Principles of Dialectic/ Placed by Margith Strand for Dissertation/Fielding

Principles
Fichtean/Hegelian Dialectics is based on three (or four) basic concepts:
1. Everything is transient and finite, existing in the medium of time (this idea is not accepted by some dialecticians).
2. Everything is made out of opposing forces/opposing sides (contradictions).
3. Gradual changes lead to turning points, where one force overcomes the other (quantitative change leads to qualitative change).
4. Change moves in spirals (or helices), not circles (sometimes referred to as "negation of the negation").[citation needed]
Within this broad qualification, dialectics has a rich and varied history. It has been stated that the history of dialectic is identical to the extensive history of philosophy.[3] The basic idea is perhaps already present in Heraclitus of Ephesus, who held that all is in constant change, as a result of inner strife and opposition.[4][5][6]
The aim of the dialectical method is resolution of the disagreement through rational discussion,[7][8] and ultimately the search for truth. One way to proceed — the Socratic method — is to show that a given hypothesis (with other admissions) leads to a contradiction; thus, forcing the withdrawal of the hypothesis as a candidate for truth (see also reductio ad absurdum). Another way of trying to resolve a disagreement is by denying some presupposition of both the contending thesis and antithesis; thereby moving to a third (syn)thesis or "sublation". However, the rejection of the participants' presuppositions can be resisted, which might generate a second-order controversy.[9]
[edit] Western forms
[edit] Classical philosophy
The term "dialectic" owes much of its prestige to its role in the philosophy of Socrates and Plato. According to Aristotle,[10] it was Zeno of Elea who 'invented' dialectic. Plato's dialogues are the best ancient written examples that show the Socratic dialectic method in great detail.
In classical philosophy, dialectic (Greek: διαλεκτική) is a form of reasoning based on the exchange of arguments and counter-arguments, advocating propositions (theses) and counter-propositions (antitheses). The outcome of such an exchange might be the refutation of one of the relevant points of view, or a synthesis or combination of the opposing assertions, or at least a qualitative transformation in the direction of the dialogue.[11][12]
[edit] Socratic dialogue
Main article: Socratic dialogue
In Plato's dialogues and other Socratic dialogues, Socrates attempts to examine someone's beliefs, at times even first principles or premises by which we all reason and argue. Socrates typically argues by cross-examining his interlocutor's claims and premises in order to draw out a contradiction or inconsistency among them. According to Plato, the rational detection of error amounts to finding the proof of the antithesis.[13] However, important as this objective is, the principal aim of Socratic activity seems to be to improve the soul of his interlocutors, by freeing them from unrecognized errors.
For example, in the Euthyphro, Socrates asks Euthyphro to provide a definition of piety. Euthyphro replies that the pious is that which is loved by the gods. But, Socrates also has Euthyphro agreeing that the gods are quarrelsome and their quarrels, like human quarrels, concern objects of love or hatred. Therefore, Socrates reasons, at least one thing exists which certain gods love but other gods hate. Again, Euthyphro agrees. Socrates concludes that if Euthyphro's definition of piety is acceptable, then there must exist at least one thing which is both pious and impious (as it is both loved and hated by the gods) — which Euthyphro admits is absurd. Thus, Euthyphro is brought to a realization by this dialectical method that his definition of piety is not sufficiently meaningful.
[edit] Medieval philosophy
Dialectics (also called logic) was one of the three liberal arts taught in medieval universities as part of the trivium. The trivium also included rhetoric and grammar.[14][15][16][17]
Based mainly on Aristotle, the first medieval philosopher to work on dialectics was Boethius.[18] After him, many scholastic philosophers also made use of dialectics in their works, such as Abelard,[19] William of Sherwood,[20] Garlandus Compotista,[21] Walter Burley, Roger Swyneshed and William of Ockham.[22]
This dialectic was formed as follows:
1. The Question to be determined
2. The principal objections to the question
3. An argument in favor of the Question, traditionally a single argument ("On the contrary..")
4. The determination of the Question after weighing the evidence. ("I answer that...")
5. The replies to each objection
[edit] Modern philosophy
The concept of dialectics was given new life by Hegel (following Fichte), whose dialectically dynamic model of nature and of history made it, as it were, a fundamental aspect of the nature of reality (instead of regarding the contradictions into which dialectics leads as a sign of the sterility of the dialectical method, as Kant tended to do in his Critique of Pure Reason).[23][24] In the mid-19th century, the concept of "dialectic" was appropriated by Marx (see, for example, Das Kapital, published in 1867) and Engels and retooled in a non-idealist manner, becoming a crucial notion in their philosophy of dialectical materialism. Thus this concept has played a prominent role on the world stage and in world history. In contemporary polemics, "dialectics" may also refer to an understanding of how we can or should perceive the world (epistemology); an assertion that the nature of the world outside one's perception is interconnected, contradictory, and dynamic (ontology); or it can refer to a method of presentation of ideas and conclusions (discourse). According to Hegel, "dialectic" is the method by which human history unfolds; that is to say, history progresses as a dialectical process.