Vast numbers of ordinary citizens are blindly unaware of how their lives are influenced by various dialectical movements.

Some few are in on the secret. An elite pool of super thinkers know the power of The Dialectic. These worthies can discuss dialectical differences among Plato, Aristotle, Kant, Hegel, Marx, Sorel, Sartre and relate past theories to modern trends. To this handful, it is no secret that The Dialectic is the hinge on which the philosophical enterprise swings.

However, the number of those who genuinely appreciate the significance of dialectical theory is small indeed. As we mentally play with nuclear weapons and flirt with doom, most of us muddle class Americans are blissfully ignorant of the importance The Dialectic exerts on our lives. Even worse, we are critically unaware of how much our future rides on the choice we make as to which dialectical style we lend our support.

Isn’t this intriguing? The most important happening of our day is a secret known only to a few. It stays that way because it is a forbidden subject of conversation. Even though our society is technically advanced beyond dreams of bygone days, most of us stubbornly refuse to examine the motor we use to drive our society? What is the answer to this mystery?

After stewing over dialectical conundrums for years, I see two solutions, one simple and one complex. The simple solution is to continue as we are and drive by “the seat of our pants”. Perhaps our native commonsense and good will holds enough power to bring civil discourse into dominance in the land.

We could. We, the moderate middle, have the power, by sheer numbers, to subdue the nefarious force of radical negative dialectics and demand that cultivated logical commonsense and fair play become the dominating method of political discourse. If we keep our feet on the ground, our head on our shoulders, and our heart in the right place we could squeeze out totalitarian propensities of social manipulators and not let the crazies in our society spoil the good life. This is a simple solution.

However, this simple solution does not always work. If the millions of tortured victims of Soviet Dialectic could speak, they would say it takes more than workaday commonsense to stand against the mesmeration of sophistic imperial dialectic once it penetrates the engines of power. Using the power of Radical Negative Dialectic, a deft autocrat can gain control behind the backs of the many and grab the wheel. If the dead victims of despotic dialectics could speak, they would tell us that there is an ever present danger, even in societies that claim to be free.

When logical intuition and rational commonsense are not enough to meet the challenge, we must have the courage to enter the realm of critical philosophy and intellectually study the matter. This brings us to my second answer, the complex solution. If we are to introduce a measure of intelligent control over powerful dialectical trends, then we must intellectually study the situation and make a conscious choice about which dialectic we prefer. This takes time and effort.

To gain a notion of the power of the term dialectic, we need to go back in time and learn how the idea has been used in the past. This means opening history books and at least glance at the role of the dialectic in history. If we do this, we will find that the power of the dialectic comes not only from its present role in directing our lives but also from the role it has played in years gone by.

The Roots of Sound Rational Thinking is a full length book (http://plusroot.com/dbook/index.html) that explores elemental ways to cultivate commonsense and advance our abilities to progress in peace.

[Xenophage]

I've always recommended taking a logic class in college. It can really change the way you think about everything. Being able to identify the various fallacies and tell the difference between a sound and unsound argument is paramount to your intellectual life.

[mconder]

This is the most important post ever made on these forums. If you want to unravel the mysteries and thwart your adversaries, the dialectic is the most important thing us patriots can ever study! This post will not likely receive the attention it deserves. It should be stickied, along with a link I will provide for people who want to make a deeper study of the dialectic.

What is the Hegelian Dialectic?
http://nord.twu.net/acl/dialectic.html

The dialectic is the primary tool the Marxist sacks of crap in Washington use to impose their will on us. When they use it most effectively, it paralyzes the opposition (us). If every patriot was able to identify when the dialectic is being used and how to properly neutralize it, we would have a much better chance at fixing this thing.

[ourlongroad]

The Anti Communitarian League's conclusion (http://nord.twu.net/acl/dialectic.html)

The Marxist platform in 1847 was "to abolish private property" and the American Revolution was to protect private property rights.

