HEGELIAN DIALECTICS

Problem - Reaction - Solution

Dialectics, or a dialectic, refers to a form of logical argumentation involving the progression of two opposing views, and a related philosophical concept of ideological evolution. This process can also be called the dialectical method.

UNDERSTANDING HEGELIAN DIALECTICS

The left diagram shows the classic logic of A to B.
The second diagram shows Hegelian logic (dialectics),
a spiral that begins at A and radiates out to B, C, etc.

German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (often shortened to G.W.F. Hegel, or just Hegel) is one of the most influential philosophers to live in the past few centuries. His work has been central to the development of the works of Kierkegaard, Derrida, Foucault, Marx, Sartre, and others. His central contribution to philosophy is known as the Hegelian dialectic. Hegel details his proposed method of dialectics in his 1817 work Encyclopaedia of Philosophical Sciences, more often called Encyclopaedia Logic.

The simplest explanation of Hegel's dialectics is this: a thesis (an argument) is proposed, generating a counterargument, the antithesis. Much like in the scientific method, philosophers will need to take the merits of both the thesis and antithesis into account, creating a new thesis called the synthesis. The synthesis, as the new thesis, may generate a new counterargument/antithesis, and so on.

Continued Here

PROBLEM REACTION SOLUTION

Link

DAVID ICKE

"The reason we are so controlled is not that we don't have the power to decide our own destiny, it is that we give that power away every minute of our lives. When something happens that we don't like, we look for someone else to blame. When there is a problem in the world, we say "What are they going to do about it". At which point they, who have secretly created the problem in the first place, respond to this demand by introducing a 'solution'- more centralisation of power and erosion of freedom.

If you want to give more powers to the police, security agencies and military, and you want the public to demand you do it, then ensure there is more crime, violence and terrorism, and then it's a cinch to achieve your aims. Once the people are in fear of being burgled, mugged or bombed, they will demand that you take their freedom away to protect them from what they have been manipulated to fear. The Oklahoma bombing is a classic of this kind, as I detail in ..And The Truth Shall Set You Free. I call this technique problem-reaction-solution.

Create the problem, encourage the reaction "something must be done", and then offer the solution. It is summed up by the Freemason motto 'Ordo Ab Chao'-order out of chaos. Create the chaos and then offer the way to restore order. Your order. The masses are herded and directed by many and varios forms of emotional and mental control. It is the only way it coud be done."

- David Icke

ALBERT EINSTEIN

"With every action theres an equal opposite reaction. With every problem, there's a solution: just a matter of taking action."

- Albert Einstein

ERICH NEUMANN

"There is no religion and no philosophy that can give us a comprehensive answer to the whole of our problems, and the abandonment and isolation of the individual who is given no answer, or only inadequate answers, to his question lead to a situation in which more and more cheap, obvious solutions and answers are sought and provided.

As, everywhere and in all departments of life, there are contradictory schools and parties, and an equal number of contradictory answers, one of the most frequent reactions is that modern man ceases to ask questions and takes refuge in a conception that considers only the most obvious, superficial aspects, and becomes skeptical, nihilistic, and egocentric. Or, alternatively, he tries to solve all his problems by plunging headlong into a collective situation and a collective conviction, and seeks to redeem himself in this way."

- Erich Neumann, The Fear of the Feminine and Other Essays on Feminine Psychology

BRAD THOR

"Hegelian dialectic—a psychological tool used to manipulate the masses. In this case, you create a problem, wait for the reaction, and then offer the solution. What people historically fail to realize, though, is that those offering the solution are the same people who caused the problem in the first place. They also fail to realize that no matter what the solution is, it always ends up providing its creators with more power.?

- Brad Thor, Black List

MURRAY N. ROTHBARD

"If consumer demand should increase for the goods or services of any private business, the private firm is delighted; it woos and welcomes the new business and expands its operations eagerly to fill the new orders.

Government, in contrast, generally meets this situation by sourly urging or even ordering consumers to "buy" less, and allows shortages to develop, along with deterioration in the quality of its service. Thus, the increased consumer use of government streets in the cities is met by aggravated traffic congestion and by continuing denunciations and threats against people who drive their own cars.

The New York City administration, for example, is continually threatening to outlaw the use of private cars in Manhattan, where congestion has been most troublesome. It is only government, of course, that would ever think of bludgeoning consumers in this way; it is only government that has the audacity to "solve" traffic congestion by forcing private cars (or trucks or taxis or whatever) off the road. According to this principle, of course, the "ideal" solution to traffic congestion is simply to outlaw all vehicles! But this sort of attitude toward the consumer is not confined to traffic on the streets.

