Negative Dialectics of Adorno

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/adorno/1966/negative-dialectics/index.htm

Prologue
Introduction
Part I: Relationship to Ontology
Part II. Negative Dialectics: Concept and Categories
Part III. Models. Freedom: Metacritique of Practical Reason
Part III. Models. World-spirit and Natural History. Excursus on Hegel
Part III. Models. Meditations on Metaphysics
Endnotes

Dialectics-Polialectics Interferences

A category may be virtual or without virtual (A or A’) in Aristo’s analytical dialectics. Virtue is without virtue (A = A’) in Lao Tzu’s synthetic dialectics.

Decadance is a contingency too, as much as synthesis in triadic dialectics of Hegel (as taken from Kant). Anti-thesisses contradict, conflict, and synthesized in Marx’s dialectical materialism.

Till here all have been positive dialectics.

Contradictions and conflicts are weighed without mixed, one side of contradiction is carried through most extreme case without help of other side in Adorno’s negative dialectics.

Till here all have been straight dialectics.

Anti-thesisses don’t close to each other, remains far or grows distant in counter-dialectics. This a valid situation, not coherent one. It is observed that all deviants exhibit enmity and attack to each other in polycultural societies, like in Turkey in Republic Period.

Till here all have been dialectics.

There are 3 couples of thesis/anti-thesis in Ursula K. Le Guin’s Dispossessed. They contradict and conflict, but not synthesized. Fourth category enters into the argumentation (and end of the story remains fuzzy). She doesn’t call so, but we can call it trialectics.

If there is a tao from 2 to 3, there may be from 3 to 4 and/or to the infinity. We may call polialectics after third road. We may define ‘n’ times of dualities, i.e. dialectics in this situation. Contradictions of a category with itself is the problem of identity principle. Nobody from Aristo to Adorno argues identity principle. It may be argued too but in another essay.

Trialectics of Dispossessed

Possessed is a novel of Dostoyevsky. Ursula K. La Guin took the name as Dispossessed in her novel.

There are 3 dialectics in the novel:

One: Between Anarres and Urras.

Two: Between A-Io and Thu.

Three: Amongst Benbili and A-Io plus Thu.

This goes to quadralectics.

And then to polialectics.

This is the mother planet Earth and Hains in her novel.

It is important that 'always coming home' closes the way to polialectics.

Triadics

Hegel took the triadics from Kant. Marx took the tri-dialectics from Hegel. He said that he made up the downside, but it may be vice versa.

Hegel also described decadance as opposite of synthesis. Marx had a teleology for revolution and didn’t describe it.

So even if there was a way to polialectics, it was closed and wasn’t used. But if a tao is not infinite, it is not tao.

Trialectics

A trialectics was created by Oscar Ichazo.

His argumentatiton is:

1. THERE IS A MUTATION FROM ONE MATERIAL MANIFESTATION POINT TO ANOTHER MATERIAL MANIFESTATION POINT (MMP)

a) The mutation is completed when inner equilibrium has been achieved.
b) MMP are neutral points of energy retention.
c) The energy moves in a universe with preestablished laws, preestablished MMP or within preestablished models.

2. INSIDE OF EVERYTHING THERE IS THE SEED OF ITS APPARENT OPPOSITE. THE EXUILIBRUIM BETWEEN THE TWO OPPOSITIONS DEPENDS ON THE BALANCED CIRCULATION ENERGY.

a) From the point of view of nature, opposites do not exist.
b) From the cosmic point of view, there are no random accidents, but process of circulation.
c) In nature there are no accidents.

3. THE PERPETUAL MOTION OF ALL CREATION IS DUE TO THE INTERCHANGE OF ENERGY BETWEEN MMP'S AND THERE IS, THEREFORE, AN INHERENT ATTRACTION TO EITHER A HIGHER OR LOWER MMP.

a) Higher MMP's are conformed by a smaller number of factors and elements.
b) Higher MMP's are responsive to the attraction of higher or lower correlating vibrations in a preestablished pattern.
c) One MMP's attraction to another can be ascending or descending.