Marxist societies confiscate wealth and promise to "re-distribute it equally." America promised everyone they could keep and control what was the product of their own labor. Modern Marxist adherents openly claim they will "rebuild the world," and they train activist change agents to openly support overthrowing the legitimate governments of the world.

Since their inception, Marxist agent provocateurs can be linked to every anarchist assassination and student uprising that caused chaos to the established European civilization throughout the 18th and 19th centuries. Modern Americans have succumbed to the conspiracy theory label and will only listen to what the propaganda machines tell them. Now our people don't believe anything but "the Arab world hates our freedom." Most modern Americans will never know what went wrong with their "great experiment in democracy."

[ourlongroad]

This is the most important post ever made on these forums.

If you want to unravel the mysteries and thwart your adversaries, the dialectic is the most important thing us patriots can ever study! This post will not likely receive the attention it deserves. It should be stickied, along with a link I will provide for people who want to make a deeper study of the dialectic.
Why is it that important material such as this is so readily ignored and so quickly pushed-off the front pages here? It's just so very disappointing.

Mconder, I certainly welcome more of your input and insights into this subject matter, so I encourage you to add to this thread. Specifically, I'd be interested in your insights into why the public so easily falls-into the trap of the dialectic, and how one can help the public see these traps so they may be avoided?

While researching this topic, I found this interesting article from Charlotte Iserbyt....



COLD WAR MYTH: AN EXERCISE IN THE USE OF THE DIALECTIC (http://www.newswithviews.com/iserbyt/iserbyt2.htm)
Charlotte Iserbyt
November 23, 2002
NewsWithViews.com


Just because the commies (peaceniks) are opposed to Bush's agenda, for their dangerous reasons, does not mean we true constitutionalists have to side with Skull and Bones Bush's march to war. (Read America's Secret Establishment... An Introduction to the Order of Skull & Bones...can be ordered from me for only $30. Make check payable to: 3D Research Co., 1062 Washington St., Bath, ME 04530). I know you guys know that but thought I'd put my views on paper so that you can forward them wherever you wish. This is what I try to say on my radio interviews. It's late, very late.

We've made that mistake (supporting the Republican Party) through the years, feeling that the Republicans are constitutionalists and care about our sovereignty, etc. Nixon gave us regional government; Reagan signed the education agreements with the Soviet Union (Gorbachev). (I used to be a Republican but am now an Independent)

Carroll Quigley, Clinton's mentor at Georgetown Univ. explained the internationalists'/financiers' control of both parties in his book Tragedy and Hope. The more I read and the more I "think" and "ponder" the events of the past century the more I believe there was never really a Cold War. I also worked in Soviet Affairs in the State Department and had many questions then...in 1958/59...I typed the press release lying to the world about Gary Powers when his U-2 was shot down over Soviet Union.

Why would there be a Cold War when the powers that be on Wall Street created the Soviet Union (also supported Hitler) and the United Nations was formed by communists. The UN Charter written by Alger Hiss Soviet agent and top Carnegie official, and Russian-born Leo Pasvolsky. Very interesting entry in my book on page 112, Don Bell's article re "White House conference on the Industrial World", 1972. This article contains proof of USA and other nation's knowledge, 20 years beforehand, of Wall coming down and phoney collapse of communism in order to implement international economic system (world govt., communism).

All wars since WWII have been UN-sponsored in order to debilitate our country, get our youth on drugs, and move us toward Lenin's goal of international socialism (world govt.) Education was also used for same purpose. Don't have to go into that, except mention U.S.-Soviet Ed agreements which speak for themselves.

Opposition from the left to Bush's planned invasion of Iraq is no more diabolical than Bush's plans for war and world government. Left's opposition represents use of dialectic. Most of those opposing it don't even understand the dialectic, but the elite implementing World Government understand its use beautifully. They need Saddam Hussein (enemy) and the left's opposition to Bush's war vs. Bush's agenda in order to arrive at the synthesis, another move towards world government. The left opposed the UN's war in Vietnam as well in order to come to the synthesis, defeat and another step forward for the communists. Try telling a leftist friend from sixties the war in Vietnam was a UN war! Good luck! Try that on a conservative who should know better and he/she is probably equally uninformed. That fact went down the memory hole long ago!

