The Use of Dialectic in Defining Good and Evil

The perennial human quest to understand good and evil is not merely a matter of personal conviction but a profound philosophical endeavor, deeply rooted in the method of dialectic. This article explores how dialectic, as a rigorous process of reasoned argument and counter-argument, has been the indispensable tool, from ancient Greece to modern thought, for probing, refining, and attempting to define these fundamental moral concepts. It is through this dynamic intellectual engagement that humanity continually seeks clarity amidst the complex tapestry of moral experience.

The Dialectical Path to Moral Understanding

From the bustling agora of ancient Athens to the quiet halls of scholastic debate, philosophy has long grappled with the elusive definition of good and evil. It is here, in the crucible of critical thought, that the dialectic emerges not just as a technique, but as the very heartbeat of moral inquiry. Far from offering simple answers, the dialectical method provides a structured pathway to challenge assumptions, expose contradictions, and progressively refine our understanding of what it means to act virtuously or malevolently.

Socrates and the Elenctic Foundation

The Great Books of the Western World introduce us to Socrates, arguably the progenitor of Western dialectic. His method, often called elenchus, involved a relentless series of questions designed to expose inconsistencies in his interlocutors' beliefs about concepts like justice, piety, or courage. Socrates didn't claim to possess the definition of good himself; rather, he believed that by demonstrating others' ignorance, they could begin the true search for knowledge. In dialogues like Plato's Euthyphro, we witness the frustration and enlightenment that arise when commonly held notions of good and evil are subjected to rigorous, dialectical scrutiny. This process is crucial because it highlights that a genuine definition cannot rest on unexamined opinion.

Plato's Ascent to the Form of the Good

Building upon Socratic foundations, Plato developed a more sophisticated dialectic as the highest form of philosophical reasoning. For Plato, dialectic was the intellectual journey from the world of sensory experience and shifting opinions (doxa) to the apprehension of eternal, unchanging Forms. In The Republic, the ultimate goal of this dialectical ascent is the Form of the Good, which illuminates all other Forms and is the source of all being and knowledge.

(Image: A classical Greek fresco depicting Socrates in animated discussion with a group of Athenian citizens, his hand gesturing emphatically as they engage in a lively philosophical exchange, symbolizing the essence of dialectical inquiry.)

Plato believed that true understanding of good and evil could only be achieved by those who, through rigorous dialectic, could grasp this ultimate Form. The definition of good thus becomes an objective, transcendent reality, accessible through intellect, not mere sensation or belief.

Aristotle's Practical Dialectic and Ethical Inquiry

While Aristotle critiqued Plato's theory of Forms, his own ethical method, as seen in the Nicomachean Ethics, contains a distinct, albeit different, dialectical character. Aristotle often begins by examining common opinions (endoxa) on a given topic, critically analyzing them, and then refining them through logical argument and empirical observation. His quest to define good is tied to the concept of eudaimonia (human flourishing). He uses dialectic to deliberate on the nature of human function and what constitutes a virtuous life, weighing different arguments for what makes an action good or evil based on its contribution to human flourishing.

Medieval Scholasticism and the Disputation

The medieval period saw the dialectic method formalized into the scholastic disputation. Thinkers like Thomas Aquinas, whose Summa Theologica is a cornerstone of the Great Books of the Western World, systematically used dialectic to explore complex theological and ethical questions. Each question was posed, arguments "for" and "against" were presented, objections were raised and answered, leading to a carefully reasoned conclusion. This method allowed for a meticulous definition of moral concepts, often integrating classical philosophy with Christian doctrine, and rigorously examining the nature of good and evil in relation to natural law and divine command.

Kant and the Antinomies of Reason

In modern philosophy, Immanuel Kant employed dialectic in his Critique of Pure Reason to expose the inherent contradictions (antinomies) that arise when reason attempts to transcend the limits of possible experience. While this was a negative dialectic demonstrating the boundaries of theoretical reason, its implications for good and evil are profound. In his moral philosophy, Kant sought to define good not by consequences or divine command, but by the rational principle of duty, expressed in the Categorical Imperative. His dialectic aims to establish a universal and necessary moral law, where actions are judged good or evil based on whether their underlying maxim can be consistently willed as a universal law.

The Enduring Value of Dialectic in Moral Philosophy

The journey through the history of philosophy reveals that the dialectic is not merely an academic exercise but an essential engine for moral progress. It compels us to move beyond superficial agreement or entrenched dogma, forcing a confrontation with the nuances and complexities of good and evil.

Key Contributions of Dialectic to Defining Good & Evil

The table below summarizes how different philosophical traditions, through their use of dialectic, have shaped our understanding of good and evil:

Philosopher/Tradition	Dialectical Approach	Contribution to Defining Good & Evil
Socrates	Elenchus (Questioning)	Exposed ignorance, sought true definitions of virtue by testing assumptions.
Plato	Ascent to Forms	Identified the transcendent Form of the Good as the ultimate objective reality for moral judgment.
Aristotle	Examination of Endoxa	Defined good as eudaimonia (flourishing) through rational analysis of human function and virtue.
Aquinas	Scholastic Disputation	Systematized moral theology, defining good in relation to divine law, natural law, and reason.
Kant	Critique of Reason	Established moral duty through the Categorical Imperative, grounding good in universalizable rational principles.

Conclusion

The dialectic serves as a perpetual engine for refining our definition of good and evil. It is a testament to the ongoing conversation of philosophy, reminding us that these fundamental concepts are not static decrees but dynamic ideas that demand continuous scrutiny, debate, and re-evaluation. Through the relentless questioning of Socrates, the soaring idealism of Plato, the practical wisdom of Aristotle, the rigorous systematization of Aquinas, and the uncompromising reason of Kant, the dialectic remains the indispensable method for navigating the intricate moral landscape of human existence. It's a journey of intellectual courage, pushing us ever closer, even if never to a final destination, toward a more profound understanding of what it means to be truly good and to confront evil.

Further Exploration

Video by: The School of Life

💡 Want different videos? Search YouTube for: ""Plato's Dialectic Explained""