New York City, for example, has suffered periodically from a water "shortage." Here is a situation where, for many years, the city government has had a compulsory monopoly of the supply of water to its citizens. Failing to supply enough water, and failing to price that water in such a way as to clear the market, to equate supply and demand (which private enterprise does automatically), New York's response to water shortages has always been to blame not itself, but the consumer, whose sin has been to use "too much" water. The city administration could only react by outlawing the sprinkling of lawns, restricting use of water, and demanding that people drink less water. In this way, government transfers its own failings to the scapegoat user, who is threatened and bludgeoned instead of being served well and efficiently.

There has been similar response by government to the ever-accelerating crime problem in New York City. Instead of providing efficient police protection, the city's reaction has been to force the innocent citizen to stay out of crime-prone areas. Thus, after Central Park in Manhattan became a notorious center for muggings and other crime in the night hours, New York City's "solution" to the problem was to impose a curfew, banning use of the park in those hours. In short, if an innocent citizen wants to stay in Central Park at night, it is he who is arrested for disobeying the curfew; it is, of course, easier to arrest him than to rid the park of crime.

In short, while the long-held motto of private enterprise is that "the customer is always right," the implicit maxim of government operation is that the customer is always to be blamed."

- Murray N. Rothbard, For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto

MATTIAS DESMET

"Almost a year after the start of the corona crisis, how is the mental health of the population?

MD: For the time being, there are few figures that show the evolution of possible indicators such as the intake of antidepressants and anxiolytics or the number of suicides. But it is especially important to place mental well-being in the corona crisis in its historical continuity. Mental health had been declining for decades.

There has long been a steady increase in the number of depression and anxiety problems and the number of suicides. And in recent years there has been an enormous growth in absenteeism due to psychological suffering and burnouts. The year before the corona outbreak, you could feel this malaise growing exponentially.

This gave the impression that society was heading for a tipping point where a psychological 'reorganization'of the social system was imperative. This is happening with corona. Initially, we noticed people with little knowledge of the virus conjure up terrible fears, and a real social panic reaction became manifested. This happens especially if there is already a strong latent fear in a person or population.

The psychological dimensions of the current corona crisis are seriously underestimated. A crisis acts as a trauma that takes away an individual's historical sense. The trauma is seen as an isolated event in itself, when in fact it is part of a continuous process.

For example, we easily overlook the fact that a significant portion of the population was strangely relieved during the initial lockdown, feeling liberated from stress and anxiety. I regularly heard people say: "Yes these measures are heavy-handed, but at least I can relax a bit." Because the grind of daily life stopped, a calm settled over society. The lockdown often freed people from a psychological rut. This created unconscious support for the lockdown. If the population had not already been exhausted by their life, and especially their jobs, there would never have been support for the lockdown.

At least not as a response to a pandemic that is not too bad compared to the major pandemics of the past. You noticed something similar when the first lockdown came to an end. You then regularly heard statements such as "We are not going to start living again like we used to, get stuck in traffic again" and so on. People did not want to go back to the pre-corona normal. If we do not take into account the population's dissatisfaction with its existence, we will not understand this crisis and we will not be able to resolve it.

By the way, I now have the impression that the new normal has become a rut again, and I would not be surprised if mental health really starts to deteriorate in the near future. Perhaps especially if it turns out that the vaccine does not provide the magical solution that is expected from it."

- Mattias Desmet

CHRIS VOSS

"Try to force your opponent to admit that you are right. Aggressive confrontation is the enemy of constructive negotiation.

Avoid questions that can be answered with "Yes" or tiny pieces of information. These require little thought and inspire the human need for reciprocity; you will be expected to give something back.

Ask calibrated questions that start with the words "How" or "What." By implicitly asking the other party for help, these questions will give your counterpart an illusion of control and will inspire them to speak at length, revealing important information.

Don't ask questions that start with "Why" unless you want your counterpart to defend a goal that serves you. "Why" is always an accusation, in any language.

Calibrate your questions to point your counterpart toward solving your problem. This will encourage them to expend their energy on devising a solution.

Bite your tongue. When you're attacked in a negotiation, pause and avoid angry emotional reactions. Instead, ask your counterpart a calibrated question.

There is always a team on the other side. If you are not influencing those behind the table, you are vulnerable."

