In The Art of Controversy by Arthur Schopenhauer, he wrote that "if we take purely objective truth as our aim, we are reduced to mere Logic" (10). I disagree. In the search for purely objective truth, it is not just Logic used but also Dialectic is used to help determine what is true and what is not. Schopenhauer writes that Dialectic "has no other aim but to reduce to a regular system and collect and exhibit the arts which most men employ when they observe, in a dispute, that truth is not on their side, and still attempt to gain the day" (10). The way he writes this makes it seem as if people are just stubborn, rigid and just want to win "acceptance of propositions" (9) even when they are "in the wrong" (4). I think Dialectic is used to find a personal truth on a subject by validating an opinion under the scrutiny of another.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I kind of have to disagree with you on that last part Safiyyah. The method in which people employ dialectic is when they want to "win" (their idea of win may be greatly convulted) an argument, not because they want to find a personal truth by validating an opinion under the scrutiny of another. In an argument I don't personally choose to use dialectic (can't tell if that's grammaticaly correct, but who cares)to find a personal truth but rather to win the argument even if, technicalitys aside, I am wrong. Winning is based merely on perception by others, regardless of who is right or who is wrong. Whether or not that belief makes me ,as you so frequently say a bad person, is totally up to you to decide (See? I knew what you were going to say because i'm awesome)
I knew that one day the words that I use against you in our frequent disagreements would come back to haunt me. :P
I told you, and although this moment seem REALLY childish and trivial...i'm still very proud of it ;)
Post a Comment