Material dialectics is just a Marxist concept that basically means "a chain reaction of cause and effect."
If something is not dialectical, it means it's only thought one step ahead. Like playing a chess game without realizing what the next steps are guaranteed to be.
If you don't like that, you can actually make an argument.
Or you can pretend like people who put effort into understanding something are dumb, actually.
Material dialectics is just a Marxist concept that basically means “a chain reaction of cause and effect.”
That is not what material dialectics is. You can analytically treat "chain reactions of cause and effect" without any reference to the components of a dialcetical process, and I do this constantly in mathematical modelling.
If something is not dialectical, it means it’s only thought one step ahead. Like playing a chess game without realizing what the next steps are guaranteed to be.
No, that is not what "not dialectical" means. You're thinking "myopic". You can be dialectical and myopic as well as being non-dialectical and non-myopic.
put effort into understanding
As I say to my students, the effort is great, but it's only half the battle!
Dialectics is whatever you want it to be.
I aint one of them "Dialektiks" but 5 dollars is 5 dollars, ya feel me?
Can't argue with that.
Dunno why you'd tell us this but ok.
I'm dumb as hell, but that doesn't make your position any less incoherent.
I dumbed it down as much as I could dude, I dunno what to tell you.
I don't understand Einstein Field Equations. I don't pretend like they're dumb because I don't know how to do math in non Euclidean space.
I don't think you understand the position you're arguing for or the position you're arguing against. Or your arguments for, or your arguments against.
I think you've got an all-purpose vocabulary you can use and that's great.
:PIGPOOPBALLS:
Fuck now I'm mad.
Material dialectics is just a Marxist concept that basically means "a chain reaction of cause and effect."
If something is not dialectical, it means it's only thought one step ahead. Like playing a chess game without realizing what the next steps are guaranteed to be.
If you don't like that, you can actually make an argument.
Or you can pretend like people who put effort into understanding something are dumb, actually.
Your choice.
That is not what material dialectics is. You can analytically treat "chain reactions of cause and effect" without any reference to the components of a dialcetical process, and I do this constantly in mathematical modelling.
No, that is not what "not dialectical" means. You're thinking "myopic". You can be dialectical and myopic as well as being non-dialectical and non-myopic.
As I say to my students, the effort is great, but it's only half the battle!