This trialectics is idealistic and has no way to polialectics.

What Can Be Anarcholectics?

It is only seen at this adress in google search:

www.bestand.com/doc/Apostasyapriori.pdf

There is no explanation.

Dialectics and polialectics is mostly deterministic.

Anarcholectics may be indeterministic.

It should be imagined.

Why Polialectics?

Because it is to be used for the Universe.

Universe is not dualistic.

Universe may have odd numbers.

Universe may be infinite.

What is Polialectics?

Polialectics is multiple dialectics.

Prefix 'poli-' means multiple.

Many may be / go infinite.

Infinite pieces may give a finite sum.

Polialectics may be limited.

Neither Nor

Kierkegaard questioned either ethical one or esthetical one.

Kafka answered neither nor: You can chose neither the life nor the death. Ie in a hermeneutic way they choose you.

Polialectics is:

Both either-or and neither-nor and neither either-or nor neither-nor. You can calculate the integral of them. Decision tree has vectors with probability and length. Integral give the total value of your ways / taos.

Operations

Human thought is dualistic: there are elements and operations. Like numbers and operations in arithmetics.

Polialectics may think similarly: thesis and conflicts.

There is change, revolution, transformation, metamorphosis. These are different operations which change the basic categories.

The last step of historical operations is the Second Industrialization: robots, computers, spacists, nanotechnology, etc. But immortality hasn’t operate yet.

Elements

Elements of philosophy are categories.

Aristo thought 10 basic categories.

Categories are not absolute. They are relative. We use words to describe the words. We use categories to describe the categories. They are relative, they may change in time and in space.

There had been aristocrates, there were bourgeois, there are netizens. There will be hardware immortals and software immortals. Classes change in time and in space.

Marx and/or Engels

There are 3 rules of dialectics:

Transformation of quantity to quality and vice versa.

Convertion of opposites.

Rejection of rejection.

These are for opposites.

Adorno brought negative dialectics: Opposites don’t interact and continue their position. Even this dialectics is straight.

Opposites stay far away in the contrary dialectics. Synthesis or praxis is not necessity.

So this is the beginnig of polialectics: There many opposites, not two. Some syhthesize and some not. Some categories may brought decadance, ie opposite way of synthesis. Total integral may calculate the panorama.

Insanity

New thoughts make people insane.

I am insane too.

I am insane because of polialectics.

Time and space is in the balance for polialectics, but not for me.

Unbalance makes me crazy. I howl because of pain.

Time

There a new historical concept which describes history as a 5 millennia whole.

Aristoteles and Lao Tzu in the midway: 2,500 years.

If we put a hypothetical and 2,500 years long future, there will be a new concept.

Turkey was governed 3 men between 1923-1960. And then coup d’etats. And then Turkey has lived 3 liberalism in 1983, 1993, and 2003. 4th will be coming in 2013. And 2023 is the date of first century of the Republic.

All these dates are in the balance. Balance of time and balance of space.

Polialectics stills between these balances.

Space

I live in Turkey.

Turkey is an underdeveloped or developing country. Turkey is in the 20th rank according to GNP with buying parity.

Turkey is a republic but has lived 4 coup d’etats in 1960, 1971, 1980, and 1997. So we can not say that there is a democrasy in the country.

Turkey is a vassal of USA, NATO, and EU. Turkey made a war between 1919-1922 and won against this countries.

Turkey is a gate between Europe and Asia. Cultures of these continents meet, but aren’t synthesized. Also Lao Tzu’s and Aristoteles’ dialectics. Polialectics is a way / tao for this opportunity.

So I have this possibility and impossibility together by living in Turkey.

Polialectics: Beginning

I have a big problem.

I created a word polialectics. And then problems beginned.

First there is no such a word in the dictionaries. So nobody accepts it.

But there is dialectics for more than two millennia. And then trialectics. And then polialectics. It is very simple.

This diary-blog will explain this simplicity and impossibility.