Isn't DM demotivating? - Page 4

RebelDog · #61 13th February 2009, 01:46

Quote:

Moreover, Newton's theory does not imply that change is impossible, which dialectics does, as my posts in this and other threads show; for example, here:

Dialectics is the philosophy of change and how change is a constraint of all matter in the universe as always dictated by the physical laws of our universe. DM is an attempt to understand change, and a very logical one at that. Change cannot happen for no reason and contradictions are a logical espousal of why change happens. Please don't post links Rosa I cant be arsed clicking them, engage me, tell me if contradictions power any change whatsoever? If they dont what are contradictions? I ask with all respect and friendlieness. And give me a break, I'm on the nightrain here.

Rosa Lichtenstein · #62 13th February 2009, 04:11

RD:

Quote:

Dialectics is the philosophy of change and how change is a constraint of all matter in the universe as always dictated by the physical laws of our universe. DM is an attempt to understand change, and a very logical one at that. Change cannot happen for no reason and contradictions are a logical espousal of why change happens. Please don't post links Rosa I cant be arsed clicking them, engage me, tell me if contradictions power any change whatsoever? If they dont what are contradictions? I ask with all respect and friendlieness. And give me a break, I'm on the nightrain here.

Yes, we know what the brochure says, but when you try to work the details out, as I have done, this theory falls apart. Indeed if dialectics were true, change would be impossible.

And no, 'contradictions' cannot power change; energy does that.

Now, if you can't be 'arsed' to click on a link, then here is the short version:

According to the dialectical classics (see the first link below), things change because of their 'internal contradictions' and because of a struggle between 'dialectical opposites'. But, they also tell us that things change into those opposites.

But this is not possible; here is why, using a concrete example (taken from an earlier post):

Quote:

DM cannot even explain dead cats!

Consider cat C. According to the Dialectical Prophets, cat C can only change because of a struggle between its internal opposites, its internal contradictions. [Hegel and Lenin both affirmed that there is only one 'other', one 'dialectical opposite', for any object or process.]

Let us call the opposite of cat C, cat C*.

But they also tell us that cat C will change into that opposite; so the opposite it changes into must be cat C*.

But C changes into a dead cat, so that dead cat must be this opposite, it must be C*.

In other words, this live cat C must struggle with dead cat C*!

Have you ever seen a live cat struggle with its future dead self?

But if C is to struggle with C*, then C* must already exist.

But, if this dead cat C* already exists, then C cannot change into it! For C* already exists!

In that case, according to this wonderful 'theory', this amazing 'method', cat C cannot die!

Now, one might be tempted to argue that C changes into some other dead cat, say C**, but in that case, if the Dialectical Magi are to be believed, C** must already exist, otherwise it could not struggle with C! So, C cannot change into it either! In fact, in this case, there would now be two dead cats, not one!

Hence, we hit the same non-dialectical brick wall.

[The same argument applies to any of the intermediate stages in a cat's life -- for the general details, see the long argument in the second link below.]

And what is true of this moggie is true of all moggies. No cat can, or has ever died, according to the 'world-view' of the proletariat!

Is it any wonder that workers ignore us?

A longer, more detailed and general proof is given in the second link below.

Quotes from the DM-classics here:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.p...4&postcount=23

Argument to show this theory fails, here:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.p...5&postcount=24