What is a dialectic approach?
verb) A method of argument or exposition that systematically weighs contradictory facts or ideas with a view to the resolution of their real or apparent contradictions. The contradiction between two conflicting forces viewed as the determining factor in their continuing interaction.
What is dialectic thinking?
Dialectical thinking refers to the ability to view issues from multiple perspectives and to arrive at the most economical and reasonable reconciliation of seemingly contradictory information and postures.
How is dialectic method used in philosophizing?
“Dialectics” is a term used to describe a method of philosophical argument that involves some sort of contradictory process between opposing sides.
What is an example of dialectical thinking?
Some other examples of dialectical statements are: “I feel happy and I feel sad”; “I want to be loud and you need me to be quiet”; “Things are very different now from a year ago and every day feels the same”; “I feel too tired to work and I can do my work anyway”; “I love you and I hate you”.
What are the advantages of a dialectical approach?
A dialectical approach to studying intercultural communication is useful because it allows us to think about culture and identity in complex ways, avoiding dichotomies and acknowledging the tensions that must be negotiated.
What are the main characteristics of dialectical method of teaching?
The Socratic method, also known as method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presuppositions.
What is the opposite of dialectic?
▲ Opposite of relating to dialectic or dialectics. illogical. irrational. Adjective.
What is dialectic in psychology?
Broadly speaking, a dialectic is a tension between two contradictory viewpoints, where a greater truth emerges from their interplay. Socratic dialog, in which philosophers mutually benefit by finding defects in each other’s arguments, is a classic example.