When will we learn? Don't forget Gorbachev's comment in London 2 years ago that the European Union is the New Soviet Union. Don't forget that the Republican Party several years back invited Gorbachev as keynote speaker at luncheon to raise money for Republican candidates.

No question that Bush is implementing communism (a softer, gentler kind? just wait):

(1) planned economy (failed socialism) through STW initiatives (quotas for jobs), like in Cuba, N. Korea, China, old Soviet Union, recommended by Carnegie Corp. in 1934 when AHA published its Conclusions and Recommendations for the Social Studies...change America from individualist economy to planned, socialist economy in "World Order." Communism calls for combination of industry and government and education and work. Don't forget Carnegie Corp . piloted OBE (Eight Year Study) in 1930s. this study paved way for implementation Skinnerian/Pavlovian performance-based, results-based, outcome-based education in 80s and 90s and ultimately what we see going on now: school to work (STW). Lynn Cheney, Vice President's wife, testified eloquently in opposition to STW three years ago. Where is she now? Muffled due to her husband's position working for the big supporter of STW and the New World Order.

(2) school vouchers for federal control (dumbing down) of all schools, including home schools (Bennett taking care of that with his Virtual Academy charter school: fed funded)

(3) Faith-based initiatives. Don't forget Washington Post article re: George Bush's faith-based initiatives which WP called "communitarianism" which most dictionaries define as a communistic form of government. This communitarian agenda (old community ed) includes UN's lifelong learning under unelected school district and all services run through schools. National Alliance of Business refers to this glowingly as K-80. Faith-based initiative will result in takeover over of churches just as in Soviet Union. Russian Orthodox Church funded by Moscow was and probably still is arm of KGB. (Not much left to do to American Christian churches; they did it to themselves...read Time mag. article in my book re Federal Council of Churches plans for world government back in 1942.)

(4) Bush supports most of what Chairman of Communist Party in 1932, William Foster buried with honors in The Kremlin, called for in his book "Toward a Soviet America". Bush supports unconstitutional Department of Education and has mandated national curriculum and national testing. supports scientific research-based reading method (Skinner) called for in Reading Excellence Act, and S1 mandates Use of Skinnerian/Pavlovian method first for phonics-based instruction, later for school to work and all subjects. This is mastery learning/ direct instruction. Skinner said "I could make a pigeon a high achiever by reinforcing it on a proper schedule."

Department of Education suported by Bush is involved in implementing communist agenda: School to work agenda, Humanistic (atheistic) curriculum including evolution, internationalism, etc. No right/no wrong curriculum: Alger Hiss's good friend, Gen. Brock Chisholm, Canadian psychiatrist, called for getting rid of the conscience in speech he gave in 1945 to World Health Organization (UN). We see results of his recommendation carried out in no right/no wrong curriculum implemented from 1965 on in our schools: Columbine, etc., etc. ENRON?

(5) Patriot Act and Homeland Security which, aside from trampling on our constitutional rights, initially called for TIPS program. Mistake on Bush's part...moving too fast in implementing police state. He had to back off TIPS. Use of COPS program whereby police become social workers and come into our homes and are used in schools.

(6) Public/Private partnership (corporate fascism/socialism). Reagan started them. I was liaison from Dept. of Ed with White House when that happened. Communist Manifesto calls for partnership of government and industry.

(7) U.S.-Soviet education agreements signed first by Eisenhower in 1958, and through the years by other presidents and then by Carnegie and Reagan in 1985 (most extensive ones). Merger of U.S. and Soviet Union: Refer to Congresional Hearings 1953 during which Norman Dodd told by Gaither, President, Ford Foundation that tax-exempt foundations received their orders from The White House (Eisenhower at that time) to use their money to change America so it could be comfortabley merged with Soviet Union.

