On the contrary, pure reason is here understood to pass beyond or to dissolve itself, and it is just this self - negation of pure reason which makes manifest the active and
dialectical reason of Vernunft.
«literariness» becomes his counter to
dialectical reason.
This solidarity, by its mere expression, supplies its own critique of
dialectical reason.
While Sartre attempts to explain the mechanisms of
dialectical reasoning in its social context, Solzhenitsyn's Gulag sets a limit to dialectical thought by demonstrating its ultimate moral failure.
The «persuasive» as such (pithanon), which defines rhetorical technique, is therefore correlative only to the probable mode of
dialectical reasoning.
Calvin not only argued against them on the basis of clear scripture, proper definitions and
dialectical reasoning.
Locked in combat with them (the dialogue is replete with images of force) is Socrates, demonstrating the techniques of
dialectical reasoning and ultimately of metaphysical and ontological questioning.
Not exact matches
Of paramount importance to the Hegelian perspective on this relation is the well - known distinction between understanding and
reason as two levels of thinking, for involved in this distinction is the view that logic, as it has been traditionally conceived, is merely a logic of the understanding, and that
reason, or speculative thinking, employs a higher, more inclusive logic, one that is «
dialectical» in nature.
By identifying the
dialectical element that he recognizes in the process of concrescence with feeling rather than with logic, Whitehead is able to preserve the integrity of logic, and to avoid what I take to be the Hegelian dual fallacy of both overestimating the power of so - called «
reason,» and at the same time encumbering logic with psychological, epistemological, and metaphysical elements that have no proper place in it.
Georg Lukacs's claim that
dialectical materialism is the culmination of Western humanism would strike Solzhenitsyn as all too true, for
dialectical materialism makes explicit post-Enlightenment humanity's quest to remake the world in people's false self - images as creatures of
reason.
There are differences, finally, as to the relation between subject and object: whether the object is known through
dialectical or analytical
reasoning, scientific method, phenomenological insight into essence, or some form of direct intuition.
That is, I address myself directly to the
dialectical part of the two Kantian Critiques: Dialectic of theoretical
reason and Dialectic of practical
reason.
This status would be scandalous if one had not previously established the status of practical
reason itself in its
dialectical part.
The Hegelian approach would say it is the necessary
dialectical development of
reason.
Andre has stated that all works of art must exist somewhere, and for this
reason all art is in a
dialectical relationship with the space that contains it.
In fact, a
dialectical approach allows us to harness those super-efficient motivated -
reasoning neurons to seek out the strongest arguments for and against any proposition.
It demands close attention to factual details that matter; a winnowing out of details that don't matter; a reliance on concrete facts coupled with a disavowal of breezy generalizations and characterizations; a building up of facts into step - by - step arguments from which conclusions naturally follow; the marshaling of
reasons that will earn the respect even of an opposing audience; a
dialectical approach in which countervailing facts and counterarguments are carefully disarmed; a defense not of the first positions you might take, but of the best ones; and, at least in your early development as a legal writer, a stripped - down style that contains not a whiff of ornate embellishment.