- Chris Voss, Never Split the Difference: Negotiating as if Your Life Depended on It

BRAD THOR

"We've been warned." "Exactly. It's a clever form of the Hegelian dialectic—a psychological tool used to manipulate the masses. In this case, you create a problem, wait for the reaction, and then offer the solution. What people historically fail to realize, though, is that those offering the solution are the same people who caused the problem in the first place. They also fail to realize that no matter what the solution is, it always ends up providing its creators with more power."

- Brad Thor, Black List

MELODY BEATTIE

"Detaching with Love: October 20 Sometimes people we love do things we don't like or approve of. We react. They react. Before long, we're all reacting to each other, and the problem escalates. When do we detach? When we're hooked into a reaction of anger, fear, guilt, or shame. When we get hooked into a power play—an attempt to control or force others to do something they don't want to do. When the way we're reacting isn't helping the other person or solving the problem. When the way we're reacting is hurting us. Often, it's time to detach when detachment appears to be the least likely, or possible, thing to do.

The first step toward detachment is understanding that reacting and controlling don't help. The next step is getting peaceful—getting centered and restoring our balance. Take a walk. Leave the room. Go to a meeting. Take a long, hot bath. Call a friend. Call on God. Breathe deeply. Find peace. From that place of peace and centering will emerge an answer, a solution. Today, I will surrender and trust that the answer is near."

- Melody Beattie, The Language of Letting Go: Daily Meditations on Codependency

ELEANOR CATTON

"Speaking of gendered differences in reaction and action—you've talked of a certain "bullying reception" to your book here in New Zealand by a certain set of older male critics. The omniscient narrator, the idea that you "had to be everywhere," seems to have affronted some male readers, as has the length of the book. Have you experienced this reaction in the UK, too, or in Canada?

Has it been a peculiarly New Zealand response, perhaps because of the necessarily small pool of literary competition here? This is a point that has been perhaps overstated. There's been a lot written about what I said, and in fact the way I think and feel about the reviewing culture we have in New Zealand has changed a lot through reading the responses and objections of others.

Initially I used the word "bullying" only to remark that, as we all learn at school, more often than not someone's objections are more to do with their own shortcomings or failures than with yours, and that's something that you have to remember when you're seeing your artistic efforts devalued or dismissed in print. I don't feel bullied when I receive a negative review, but I do think that some of the early reviewers refused to engage with the book on its own terms, and that refusal seemed to me to have a lot to do with my gender and my age.

To even things out, I called attention to the gender and age of those reviewers, which at the time seemed only fair. I feel that it's very important to say that sexism is a hegemonic problem, written in to all kinds of cultural attitudes that are held by men and women alike. As a culture we are much more comfortable with the idea of the male thinker than the female thinker, simply because there are so many more examples, throughout history, of male thinkers; as an image and as an idea, the male thinker is familiar to us, and acts in most cases as a default. Consequently female thinkers are often unacknowledged and discouraged, sometimes tacitly, sometimes explicitly, sometimes by men, and sometimes by women.

I am lucky, following the Man Booker announcement, that my work is now being read very seriously indeed; but that is a privilege conferred for the most part by the status of the prize, and I know that I am the exception rather than the rule. I'd like to see a paradigm shift, and I'm confident that one is on the way, but the first thing that needs to happen is a collective acknowledgment that reviewing culture is gendered-that everything is gendered-and that until each of us makes a conscious effort to address inequality, we will each remain a part of the problem, rather than a part of the solution. Protesting the fact of inequality is like protesting global warming or evolution: it's a conservative blindness, born out of cowardice and hostility."

- Eleanor Catton, The Luminaries

MARIE RUTKOSKI

"He ought to be up there, guarding the pass, or at least striving in some way to keep his country. His. The thought never failed to thrill him. It was worth death. Worth almost anything to become again the person he had been before the Herran War. Yet here he was, gambling the frail odds of success.

Looking for a plant.

He imagined Cheat's reaction if he could see him now, scouring the ground for a wrinkle of faded green. There would be mockery, which Arin could shrug off, and rage, which Arin could withstand--even understand. But he couldn't bear what he saw in his mind.

Cheat's eyes cutting to Kestrel. Targeting her, stoking his hatred with one more reason.

And the more Arin tried to shield her, the more Cheat's dislike grew.

Arin's hands clenched in the cold. He blew on them, tucked his fingers under his arms, and began to walk.

He should let her go. Let her slip into the countryside, to the isolated farmlands that had no idea of the revolution.

If so, what then? Kestrel would alert her father. She'd find a way. Then the full force of the empire's military would fall on the peninsula, when Arin doubted that the Herrani could deal even with the battalion that would come through the pass in less than two days.

If he let Kestrel go, it was the same as murdering his people.

