Comparing the Western and Asian Dialectic -- as I am phenomic (or phenomenological--a branch of experiential thinking), I believe that if Western society was "civilized" (a process) using the Dialectic (a process), then something similar happens everywhere else, such as in Asia (China) and India. As empires, it seems logical that they would be empirical--which is the West is Science as it developed from Aristotle's Syllogism.
My first reading this morning confirmed that Asian
oligarchy is Confucian (as you would guess), but did not produce a
direct dialectic. Searching using the dialectic's partner word, the
didactic, I did find many sources, but, interestingly, the majority of
them were focused on "Confucianism for women."
family/communal trait of the typical Asian village that is universally
attributed to Confucianism does not differentiate from Buddhism in
current studies, which suggests to me that Asian village life is not
necessarily related to Confucianism but has deeper roots that are not
understood by Western writers.
However, in the end, Confucianist
influence is no different that Socrates' and Plato's Dialectic; In the
end, both are about government control. Just as with Socrates, Plato,
and Aristotle, the influence of Confucius was such that a Chinese
emperor had carve the core "Five Classics" in stone to prevent them from
being maligned by politicians and scholars (same thing in ancient Asia)
who would bribe official librarians to alter texts to help them alter
the social structures.
As Confucius is associated with the
creation of "civil service exams" (that were based on his philosophy) it
might be suggested that he was purely didactic in his educational
approach, which would put the Asian civilization development process at
about the stage of the Christian Reformation--about a 2,000 year
difference! Perhaps in Asia the "debate was over" and the social
structure had settled into a mode of "respect for superiors" (which I
differentiate from elders as superior suggests politics and elders
While Confucius seems to be ahead of Greek oligarchs in
reaching didactic control, it is interesting that the Asian and Greek
philosophers were near-contemporaries. (It is also interesting that the
Buddha was also a near-contemporary, suggesting the possibility of
communication between East and West that occurred somewhat "below the
The purpose of the comparison is to use each
of the philosophies as templates to lay over the other to attempt to
remove extraneous ethnicity-related traits so as to "boil down" a core
philosophic process that is universally used to "civilize society."
While the Greek oligarchs used the Dialectic, the Dialectic in Plato's
example may not be different from Confucius' question/answer mode, where
students would be satisfied with "the master's" intuitive answers, and
then meditate upon them as homework. In Plato's dialectical
interactions, the master was always right in the end, as he determined,
through introversion, what was real, or his forms, by deliberately
ignoring reality. Aristotle took acceptance to this (in his competing
Lyceum) to initiate empirical science which is based on a concept of
matter and utilizes observation and experimentation. (I have not yet
discovered the Asian equivalent or parallel of empirical science.)
far, the comparison has been useful; for instance, the use of empirical
to describe Aristotle's science (which may really be Hypocrites') does
not seem coincidential,
it really could be "empire-oriented science," as we can easily see that
the Confucian oligarchy exists solely to promote the ruling empire and
to reinforce with didactic education whose leadership (of
scholar-philosophers) is carefully filtered with "civil service exams."
But putting the poets in control, Confucius was far ahead of Plato who
foretold a day when all the leaders would be philosophers. Ironically,
Plato reached his goal with the purely-didactic Marxist empire that, of
course, swallowed Asia with Maoism that dislodged Confucianism after so
Using Korea (Southern) as an example, Western oligarchy triumphed over Confusicanist
through capital rather than communism (thanks to the Korean War) by
displacing a single 1500-year-long Confucian dynasty. It is through
Korea that we can compare the two Asian philosophies, oligarchic
Confucianism and democratic Buddhism. From my reading about Korea, it
seems that levels are family respect exceed both Confucius and the
Buddha suggesting a "human" phenomena, or perhaps a "phenomic" philosophy that is purely natural, and hence ignored by the synthesis of both the Dialectic and Confucianism.
suggests that Confucius, thus, only altered (or perverted) the ancient
Asian morality for the benefit of the aristocracy, and, if he did, then
there may be a parallel (though unique) Western natural morality that
has been suppressed by the Dialectic (whose purpose was to likewise
benefit the aristocracy of Sparta). If so, then that natural morality
might be wrapped in the Pre-Indo-European (PIE) concept of "Menos,"
which initiated this learning thread nearly two years ago with my
interest in the parallel evolution of thought, mental abilities, and
language. Since neither Confucius nor the Dialectic are associated with
evolution, then perhaps we have a "model" for the evolutionary fork
called "de-evolution" (or devo) if such a phenomena can be described as a "model."
Finally, this effort is feeling conclusive, which I hoped for from the outset 2+ yrs ago. With the discovery of the socialist emergence from the "Jewish settlements in the Pale," the pure negativity of academic oligarchy the possibility of scientific rehabilitation in an aboriginal context. Cultural "fleshing" will continue with reprints of currently-relevant recently-historical experiences, often gangster, while "the Pale" experience is solidified upto present revolutionary efforts. The hope is to create a hinge with which to restore revolution as evolution after the excessively long period of oligarchic occupation -since 500BC.
Then, probably, the entire blog will be consolidated and "put to rest" with the first wikified writing about the occupy dialectic two years ago.