Posts Tagged ‘Historical Dialectics’
Twilight of “Love of Knowledge”?
Posted by: adonis49 on: April 21, 2021
Inertia of a thinking system in “Love of Knowledge”. Part 1
Posted on January 27, 2010
- In: philosophy | politics/finance Today
- There is this notion that philosophers are after the “Truth”, based on the assumption that they have this urge to go to the tiniest details and exhaustive possibilities of a concept.
- I beg to differ. Once a philosopher starts building structures for his line of thinking, then it is the system that tows and guides the “Truth”. It takes an insurmountable character of honesty to shake off the inertia erected by a system for a philosopher to restart his independent reflection in search of truth.
Philosophy from Antiquity till now was what is currently called “Ideology of the power to be” of the politico-economic system (the dominant classes of the period).
Philosophy was the super-structure of the apologetic social structure of a culture that has been flourishing for decades. Consequently, philosophy tried to make sense of the mood of the time.
What is striking is that most philosophical systems refrained to include the economical structure aspect into the equation. At best, the economic structure was indirectly referred to.
For example, slavery was accepted as a qualitative level in human nature: since animals are difficult to communicate with then it is better to leave it as is. It was if economy was a taboo notion because the class structure could not be altered.
Every politico-economic dominant class needs a valid interpretation of the statue-quo coupled with a rationale for the intelligentsia to take stock of the inevitable status that settled in and come along.
Thus, philosophers’ interpretations always were phased out by several decades of the “has been reality”.
In periods of alliances between the religious institutions and the monarchy it was required for God to taking center stage: people had to get used to letting God run their destinies.
Usually, the philosophical lines of thinking revolved in that guideline; these philosophical trends lasted long because the power was concentrated in the hand of the almighty alliance.
Superstition was king and empirical works led the bold experimenters to the fire to be burned alive as witches. Knowledge was built around abstract concepts or the realm of religious dogmas. Religious institutions dictated how the universe functioned and detailed the proper mental activities.
In periods of the rising middle classes (of traders, merchants, and lately the industrial class of entrepreneurs) philosophical systems set man in center stage of the universe.
It was important that man regains his place instead of God: The church-monarchy alliance was not to regain political-economic supremacy and control. Consequently, man was to discover and investigate his “backyard” (earth and universe).
Scientific knowledge, empirical experiments, discovery, and world adventures were the result of opening up new market for exploiting many more people for added values of merchandises, and mostly for enslaving and exploiting more people.
Hegel realized the historical interpretation process of philosophical structures as a fundamental aspect of civilization changes, but Hegel failed to find the intimate connection with the politico-economic source.
The historical dialectic method could make sense of the super structure of “knowledge” development in an a posteriori phase; thus historical dialectics could not forecast the synthesis for the current period since the source of the dialectics (politico-economics) was not within his range of expertise.
It was Marx who realized the power of historical dialectics when applied to politico-economic realities. It made sense from Marx position to declare that history started when class struggle was identified as the catalyst for change and knowledge development.
It means that if a “hot” culture wants to understand or create a history for its society, then it must invest in gathering artifacts and ancient manuscripts that shed light on the class structures through the phases of its history.
Democratic systems are trying hard to diminish civil administration interference with religions in its habit of demanding religious inputs and backing to political activities and programs. This phenomena is called “separation of religion and civil rules”
Human advances and knowledge development: the “Historical Dialectics”
Posted by: adonis49 on: April 5, 2021
Cases of “Historical Dialectics” of human and knowledge development
Posted on December 23, 2009
Dialectics is not only used to comprehend historical development of human/knowledge development but is basic in discussions and effective dialogues.
Hegel was first to introduce “dynamic logic” and used the term of historical dialectics as the interaction of an extreme opinion (thesis) that generates an opposite extreme counter opinion (antithesis) which results in a consensus (synthesis).
Historical dialectics is a macro method for long range study and it does not explain the individual existential conditions (survival situations).
Hegel offered dialectics as a method for explaining how human knowledge developed by constant struggle between contradictory concepts among philosophical groups. The purpose of his method was to demonstrate how the “universe of the spirit” or ideas managed to be raised in human consciousness.
Before I offer my version of knowledge development it might be useful to give a few examples of historical dialectics.
In Antiquity, the pre-Socratic philosophers were divided between the Eleatics or philosophers who claimed that change of primeval substances was impossible: we cannot rely on our senses.
