With Polish sub-titles!!! -timandvic

The Hegelian Dialectic is a theoretical construct which assigns names to different stages in an evolving conception of, originally, ideas, and later, events. It is actually based off of earlier Greek ideas of dialectics, specifically from Parmenides. It postulates that every Thesis is followed by an Anti-Thesis, which takes some of the ideas of the Thesis and refutes them, and takes other propositions and elaborates on them. The Anti-Thesis is then met with a third proposition, the Synthesis, which combines the Thesis and Anti-Thesis into an altogether new postulation, which contains ideas from both, and which dissolves the tension between the original Thesis and it's Antithesis. This new Synthesis is the new paradigm, until another idea comes along, which turns the Synthesis into merely the Thesis for the next three-tiered stage of evolving ideas. Hegel believed that this process of Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis is an ever continuing series of philosophical confrontations which always approaches but never achieves what he called 'The Real', or a grand unified and perfected view of the world that perfectly mirrored reality. It was Marx and Engels who took the Hegelian Dialectic and applied it to the material world, saying that the dialectic was not just a historical process, but an economic one (as they believed economic factors were more important than many other over-emphasized factors which shape history). For this reason, Marx and Engels referred to Dialectical Materialism as the overarching or comprehensive view of history. This, of course, is classical continental idealism, a consequence of a particular reading of Kant. It is not, however, universally accepted that idealism is the most appropriate method of interpreting the world, as competing camps such as rationalism or empiricism have influenced the english speaking world, whilst idealism has lead to much folly and tangible suffering (Leninism, Maoism). If we understand the preceding, we understand the Hegelian Dialectic in a much more comprehensive fashion that those who bandy about the term to advance their particular ideological agenda (Alex Jones et al.)
- Chelvis

Understood. But I stand by my original diagnosis, Classic Hegelian Dialectic. I like the use of the word "bandy". So what then is "ideological agenda" of the Alex Jones set? Could this "agenda" not be considered a tiered "antithesis"? -timandvic