Dialectical Reasoning

Author(s):  
Gareth Stedman Jones
1990 ◽  
pp. 121-128
Author(s):  
Gareth Stedman Jones

2002 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 249-265
Author(s):  
Alan E. Singer

Dialectical tensions are very evident in almost all international business episodes, as well as in the perceptions and value-priorities of once-separated civilisations. It is regrettable indeed that these have hardly ever been mentioned in the mainstream business media, nor in professional education. At the same time, much has been communicated (and replicated) on subjects like business-ecology, product-ecology, knowledge-ecology and ecology-of-mind. Such ideas, together with the sciences of life and mind that support biotechnology and information technology, are all closely associated with the principle of dialectic (intuitively, historically and formally). Accordingly, much greater emphasis should be placed upon dialectical reasoning in contemporary strategic business analysis, not to mention political calculations.


2004 ◽  
Vol 84 (4) ◽  
pp. 312-330 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Edwards ◽  
Mark Jones ◽  
Judi Carr ◽  
Annette Braunack-Mayer ◽  
Gail M Jensen

Abstract Background and Purpose. Clinical reasoning remains a relatively under-researched subject in physical therapy. The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine the clinical reasoning of expert physical therapists in 3 different fields of physical therapy: orthopedic (manual) physical therapy, neurological physical therapy, and domiciliary care (home health) physical therapy. Subjects. The subjects were 6 peer-designated expert physical therapists (2 from each field) nominated by leaders within the Australian Physiotherapy Association and 6 other interviewed experts representing each of the same 3 fields. Methods. Guided by a grounded theory method, a multiple case study approach was used to study the clinical practice of the 6 physical therapists in the 3 fields. Results. A model of clinical reasoning in physical therapy characterized by the notion of “clinical reasoning strategies” is proposed by the authors. Within these clinical reasoning strategies, the application of different paradigms of knowledge and their interplay within reasoning is termed “dialectical reasoning.” Discussion and Conclusion. The findings of this study provide a potential clinical reasoning framework for the adoption of emerging models of impairment and disability in physical therapy.


2008 ◽  
Vol 40 (11) ◽  
pp. 2603-2612 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Sheppard

As radical geography, inflected by Marx, has transformed into critical geography, influenced by poststructuralism and feminism, dialectical reasoning has come under attack from some poststructural geographers. Their construction of dialectics as inconsistent with poststructural thinking, difference, and assemblages is based, however, on a Hegelian conception of the dialectic. This Hegelian imaginary reflects the intellectual history of radical and/or critical anglophone geography. Yet, dialectics can be read in a non-Hegelian, much less totalizing and ideological, and more geographical way. This broader reading opens up space for considering parallels between dialectics, the assemblages of Deleuze and Guattari, and aspects of complexity theory.


Author(s):  
Aaron M. Kuntz

Conventional approaches to qualitative research seek to distill and capture meaning through a sequence of determined, progressive methodological steps that serve to synthesize difference toward a series of overarching claims regarding human experience. This approach reifies contemporary neoliberal values and, as a consequence, short-circuits any possibility for progressive social change. Through conventional research practices, the principles of security, schizoid, and statistical society accelerate, extending normalizing processes of governmentality, and producing a docile citizenry adverse to key elements of an engaged democracy. In such circumstance, risk is identified as the production of findings that are ambiguously defined, not attending to values of certainty and generalizable outcomes. As a consequence, conventional methodological practices fail to engage the postmodern condition—fragmented experiences with inconclusive outcomes are displaced by methodologies bent on merging difference into foreclosed meaning. Contrary to conventional approaches to research, post-foundational orientations emphasize relational logics that maintain difference within the inquiry project itself. A provocative example of this extends from newly materialist approaches to qualitative inquiry that emphasizes the productive possibilities inherent in difference and, as such, displace the simplified dialectical reasoning of conventional approaches in favor of more dialogic recognition of diffractive patterning. In this sense, open-ended difference makes possible previously unrecognized (even unthought) possibilities for being otherwise. As such, newly materialist approaches to inquiry manifest alternative ontological and epistemological practices that are not available to the conventional methodologist; they make possible an open-ended vision of the future that is necessary for radical democratic action. Furthermore, the fluid nature of such methodologies align well with Foucault’s explication of parrhesia, a means of truth-making that creates new possibilities for becoming otherwise. The intersection of newly materialist methodologies with parrhesia challenges methodologists to risk the very relations that secure their expertise, establishing a moral challenge to the impact of past practice on the possibilities inherent in the future.


Author(s):  
Jonathan D. Teubner

Prayer after Augustine explores the place of prayer in the works of Augustine, Boethius, and Benedict, three figures critically important to the development of Latin medieval philosophical and theological thought. Part I offers a chronologically ordered reconstruction of Augustine’s understanding of prayer, tracing both theological reflections and practices from his early philosophical dialogues to his late anti-Pelagian polemical works. Part II investigates how Boethius in his Opuscula sacra and De consolatione Philosophiae and Benedict in his Regula take up Augustine’s understanding of prayer. For all three authors, the virtue of patience emerges as the means through which they struggle to confront the chasm between time and eternity, mortality and immortality, and humanity and divinity. At the heart of this book’s approach is an argument for a more complex understanding of religious and moral traditions that appreciates the subtleties with which late antique authors draw on their predecessors’ works and lives. By proposing a distinction between two levels of tradition—Augustinianism 1 and Augustinianism 2—this book argues for a distinction between the act of citing, referencing, and alluding to another author, and the use of general orientations and constellations of thought borrowed from another author. As Boethius and Benedict exemplify, the development of a religious tradition may oftentimes be less an affair of dialectical reasoning and more an expansion and refinement of devotional sensibilities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document