Heraclites reacted with his position that we can rely on our senses and that everything in the universe is in a state of flow and that no substance remains in its place.
The synthesis came from Empedocles who claimed that we can rely on our senses but that what flow are the combination of substances, though the elementary particles do not change.
The Sophists during Socrates were the paid teachers of the elite classes and tore down the mythological teaching of the period and focused on improving individual level of learning.
They were in effect in demand by a nascent City-State democracy of Athens that relied on a better educated society to participate in the political system.
Socrates reacted by proposing that there are fundamental truths, and that knowledge is Not an exercise in rhetorical discourse. The same dialectics worked between the world of ideas of Plato and the empirical method counterpoint of Aristotle.
In the Medieval period the Catholic Church set up a barrier or distance between God and man and forced people to believe that all knowledge emanates from God.
The Renaissance man (wanting to be knowledgeable in many disciplines) reacted by promoting the concepts that God is in every element, that man is a complete microcosm of the universe, and that knowledge starts by observing nature and man.
Another example is the position of Descartes who established that rationalism was the main source for knowledge.
David Hume responded by extending that empirical facts are generated from our senses that are the basis for knowledge.
Kant offered the synthesis that the senses are the primary sources for our impressions but it is our perceptual faculties that describe and view the world: there is a distinction between “matter” of knowledge or the “thing in itself” and “form” of knowledge or the “thing for me”. Kant became the point of departure for another chain of dialectical reflections.
Many philosophers used the dialectic methods to explaining other forms of development.
Karl Marx wrote that Hegel used his method standing on its head instead of considering human material conditions. Marx claimed that “philosophers have only interpreted the world; the point is to change it”.
Thus, Marx defined three levels as basis of society: condition of production (mainly the geographic, natural resources, and climatic conditions), means of production (such as machineries and tools), and production relations (such as political institutions, division of labor, distribution of work and ownership).
Marx claimed that the main interactions are among the working class (the new slaving method of production) and the owners of the means of productions or the ruling class: it is this struggle that develop the spiritual progress.
Another dialectical process is the extreme feminist political claims of equality between genders which brought about a consensus synthesis for a period.
My view of progress is based on the analogy of combination of two schemas:
The first schema is the coexistence of two strings of evolution (picture a DNA shape): the knowledge development (mainly technological) and the moral string (dominated mainly by religious ideologies).
The second schema is represented by historical dialectic evolutions in the shape of helical cones. The time lengths of cycles for the two strings are not constant: the technological progress phase has shorter and shorter cycles while the moral string has longer cycles.
The two strings are intertwined and clashes frequently.
When one string overshadow the other string in evolution then there are a slow counter-reaction culminating in stagnate status-quo phases between the two forces.
Technological or level of sustenance period has time length cycles that is shrinking at the top of the cone before the cone is inverted on its head so that the moral time length cycles start to increase and appears almost invariant (that what happened in the long Medieval period that stretched for over 11 centuries in Europe). Then the cone is reverted on its base for the next “rebirth” cycles (for example the Renaissance period that accelerated the knowledge string ascent).
Note 1: Currently, the technological progress is overwhelming and the mythological string is countering this vigorous cycle: Racism, apartheid, far-right exclusion organization and massive sanctions on entire people based on geopolitical antagonism…
The worst of time started when nature was considered a means to increase capitalism “profit” through massive exploitation of people and nature. Looks like the viability of Earth is on a trend of doom for most living species.
And technology is proven to be very limited in countering the weak moral trend of ignoring the foundation for our existence
Note 2: The Islamic empire that lasted 9 centuries also struggled between religious ideologies and rational thinking. This empire witnessed two short renaissance of the mind and generated countless scientific breakthrough that Medieval Europe tried hard to oppose and to translate.
List of posts from Dec. 19 to 25, 2009
Posted by: adonis49 on: December 27, 2009
593. ICT: Transmitter of crisis and catalyst of global economic restructuring; (Dec. 19, 2009)
594. First “mathematical” philosopher: Descartes; (Dec. 20, 2009)
595. Idiosyncrasy in “conjectures”; (Dec. 21, 2009)
596. Cases of “Historical Dialectics” of human and knowledge development; (Dec. 23, 2009)
597. How causality relation and invariant are perceived by the brain; (Dec. 24, 2009)
598. Color of your money; (Dec. 25, 2009)
Adonis Diaries 