(8) Regional government at local, state, national and international levels which is Lenin's international socialism. Bush involved in setting up "New Soviet Union" in this hemisphere modelled on European Union referred to by Gorbachev as "New Soviet Union". Lenin called for regionalization of world. Regionalism is communism. See Daily World entry in my book, comments by Morris Zeitlin.

Put all of the above together and what do we have?

Since Republicans are now in control of Congress why not demand that they sumbit legislation calling for abolishing unconstitutional U.S. Department of Education. Be sure to tell them that means "assessment" as well since Chester Finn said even with Department gone, "assessment" was all government needed in order to be in control... words to that effect. That would solve almost all of our problems since the international school to work program which is changing our free form of government (freedom depends on economic freedom, not just political) would be collapsed if USA, no 1. economic partner in global economy, no longer participating, but educating its students in academics for upward mobility. I believe all good school teachers would support this legislation.

I guess I could go on and on, but I don't want to ruin my day or yours. Am taking my miniature dachshund for a walk.

[Nate K]

I don't know much about dialectics, is this similar to logical fallacies? i'm very interested in those.

[ourlongroad]

According to Dean Gotcher (http://www.womensgroup.org/998NEWLT.html), an expert in philosophies, the Hegelian Dialectic is used with diverse groups to "dialog to consensus." According to Dean, Hegel's process, which was revolutionary in his day, has now become the basic tool for developing and supporting the universal world view of the New World Order. All forms of socialism (fascism, communism, existentialism, positivism, pragmatism....globalism) are unthinkable without the aspects of Hegels formula. "


It was Hegel's view that all things unfold in a continuing evolutionary process whereby each idea or quality (the thesis) inevitably brings forth its opposite (the antithesis). From that interaction, a third state emerges in which the opposites are integrated, overcome, and fulfilled in a richer and higher synthesis. This synthesis then becomes the basis for another dialectical process of opposition and synthesis. Hegel believed that the creative stress of opposing positions was essential for developing higher states of consciousness. In the moment of synthesis, the opposites are both preserved and transcended, negated and fulfilled."


I believe that in order to counter-act the evil which is taking place around us, that we must understand the process-- modus operandi--which is being used on us.

[itsthepathocrats]

Audio on the topic (approx 50mins)
http://tinyurl.com/cprokx

[liberteebell]

Thinking Dialectically

Aristotle:
People that can't think dialectically aren't really human beings at all, they just look like human beings

John Taylor Gatto:
It means that you don't accept any contention, that you hold them in suspension, as operating principles of your life until you've had some opportunity to test them and verify them privately. "Australian Interview (http://www.altruists.org/downloads/search/?restype=0&rescategory=0&resauthors=John+Taylor+Gatto&restitle=Enter+Keyword)" (2004-09-07 ABC)





The Roots of Sound Rational Thinking is a full length book (http://plusroot.com/dbook/index.html) that explores elemental ways to cultivate commonsense and advance our abilities to progress in peace.

Thank you for this!

[mconder]

According to Dean Gotcher, an expert in philosophies, the Hegelian Dialectic is used with diverse groups to "dialog to consensus.

Otherwise known as the "bully people into consensus" tactic. I went to a town meeting to oppose vision 2020 land grabs. The meeting started with them handing out a survey designed to drive the "dialog to consensus" to the desired outcome. It made property rights advocates like me look like outdated menaces to society. "What? You don't see the need from keeping evil property owners from potentially obstructing our view of the mountains. What? You don't believe in "smart" growth?"

These are the type of tactics they use.

[ourlongroad]

Thank you for this!
NP. Just reward me by spreading this material. Thanks.

Found this re:Hegel....

