This is the first of a series of posts that will explore what prominent thinkers and philosophers can teach us about today’s public multiversity, the modern university with its many colleges, departments, and other administrative units that play multiple functions and roles in our society.
Yes, dialectics is superior to eristics in the multiversity because it is collaborative inquiry towards what is true and good rather than learning how to win a debate, which often turns on rhetorical tricks. Anymore, winning seems to be everything in our politics today, and so dialectics hasn't had much effect outside of liberal arts and sciences courses, except in direct and cross-examination in the courts. How can we get dialectics into our politics instead of eristics? Perhaps more conscious awareness of the value and practice of dialectics in the multiversity will help? That was Plato's solution.
Isn't the aim of the multiversity the elimination of humanity and its cultivation, through the technological monitoring/supervision/control of all attempts to communicate in dialogue? Is the new institution not dedicated to the eradication of all intimacy from the public sphere? Is the (globalist/totalitarian) Regime not strategically and systematically bent upon replacing liberal education with technical instruction for which the Why question is entirely anachronistic (asked in the past and answered by the future neo-Machiavellians are supposed to be constructing, today)?
Yes, dialectics is superior to eristics in the multiversity because it is collaborative inquiry towards what is true and good rather than learning how to win a debate, which often turns on rhetorical tricks. Anymore, winning seems to be everything in our politics today, and so dialectics hasn't had much effect outside of liberal arts and sciences courses, except in direct and cross-examination in the courts. How can we get dialectics into our politics instead of eristics? Perhaps more conscious awareness of the value and practice of dialectics in the multiversity will help? That was Plato's solution.
Isn't the aim of the multiversity the elimination of humanity and its cultivation, through the technological monitoring/supervision/control of all attempts to communicate in dialogue? Is the new institution not dedicated to the eradication of all intimacy from the public sphere? Is the (globalist/totalitarian) Regime not strategically and systematically bent upon replacing liberal education with technical instruction for which the Why question is entirely anachronistic (asked in the past and answered by the future neo-Machiavellians are supposed to be constructing, today)?