Arin nudged a rock with his boot and wanted to kick it.

He didn't. He walked.

Thoughts chipped at his sanity, proposing solutions only to reveal problems, taunting him with the certainty that he would lose everything he sought to keep.

Until he found it.

Arin found the herb threading up through a patch of dirt. It was a pitiful amount, and withered, but he tore it from the ground with a fierce hope."

- Marie Rutkoski, The Winner's Curse

DAVID ICKE

"When there is a problem in the world, we say "What are they going to do about it". At which point they, who have secretly created the problem in the first place, respond to this demand by introducing a 'solution'- more centralisation of power and erosion of freedom. If you want to give more powers to the police, security agencies and military, and you want the public to demand you do it, then ensure there is more crime, violence and terrorism, and then it's a cinch to achieve your aims.

Once the people are in fear of being burgled, mugged or bombed, they will demand that you take their freedom away to protect them from what they have been manipulated to fear….Create the problem, encourage the reaction "something must be done", and then offer the solution. It is summed up by the Freemason motto 'Ordo Ab Chao'-order out of chaos. Create the chaos and then offer the way to restore order. Your order. The masses are herded and directed by many and various forms of emotional and mental control."

- David Icke

ISRAELMORE AYIVOR

"Your potentials contain local elements that can react with your passion to produce global compounds for the solution of the world's problems. Go and do it."

- Israelmore Ayivor, Shaping the dream

MELODY BEATTIE

"Letting Go of the Need to Control: April 27 The rewards from detachment are great: serenity; a deep sense of peace; the ability to give and receive love in self-enhancing, energizing ways; and the freedom to find real solutions to our problems.

Codependent No More Letting go of our need to control can set us and others free. It can set our Higher Power free to send the best to us. If we weren't trying to control someone or something, what would we be doing differently? What would we do that we're not letting ourselves do now?

Where would we go? What would we say? What decisions would we make? What would we ask for? What boundaries would be set? When would we say no or yes? If we weren't trying to control whether a person liked us or his or her reaction to us, what would we do differently? If we weren't trying to control the course of a relationship, what would we do differently? If we weren't trying to control another person's behavior, how would we think, feel, speak, and behave differently than we do now? What haven't we been letting ourselves do while hoping that self-denial would influence a particular situation or person? Are there some things we've been doing that we'd stop? How would we treat ourselves differently? Would we let ourselves enjoy life more and feel better right now? Would we stop feeling so bad? Would we treat ourselves better? If we weren't trying to control, what would we do differently? Make a list, then do it."

- Melody Beattie, The Language of Letting Go: Daily Meditations on Codependency

JIM MARRS

"Hegelian dialectic, or problem, reaction, solution. This method basically involves fabricating or intensify a problem, offering a draconian solution, then settling for a "compromise" that nevertheless furthers the intended goal."

- Jim Marrs, Our Occulted History: Do the Global Elite Conceal Ancient Aliens?

SUSAN CAIN

"Joe Marino, president of Rite-Solutions, and Jim Lavoie, CEO of the company, created this system as a reaction to problems they'd experienced elsewhere. "In my old company," Lavoie told Berns, "if you had a great idea, we would tell you, ‘OK, we'll make an appointment for you to address the murder board'" -a group of people charged with vetting new ideas.

Marino described what happened next: Some technical guy comes in with a good idea. Of course questions are asked of that person that they don't know. Like, "How big's the market? What's your marketing approach? What's your business plan for this? What's the product going to cost?" It's embarrassing. Most people can't answer those kinds of questions. The people who made it through these boards were not the people with the best ideas. They were the best presenters."

- Susan Cain, Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking

JONATHAN HAIDT

"To Greg, who had suffered from bouts of depression throughout his life, this seemed like a terrible approach. In seeking treatment for his depression, he along with millions of others around the world had found that cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) was the most effective solution. CBT teaches you to notice when you are engaging in various "cognitive distortions," such as "catastrophizing" (If I fail this quiz, I'll fail the class and be kicked out of school, and then I'll never get a job . . .) and "negative filtering" (only paying attention to negative feedback instead of noticing praise as well).

These distorted and irrational thought patterns are hallmarks of depression and anxiety disorders. We are not saying that students are never in real physical danger, or that their claims about injustice are usually cognitive distortions. We are saying that even when students are reacting to real problems, they are more likely than previous generations to engage in thought patterns that make those problems seem more threatening, which makes them harder to solve.

