In his 1958 book, Physics & Philosophy, Werner Heisenberg tried to explicate -- for a general audience -- his key concept of "Quantum Uncertainty". So he contrasted the fractional statistical nature of quantum superposition with the integral factual assumptions of Aristotelian Logic. Apparently, he coined the term "Quantum Logic"*1, but today we might substitute the term "Fuzzy Logic"*2. Early quantum physicists were grappling with the ambiguous reality of super-posed particles that are not-yet particular, but holistic, as-if merely waves in a universal fluid medium*3.Whatever the dialectic is, it is not logic in the modern sense. — Banno
It's largely intellectuals that change history. — Gregory
Whatever the dialectic is, it is not logic in the modern sense. — Banno
“Hegel provides the most extensive, general account of his dialectical method in Part I of his Encyclopaedia of
Philosophical Sciences, which is often called the Encyclopaedia Logic [EL]. The form or presentation of logic, he says, has three sides or moments (EL §79). These sides are not parts of logic, but, rather, ... — Joshs
“Fichte introduced into German philosophy the three-step of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, using these three terms. Schelling took up this terminology. Hegel did not. He never once used these three terms together to designate three stages in an argument or account in any of his books. And they do not help us... — Dermot Griffin
My post was intended to address your conditional assertion that The Dialectic is not logical*1. Says who? As presently understood, by whom?↪Gnomon
I didn't notice this until now.
I don't see how it addresses the point of mine that you quote:
Whatever the dialectic is, it is not logic in the modern sense. — Banno
Here is a link to an account of logic: The Open Logic Text complete build (Large file). it's pretty much a summation of the core ideas of Logic as presently understood.
Neither Hegel nor Dialectic are mentioned. — Banno
.some people look past the text’s attempt to analyze consciousness and the meaning of geist there are harsh criticisms that the book has inspired fascism, communism, and overall totalitarianism. I — Dermot Griffin
My post was intended to address your conditional assertion that The Dialectic is not logical* — Gnomon
I said Dialectic is not logic. That is quite different.
After Frege, logic came into it's own, developing rapidly in many and varied directions. That's the topic oft he book linked previously. Whatever Hegel is doing, it's not what is now called logic. As explained above I'd be more inclined to count it as rhetorical. — Banno
I assume that by "logic" you mean a canonical form of reasoning, as defined by your preferred authority. By "logical" I meant merely any formal process of inferring truth from premises. That is "quite different : Authoritarian vs Liberal. I apologize for implying that you dismissed Dialectic as illogical. :smile:I said Dialectic is not logic. That is quite different. — Banno
...this way of thinking — Joshs
I assume that by "logic" you mean a canonical form of reasoning... — Gnomon
Analytic philosophy began as critique of Hegelianism. So, what did Hegelians learn from that critique? Apart, perhaps, from being overtly defensive. — Banno
Most anglophone philosophers still do not take Hegel seriously, — Joshs
I've never read Hegel, and I'm not a disciple of Marx, so I don't care what you think about their philosophy, which is usually characterized as a form Idealism. For the purposes of this thread, my interest is in the Dialectic dynamic as the logical process of competition, for weaning-out the unfit or untrue, which is more like brutal Realism . So, let's get real.I assume that by "logic" you mean a canonical form of reasoning... — Gnomon
No, I mean an explicit form of reasoning. — Banno
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.