![]() To say that a proposal is supported by an authority is not to say that it is true, but to say that it deserves discussion. Authority is not invoked in order to close the discussion but rather to open it. It is remarkable to see that it is the plurality and competition between authorities - rather than the call to authority - which is placed at the core of intellectual debate. The authority entering the debate is clearly socially referenced as such. In other words, “if it were the first comer who emitted paradoxes, it would be absurd to pay attention to it” (Aristotle, Top., Brunschwig, I, 1, 100b20, p.17). They define a contrario what a thesis as “a supposition of some eminent philosopher that conflicts with the general opinion” the philosopher must be eminent, “for to take notice when any ordinary person expresses views contrary to men’s usual opinions would be silly” (Aristotle, Top., I, 11). We are far from the vision of the doxa as cliché or stereotype as “ready-to-think”, or, just as mechanically, “ready-to-denounce”.Įndoxa are opinions worthy of discussion. The Aristotelian continuum values different orders of endoxa. Now a dialectical proposition consists in asking something that is held by all men or by most men or by philosophers, i.e., either by all, or by most, or by the most notable of these. To be worthy of a dialectical debate, the proposition must be an endoxon, that is to say, it must be endorsed by some social or intellectual authority: Unlike the Proponent of a substantial proposition in an argumentative situation, the Respondent in the dialectical game does not have to build a positive proof of the proposition put forward, but must simply avoid being led into a self-contradiction. The terms Proponent and Opponent used to refer to the core partners of an argumentative situation, are borrowed from this dialectical theory. If the Questioner succeeds, then he or she will win the dialectical game if he or she fails, the Respondent will win. On the basis of these answers, the Questioner attempts to make the Respondent admit a statement which contradicts the original assertion. The Questioner must refute the proposition that the Respondent has chosen to support, by means of total questions ( yes or no questions). The Respondent first chooses to assert either P or not P. It is a bounded interaction governed by strict rules, proceeding by questions and answers, with a winner and a loser. The dialectical game is played by two partners, the Respondent and the Questioner (Brunschwig 1967, p. The strict deduction rules of the syllogism are replaced by argument schemes. The word endoxa translates as “probable premises” or as “accepted ideas”. ![]() Our treatise proposes to find a line of inquiry whereby we shall be able to reason from opinions that are generally accepted about every problem propounded to us, and also shall ourselves, when standing up to an argument, avoid saying anything that will obstruct us. While scientific syllogistic deduction proceeds from “true and primary” premises, dialectic uses generally accepted premises ( Top. ![]() 1.1 Dialectical reasoningĪs “mathematical science” and “rhetorical argument”, “dialectical reasoning” proceeds by syllogism and induction (Aristotle, Post. In this function of clarification of the first principles, it has been replaced by axiomatization. The ancient dialectical methodĪristotelian dialectic is a dialogical method used to solve questions of the form “ P or not P?”, such as “ is being rich a good thing or not?”, by eliminating one of the options, in a standardized question-answer interaction using dialectical syllogisms.ĭialectic is a philosophical instrument used in the a priori search for the definition of fundamental concepts. However, the historical notion of dialectic does refer to a two-partner dialogue. The condition is not on the number of participants, but on discourse circulation. Etymologically, a dialogue is not a two-person conversation (which could be referred to as a dilogue). ![]() The prefix dia- is different from the prefix di– meaning “two”. Dialectics and dialogue have the same Greek etymology dia- + legein, dia- “through”, legein “say”.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |