Back to teaching Wednesday. We have a core group that has been with us for a while so I like to infuse a little extra information at times. Keep things fresher. I found something about dialectic thought but it is pretty dense. I am in need of thinning it out and writing a practice lesson….Yep. You got it. Thank you for ‘volunteering’ to be my guinea pigs! ::grin::
Dialectic thinking. Dialectics are not debate. While debate has as its goal victory for one party or another, the purpose of a dialectic discussion is to find the truth. Dialectics looks for this truth in the arguments of the people who are presenting differing viewpoints. The reason for this is twofold. First of all, whether we realize it or not, even the most adamantly held position contains elements of and is defined by the opposite concept. You cannot say the room is cold without considering the concept of warmth. Also, the conflict allows us to be exposed to and become aware of the opposite concept, therefore opening the door to change.
How do you like them apples?!?!
Since these are supposed to be AMD pages, let me try to think of an AMD example. How about the standard one that goes something like this: when you were first diagnosed you may have thought your life was over. What is the purpose of life if I cannot see it? Your spouse may have poo pooed your concerns. We will be fine. Not much is going to change.
Now you could have had a debate. I suspect feeling the way you may have felt then you would have had a hard time believing things might be alright. However, by arguing about what a life worth living might be, you compared what you thought you would have to your ideal and realized some things would not change. Chocolate ice cream is still delicious even if you cannot see it so well! Your spouse compared his concept of a life worth living to the life you would be living and also modified his view. No, you would not be able to jump in the car and go for that ice cream cone whenever you wanted. The truth was not black and white. It was somewhere in the middle.
I found a good quote. Mary Parker Follett, who apparently writes about management said “we should never let ourselves be bullied by either-or.” Using my ice cream metaphor, you chocolate lovers may be dreading a plain vanilla existence. Your spouse may think chocolate will always be available to you but the truth may be a large twist cone. Definitely not either-or.
Now, if we start to see other possibilities in life, we start to question our shoulds and our routines. We may really look at what we are doing and become mindful (there is that word again) of what we are doing and how we are doing it. Being aware of what we are doing gives us the option to change it. I want rainbow sprinkles on that twist cone! And that gives us the opportunity for spontaneity. Which is actually sort of a dialectic by the way.
So, there you go. Dialectic thinking redux. Make any sense?
Next: The Driver’s Seat
Home