辯證法是甚麼?

2007-10-22 12:54 am
不要copy一大堆資料,

因為看過不知講甚麼才問的

有沒有人讀過哲學,用些簡單的例子講講

謝謝

回答 (3)

2007-10-22 3:10 am
✔ 最佳答案
辯證法起源于古希臘哲學綜合辯論雙方正反意見得出正確結論的方法, 原是指一種邏輯論證的辯論技巧,藉由論證過程以逐漸逼近真理。

後被黑格爾引伸成唯物辯證, 有所謂「正、反、合」三段式辯證法, 指出世界及任何物件都將變化而背離原來的形態, 正 ->反 ->合, 黑格爾認為人類的歷史、思想、社會是個不斷變化的過程,起先是所謂的「正」的狀態,但歷史必然會形成一個對立面,也就是「反」的狀態,「正」、「反」互相矛盾,產生對立和緊張,最後一種新的狀態出現,能調合二者的矛盾,即為「合」。然而此「合」又成為下一過程中的「正」,再次進入「正、反、合」的循環。如此循環不息,歷史於是不斷的前進。(例如文化大革命就是一個反階段, 推翻以前的制度, 文化大革命後, 社會步向另一個合的階段, 比以前行前了一步)

馬克思主義認為人類社會會由正 ->反 ->合過程,產生變化, 最終會步向共產社會。
2007-11-10 5:33 pm
黑格爾的辯証法是唯心的.
馬克思及恩格斯的辯証法才是唯物.
2007-10-22 2:46 pm
Sorry but for some reason, I can't type Chinese, but I'll try to make it clear in Eng...

Dialectics(辯證法) is one of the most important logical methods for philosophers, as well as others, to find true knowledge (testing if something's true).

When using dialectics, we try to examine if an argument is true by testing it in different perspectives and asking different questions. It might lead to contradiction and thus the argument is not valid.

This method appears at the very beginning of ancient time, and now there are many variations out there. one of the earliest is the Socratic Dialectics.

A famous example is when Socrates asked Euthyphro what is "piety" (to give definition for the term), he answered that it is "something loved by God". Then Socrates asked him again, whether Gods argue with each other, ("Gods" refers to Gods in Greek myths), and Euthyphro answered "yes".
Then Socrates reason that, followed by that, there's at least one thing that certain Gods love but others hate, and Euthyphro agreed again.
After that, Socrates concluded that, if Euthyphro's definition of "Piety" is true, there would be thing that is both loved and hated by Gods at the same time, which makes Euthyphro realized that his definition is logically invalid, (not true).

So basically, the very first form of Dialectics is to test an argument's validity by rational thinking/discussions then come up with other supporting rational arguments and put them together to see if they are logically valid (not contradict to each other, by Principle of non-contradictory*)And the variations we see now are also based on that.

*Principle of non-contradictory--logical rule that states:
1) A thing cannot contradict itself
2) A thing cannot both be and not be at the same time in the same perspective

Hope u can understand my poor English...
參考: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic, 0xford Dictionary of Philosophy, Dr. John Muenzberg and myself


收錄日期: 2021-04-29 19:21:33
原文連結 [永久失效]:
https://hk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071021000051KK03303

檢視 Wayback Machine 備份