I initially became familiar with this program through the movie Half Nelson. For those who haven't seen the movie, the main character is a teacher who teaches a social studies class through dialectics. He teaches junior high kids, which is what I thought strange. I don't even fully understand dialectics, what on earth is he doing teaching inner-city junior high kids dialectics. Through further research I discovered the movie is actually using a program called Dialectics for Kids.

The program has a website which advocates the teaching of dialectics through pre-school on up. This might be a good site for people with no base in philosophy to begin to comprehend dialectics.

Dan Dunne (Ryan Gosling) teaches each of Engel's three laws of dialectics in the class. He even numbers them on the blackboard:
1- Opposites,
2 - Turning points,
3 - He doesn't name the third law of dialectics on the board, but he describes it in class, saying "change moves in spirals, not circles"

Although I think a lot of it may be a bit oversimplified, I find most of it easy to understand and well thought out.

http://www.dialectics4kids.com/

FOB, this is one of the worst sites I have ever seen on dialectics (and that is saying something!).

I e-mailed its owner to tell him all his ideas had been trashed at my site.

Why you are recommending it beats me.

Thanks FoB

This site has actually been one of the recommended sites for dialectics in the RL dictionary for quite some time.

RevLeft dictionary

This is the Revleft info on dialectics.
Yeah, Rosa I don't see your web site on the list for understanding dialectics or, I guess, negating dialectics.

PP, yes I see you are right.

Must fix that!!! :angry:

Thanks for the tip-off!

I love it!

Cool site. Very sweet.


http://www.dialectics4kids.com/

The last two are actually pretty good for displaying the basis of dialectics.

I disagree; it is based on entirely discredited philosophy.

None of the 'logical' arguments work, and the facts it quotes do not support dialectical materialism.

It is quite the worst site I have seen on this bogus theory.

More details here:

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rosa.l/Why%20...Oppose%20DM.htm

Can we not turn this into another anti-dialectics debate? It's been done and gone round in cirlces a million times. If you're not going to debate weather this is useful in relation to learning about dialectics can we have the discussion elsewhere?

Merged.

Is it safe to do away with dialectics if Marx was a dialectician? His earlier writings prove this, and it is a crucial part of his later writings, mainly Capital.

He uses the Hegelian dialectic in a real, concrete manner than a mystical one no?

Yes, unless you're some dogmatic wankbag that takes Marx's writings to be holy writ and the man himself to be infallible.

Not at all; I am very vague as to what dialectics are.

I'll take a peek at Rosa's Essays.

I wouldn't suggest reading Rosa's essays unless you are proficient in philosophy and/or dialectics. I don't even understand them. Someone should make an antidialectics4kids.com. Not that I'm necessarily anti-dialectics, but I think people should look at both sides.

True dat.

But its so abstract and confusing that I just feel like not reading it at all.

BB:

No chance!

These mystics have got away with this boll*cks for far too long.

HastaV:

Except, Marx himself says that in Capital he merely "coquetted" with Hegelian jargon, and even then only in a few places (especially in chapter one).

That is the extent of the 'rational' kernel: a few bits of jargon.

So, whatever Marx did in his earlier work, by the time he came to write Capital, he had come to see things the way I do

So, he agreed with me; only I go further.

FOB:

Done it, here:

http://anonym.to/?http://homepage.ntlworld...Oppose%20DM.htm

If that is too difficult, let me know, and I will make it simpler!