Whats the big deal with Dialectics.

[DesolationRow]

Hey everyone, my understanding of Dialectical Materialism is that everything is constantly contradicting itself, like in rugby, when your trying to score a try you have people blocking for the guy running with the ball, so even when your attacking your defending, and this is true for everything in life, but so what, what bearing does this have on the working class struggle, seems to me very unimportant.
Would appreciate any help and please dont take offense to me saying it sounds unimportant, maybe it is, im just looking for some help understanding.
: )

[ZeroNowhere]

Given that I do not have much time here, I'll just copy and paste something I had posted a while ago.

The materialism of philosophy "consists in nothing else than in recognizing that the finite has no veritable being," to paraphrase a famous dialectician, and veritable being belongs only to the infinite. However, he also argued that earlier philosophy was inconsistent in application of the idealist principle, as its method was materialist, based on the principles of non-contradiction and identity, labelled the 'intellect'. Therefore, they present the finite as “irreconcilable with the infinite,” saying that it, “cannot be united with it, that the finite is utterly opposed to the infinite.” This means that the finite “remains absolutely on its own side”, the possibility of it passing over into the ‘other’ is excluded. Since its non-being is understood here as a negation that stands in “abrupt contrast to its affirmative”, the finite is regarded as “imperishable and absolute.” Finitude is thus made eternal, and the infinite, which should have been the totality, is only one of the two, while the finite lives on. The infinite thus is “not the whole but only the one side; it has its limit in what stands over and against it; it is thus the finite infinite”, only one of two finites, rather than only the infinite existing. Therefore, “the finite is represented as independent and persisting on its own vis-à-vis the infinite, completely separated from the latter and delivered from annihilation.” Thus, the infinite manages to exist only as, “the negative [...] of determinateness in general, as the empty beyond.”

So instead, he gets rid of the principles of non-contradiction and identity, and says of finite things, "non-being constitutes their nature and being. Finite things are, [...] but the truth of their being is their end." He explains that, "The finite not only alters, like something in general, but it ceases to be; and its ceasing to be is not merely a possibility, so that it could be without ceasing to be," but rather, "The hour of their birth is the hour of their death." He says that the finite has as its essence what is other than it, the infinite. Therefore, it is not when it is the finite, and it is only when it 'is not', when it is 'the other'. He portrays this contradiction as causing it, it being its nature to do so rather than caused by external forces, to "negate its negation (ie. its actual finitude or illusory being) and to become infinite. Thus the infinite does not stand as something finished and complete superior to the finite, as if the finite had an enduring being apart from or subordinate to the infinite." As the finite has no being in and of itself, it becomes only the form of appearance, illusory being, of the infinite, through which it becomes flesh, so to speak, in it the absolute is reflected, it is a positive manifestation of the absolute.

Engels gave this example, "Motion itself is a contradiction: even simple mechanical change of place can only come about through a body at one and the same moment of time being both in one place and in another place, being in one and the same place and also not in it. And the continuous assertion and simultaneous solution of this contradiction is precisely what motion is." Hegel formulated it, "The ancient dialecticians must be granted the contradictions that they pointed out in motion; but it does not follow that therefore there is no motion, but on the contrary, that motion is existent contradiction itself." According to Engels, earlier philosophy could not grasp change due to its upholding of the principle of non-contradiction, and only "consider things as static and lifeless, each one by itself, alongside of and after each other," as dead being, rather than "things in their motion, their change, their life, their reciprocal influence on one another."

[DesolationRow]

sorry but thats a bit heavy for 2 oclock on a sunday, but thanks anyway.
Why do communists feel the need to confuse the masses lol
:D

[KC]

Edit

[Charles Xavier]

blank

[DesolationRow]

Practically dialectics basically tells you to look at everything as a process and not as an absolute. Instead of looking at "Canada is Capitalist" as an absolute you need to look at the processes unfolding in Canada to see which way things are heading, is the ruling class getting stronger and more united? What about the left and progressive forces? what processes have started and what will their impacts be and looking at the interchanging relations, of victories and defeats.

You will now be trolled by Rosa who won't make any sense and post 6 pages of nonsense.

cant wait : )