[1] It's not just a matter of focusing in on what's important, it's also a matter of figuring out the implementation of a practical power that can be achieved within a lifetime, even if such a power (a species-power!) has its future in the quality of a multi-generational work. You will ask me, "what is the ground for this claim?" The answer is the brevity of life itself! Added to this one can also take note of life's impoverished, subconscious conditions, these amount to unintelligent social formations.
[2] Dialectic identifies and deconstructs the lie posited by the linguistic form (and content) against the movement and totality of being.
[3] The revolutionary form in dialectics is not a theoretical-praxis, but praxis itself -- against the dead theory of a formal dialectics.
[4] The highest point achieved in dialectics is the discovery of the self-deception of theoretical forms -- leading toward a revolutionary-praxis of freedom that is consciously concerned with achieving existential quality, which always means, social quality: the intelligent ordering of the production of economic and political life.
[5] Dialectics, done properly, will always negate their own formalism, which is to say, they transcend themselves as mere, abstract theory.
[6] Through dialectics life can return toward itself in consciousness (act toward itself with intelligence) as opposed to the formation of a society based on psychological reactionism: a subconscious-narrative-formation that seeks to define existence from a disposition of impulse, emotion, fear.
[7] A logic that cannot qualitatively impact the world is a form of empty idealism; it is a logic that still occupies the superstitious and abstract form of religion; such was the logic of Aristotle. The freedom of identity-logic is a lie, an abstraction, not a life-form of concretion. What man needs, to achieve an advanced existence, is a concrete-logic, such is the logic of dialectics!
[8] While it's true that dialectic leads to the consciousness and pursuit of a revolutionary praxis, the class-agent of this praxis (though properly identified as "the proletariat") is itself in need of a dialectical transvaluation. The highest form of dialectics is not "work," but emancipation from the necessity of labour through technology unto the renaissance and explosion, proliferation of thought, leading to the creation of a society of advanced technology, regulated and conditioned by a mature psychology. This means that, in such a society, "species-consciousness" would be politically dominant so that worlds could be established as humans qualitatively develop without being sabotaged by social-pathology or material-deprivation.
[9] The logic of dialectics proves, above all else, that the species is in desperate need of education predicated on the basis of material security.
[10] Belief, conviction, credulity, are not what's important, the thing that's important is the grounding and justification of belief on the basis of evidence. In this domain many abstract games have been played in order to circumvent the authority of evidence, precisely because many narrative-believers cannot substantiate their fantastic claims on the basis of evidence. Thus their method has been to attack the credence of evidence, but the problem with this is that they already presuppose its authority at every existential level of their existence!
[11] Dialectic is not a game, not a mere abstract, idealistic-logic, but a revolutionary-logic, however, this fact doesn't remove the human psychological element, which has historically lost sight of the world through abstraction. Even in dialectic (because of man's psychology) the temptation is to wander in the abstraction of theory, but a disciplined dialectic should swiftly return us toward a revolutionary-praxis, which is achieved through a concrete-criticism based on life and its conditions.
[12] The climax of dialectic must be the negation of formal dialectic. Where this negation fails dialectic itself has failed. The revolutionary formation of dialectic is simply the negation of its own formalism carried into the intelligence of a revolutionary praxis.
-
-
-
