Philosophy

107 readers

1 users here now

For everything and anything pertaining to philosophy.

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

Makan@lemmygrad.ml

I got a tough one for you. Are dialectics eternal? (lemmygrad.ml)

submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by CriticalResist8@lemmygrad.ml to c/philosophy@lemmygrad.ml

30 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Rephrased, will dialectics always exist?

Have fun, because I sure don't.

edit: if it helps your thinking process a bit, consider this:

Dialectics explains the process of contradictions. So, does dialectics go through its own contradictions?
If so, that means dialectics has a process of its own and describes its own process as well. It's a bit like the "does a set of all sets contain itself" question.
But if the laws of dialectics are eternal and dialectics does not go through its own process and contradictions, then it would be eternal. Is that possible though?
And finally of course what are the implications of all of that?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 1 week ago

Our human context is inescapable. Language doesn’t exist in order to correspond to objective reality, it exists to allow us to socialize and think in order to survive: a practical purpose. Reality can only be understood from a context. Scientific instruments only enhance our senses, they do not reveal something about an ethereal true reality beyond anyone’s perception of pure energy and matter.

Ideas are real because we are real and perceive them. Ideas are concepts. Concepts are human linguistic/imaginitive/etc understandings of what we perceive. They suit a practical purpose. We develop high level concepts that allow us to interact with reality on high levels. The map is not the territory and the territory does not depend upon the existence of the map. Still, the map can be highly detailed and be used to skillfully navigate the territory.

In a causal chain an entity feels the feeling we call hunger, gets the impulse to eat, eats, and the feeling and impulse cease. This language is not real on some transcendent material plane, but as you experience reading it, it functions to make you imagine a scenario you know to occur practically. All such things happen without the need for the word carbohydrate, though that word enhances our ability to interact with a group of substances in process that we have categorized together.

This is what Mao meant, put in the terms of an autistic philosophy nerd.