Go Back   Flash Flash Revolution: Community Forums > General Discussion > Critical Thinking
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-17-2006, 11:01 AM   #1
coberst
FFR Player
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 256
Default Reaching a synthesis

Reaching a synthesis

Deductive and inductive reasoning are the two corner stones of a rational process whereby the individual can ascertain and/or develop rational conclusions about complex questions. When complex questions overflow the narrow boundaries of the natural sciences another form of reasoning is called for.

Dialectical reasoning forms the only process available for examining complex problems associated with multiple agents attempting to develop communicative action plans. Our newspapers are constantly filled with discourse about such problems; examples are abortion, stem cell research, Iraq war, Iran’s nuclear ambitions, America’s polarized electorate, etc. When many agents must come together to seek a majority judgment for the determination of an acceptable goal then dialectical reasoning is called for.


Dialogue is a technique for mutual consideration of such problems wherein solutions grow in a dialectical manner. Through dialogue each individual brings his/her point of view to the fore by proposing solutions constructed around their specific view. All participants in the dialogue come at the solution from the logic of their views. The solution builds dialectically i.e. a thesis is developed and from this thesis and a contrasting antithesis is constructed a synthesis that takes into consideration both proposals. From this a new synthesis, a new thesis is developed.


When we are dealing with problems well circumscribed by algorithms the personal biases of the subject are of small concern. In problems in which there are agents with varied concerns and varied world views, without the advantage of paradigms and algorithms, the biases of the problem solvers become a serious source of error. One important task of dialogue is to illuminate these prejudices which may be quite subtle and often out of consciousness of the participant holding them.

When we engage in a dialogue what happens? The first thing we find is that dialogue is unlike anything in which we have previously been involved. Group discussions generally digress quickly into verbal food fights and nothing positive is accomplished. Discussions become venues for shouting at one another. The most important thing discovered--provided you wished to advance your thinking so as to develop a means for solving intractable problems--is that skills and attitudes not presently possessed must be developed.
coberst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2006, 10:04 PM   #2
Cavernio
sunshine and rainbows
FFR Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Age: 38
Posts: 1,987
Default Re: Reaching a synthesis

These skills you're talking about involve detaching yourself from the topic I think. This helps to keep things at debate instead of argument. Also, skills such as paying attention to the other person is involved. But not just reading and responding to what has been said. You have to pay attention to the unspoken dialogue as often as not. And that's the only way you're ever going to get yourself put into someone else's shoes. And only if you can somehow put yourself in the place of someone else in some way can you begin to understand what is needed to be done to influence the way they perceive something. Not only does that succeed in your success of reaching the other person, it also allows you to see their point of view, which, if you're really doing this process properly, will alter your opinion about something if the point of view the other person has is even marginally logical. If you don't understand what someone else is saying enough to understand their point of view, chances are the other person should try harder to describe it, and instead of blowing it off as stupid/ignorant/immoral, you should ask them to clarify, or mull it over for a little.
Cavernio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2006, 06:07 AM   #3
coberst
FFR Player
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 256
Default Re: Reaching a synthesis

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavernio
These skills you're talking about involve detaching yourself from the topic I think. This helps to keep things at debate instead of argument. Also, skills such as paying attention to the other person is involved. But not just reading and responding to what has been said. You have to pay attention to the unspoken dialogue as often as not. And that's the only way you're ever going to get yourself put into someone else's shoes. And only if you can somehow put yourself in the place of someone else in some way can you begin to understand what is needed to be done to influence the way they perceive something. Not only does that succeed in your success of reaching the other person, it also allows you to see their point of view, which, if you're really doing this process properly, will alter your opinion about something if the point of view the other person has is even marginally logical. If you don't understand what someone else is saying enough to understand their point of view, chances are the other person should try harder to describe it, and instead of blowing it off as stupid/ignorant/immoral, you should ask them to clarify, or mull it over for a little.
Do you think that it would be possible to develop a format on the Internet to facilitate a dialogue/dialectic exchange? It seems to me that such a forum is vital to our abiity to discuss and reach a reasoned consensus on important matters regarding human interaction.
coberst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2006, 08:05 PM   #4
Cavernio
sunshine and rainbows
FFR Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Age: 38
Posts: 1,987
Default Re: Reaching a synthesis

Umm, I think the internet's forums, blogs, etc, are already developed and that indeed, such exchanges already take place. It just depends where you go to discuss I don't think a strict 'format' would be a good idea to develop anything like this though. Sure, you could create a blog where you specify rules and then have moderators throw away anything which isn't in line with them, but that already happens. Anything which is too strict however, no one will go to if they feel it's impeding free speech or something.

I don't know why you're asking me this. Also, I'm not sure even with such ordered dialogue could one come up with a consensus on things, and also, it would be a freaky, unemotional world if everyone somehow managed to distance themselves from discussion about moral issues. If not for emotions, I don't think there'd even be morality.
Cavernio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2006, 08:19 PM   #5
Kilgamayan
Super Scooter Happy
FFR Simfile Author
 
Kilgamayan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Location, Location.
Age: 36
Posts: 6,584
Send a message via AIM to Kilgamayan
Default Re: Reaching a synthesis

You mention the issue of abortion. What do you propose is the objective, unbiased solution?
__________________
I watched clouds awobbly from the floor o' that kayak. Souls cross ages like clouds cross skies, an' tho' a cloud's shape nor hue nor size don't stay the same, it's still a cloud an' so is a soul. Who can say where the cloud's blowed from or who the soul'll be 'morrow? Only Sonmi the east an' the west an' the compass an' the atlas, yay, only the atlas o' clouds.
Kilgamayan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2006, 08:46 PM   #6
T0rajir0u
FFR Player
FFR Simfile Author
 
T0rajir0u's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: awsome
Posts: 2,946
Default Re: Reaching a synthesis

Abortion is one of those issues where it's really easy to see that the real argument goes deeper than the issue - it's about why human lives have value (we can use the issues raised to discuss why human lives have more value than animal lives, and so forth). The way you answer that question dictates the degree to which you treat embryos at various stages of their development as fully human, and so the degree to which you think abortion is a monstrosity.

The "objective" answer to why human lives have value is pretty straightforward - a human life has value if it advances the cause of the human race, and in many situations an abortion would only terminate a human life that would grow up in horrible conditions (a destitute, young, and unprepared single mother in a poverty-stricken neighborhood, for example, a hapless rape victim) and not contribute much to society, so their lives are, in some sense, worth "less." This answer is pretty unsatisfying to people who take a more humanistic approach to morality, though.
__________________
hehe
T0rajir0u is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright FlashFlashRevolution