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_of_Logic

Science of Logic (Amazon): http://www.amazon.com/Hegels-Science-Logic-Wilhelm-Friedrich/dp/1573922803

Science of Logic (pdf): http://www.hegel.net/en/pdf/Hegel-Scilogic.pdf

Science of Logic (intro blog): http://pervegalit.wordpress.com/2008/01/03/hegels-science-of-logic-introduction/



Otherwise known as the "bully people into consensus" tactic. I went to a town meeting to oppose vision 2020 land grabs. The meeting started with them handing out a survey designed to drive the "dialog to consensus" to the desired outcome. It made property rights advocates like me look like outdated menaces to society. "What? You don't see the need from keeping evil property owners from potentially obstructing our view of the mountains. What? You don't believe in "smart" growth?"

These are the type of tactics they use.
We need a separate thread on the Delphi Technique, which is what Charlotte Iserbyt found widely used by Change Agents as the Dept of Education during her employ there under Reagan's administration. People here may want to learn how to recognize these techniques in order to defeat them.

[ourlongroad]

The Anti Communitarian Manifesto
http://nord.twu.net/acl/manifesto.html


Abstract - The Anti Communitarian Manifesto (http://nikiraapana.blogspot.com/2008/04/abstract-anti-communitarian-manifesto.html)
What is the Hegelian Dialectic? and The Historical Evolution of Communitarian Thinking by Niki Raapana and Nordica Friedrich, 2003, Seattle, Wyoming, Alaska.


Background: Communitarianism is the theory that individual rights must be balanced against the rights of the "community." Its many proponents insist that individual rights and liberties pose a real threat to the health and safety of the "community at large." The founders of the Communitarian Network began "shoring up the moral, social and political environment" in the early 1990s. Today the communitarian theory is the basis for hundreds of new global rules and regulations eliminating individual rights, yet fewer than one percent of the affected population knows about it.

Results: The progression of recent history clearly shows a dedicated effort to lead the world into unknowingly accepting communitarian solutions. To understand how philosophical Communitarianism advanced itself, the authors traced it back to the original source. Using the works of the leading Communitarian theorists, they followed the path from Seattle Neighborhood Plans all the way to the International Court at the Hague.

Conclusion: The foundation for the communitarian theory is undisputedly the Hegelian dialectic; Part I, a tutorial on the Hegelian dialectic is fully substantiated by Jesuit priests, Renowned Marxists and Pope John Paul. Theoretical analysis, i.e.. (A) Communitarianism did not evolve naturally (B) and it was never a movement that arose out of U.S. society (C) therefore, communitarianism has no natural home in the United States., is further substantiated with 70 verifiable, solid references that overwhelmingly support it. Part II, also heavily referenced, outlines historical events leading to the global communitarian synthesis. The changing duality of the new legal system clearly indicates Communitarianism is a criminal enterprise whose aim is to destroy all legal institutions established under national and state constitutions. Both Part I and Part II establish the aims and shared goals of the lesser arms involved in the global communitarian insurrection, showing direct ties to the War on Terror business, the European Union's integration under Communitarian Law, the emerging North American Free Trade Zone, UN Local Agenda 21, global sustainable development programs, Regionalization, Faith-Based Initiatives, Volunteer America, Community Oriented Policing, Rebuilding Community and Community Development.

[Xenophage]

Dialectic is a method of logical debate. Arguments and counterarguments. Rhetoric is its opposite - no debate, just stirring appeals to emotion. Aristotle considered the dialectic (e.g. rational argument) a virtuous endeavor, but he considered people who engage in pure rhetoric as despicable. Nevertheless, he wrote a great deal about the art of rhetoric, recognizing its ability to influence the common man, who may not be skilled in philosophy, toward noble ideals.

You can, for the most part, substitute the word "dialectic" for "argument" if it seems confusing.

Hegel and later philosophers use the phrase "dialectic" in a bit of a different meaning. Instead of just meaning the study of argumentative method, it became pretty synonymous with outright irrationality and contradiction. "Taking two contradicting things and combining them to form a true conclusion." Pretty much bullshit, but it infected philosophy with irrationality.

[Nate K]

thanks

[ourlongroad]

^^^^