An important discovery by early CBT researchers was that if people learn to stop thinking this way, their depression and anxiety usually subside. For this reason, Greg was troubled when he noticed that some students' reactions to speech on college campuses exhibited exactly the same distortions that he had learned to rebut in his own therapy. Where had students learned these bad mental habits? Wouldn't these cognitive distortions make students more anxious and depressed?"

- Jonathan Haidt, The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting up a Generation for Failure

RICK RUBIN

"On a daily basis. To create is to bring something into existence that wasn't there before. It could be a conversation, the solution to a problem, a note to a friend, the rearrangement of furniture in a room, a new route home to avoid a traffic jam. What you make doesn't have to be witnessed, recorded, sold, or encased in glass for it to be a work of art.

Through the ordinary state of being, we're already creators in the most profound way, creating our experience of reality and composing the world we perceive. In each moment, we are immersed in a field of undifferentiated matter from which our senses gather bits of information.

The outside universe we perceive doesn't exist as such. Through a series of electrical and chemical reactions, we generate a reality internally. We create forests and oceans, warmth and cold. We read words, hear voices, and form interpretations. Then, in an instant, we produce a response. All of this in a world of our own creation."

- Rick Rubin, The Creative Act: A Way of Being

SHAUN USHER

"Significant progress in the solutions of technical problems is frequently made not by a direct approach, but by first setting a goal of high challenge which offers a strong motivation for innovative work, which fires the imagination and spurs men to expend their best efforts, and which acts as a catalyst by including chains of other reactions."

- Shaun Usher, Letters of Note: Correspondence Deserving of a Wider Audience

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL "The Wall Street Journal" - Added on Tuesday, May 5, 2015 5:10:24 PM

OPINION Baltimore Is Not About Race Government-induced dependency is the problem and it's one with a long history.

By William McGurn

For those who see the rioting in Baltimore as primarily about race, two broad reactions dominate. One group sees rampaging young men fouling their own neighborhoods and concludes nothing can be done because the social pathologies are so overwhelming. In some cities, this view manifests itself in the unspoken but cynical policing that effectively cedes whole neighborhoods to the thugs. The other group tut-tuts about root causes. Take your pick: inequality, poverty, injustice.

Or, as President Obama intimated in an ugly aside on the rioting, a Republican Congress that will never agree to the "massive investments" (in other words, billions more in federal spending) required "if we are serious about solving this problem." There is another view. In this view, the disaster of inner cities isn't primarily about race at all. It's about the consequences of 50 years of progressive misrule which on race has proved an equal-opportunity failure. Baltimore is but the latest liberal-blue city where government has failed to do the one thing it ought i.e., put the cops on the side of the vulnerable and law-abiding while pursuing "solutions" that in practice enfeeble families and social institutions and local economies.

These supposed solutions do this by substituting federal transfers for fathers and families. They do it by favoring community organizing and government projects over private investment. And they do it by propping up failing public-school systems that operate as jobs programs for the teachers unions instead of centers of learning. If our inner-city African-American communities suffer disproportionately from crippling social pathologies that make upward mobility difficult and they do it is in large part because they have disproportionately been on the receiving end of this five-decade-long progressive experiment in government beneficence. How do we know? Because when we look at a slice of white America that was showered with the same Great Society good intentions.

Appalachia - we find the same dysfunctions: greater dependency, more single-parent families and the absence of the good, private-sector jobs that only a growing economy can create. Remember, in the mid-1960s when President Johnson put a face on America's "war on poverty," he didn't do it from an urban ghetto.

He did it from the front porch of a shack in eastern Kentucky's Martin County, where a white family of 10 eked out a subsistence living on an income of $400 a year. In many ways, rural Martin County and urban Baltimore could not be more different. Martin County is 92% white while Baltimore is two-thirds black. Each has seen important sources of good-paying jobs dry up.

Martin County in coal mining, Baltimore in manufacturing. In the last presidential election, Martin Country voted 6 to 1 for Mitt Romney while Baltimore went 9 to 1 for Barack Obama. Yet the Great Society's legacy has been depressingly similar. In a remarkable dispatch two years ago, the Lexington Herald-Leader's John Cheves noted that the war on poverty sent $2.1 billion to Martin County alone (pop. 12,537) through programs including "welfare, food stamps, jobless benefits, disability compensation, school subsidies, affordable housing, worker training, economic development incentives, Head Start for poor children and expanded Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid."

The result? "The problem facing Appalachia today isn't Third World poverty," writes Mr. Cheves. "It's dependence on government assistance." Just one example: When Congress imposed work requirements and lifetime caps for welfare during the Clinton administration, claims of disability jumped. Mr. Cheves quotes"

Anonymous

Link