The Trivium’s Evil Twin: Hegel’s Dialectic

The Trivium's Evil TwinAs you may already know from other articles we’ve written, the Trivium is a method of critical thinking based in asking questions in a specific cyclical order.  It comprises the first three of the liberal arts of “grammar, logic, and rhetoric”, where liberal stands for “free man“; historically, the liberal arts where not allowed to be taught to slaves, but only to the “free man”.  The Trivium’s order of asking questions goes like this:

What (who, where, when)? → Why? → How?

Asking the Trivium’s questions grants the following:

Knowledge → Understanding → Wisdom

This is also mirrored in the process of reality generation of:

Think (Perceptions) → Feel → Act (Manifest)

…and in our three brains:

Neo Cortex (Higher Reason) → Limbic System (Emotions) → Reptilian Brain (Actions)

The effect of using the Trivium method of asking questions / critical thinking enables a person to have discernment, as one is able to discern the truth in any given situation.

Knowledge + Understanding – Contradictions = Wisdom (Truth)

Knowledge – Understanding + Contradictions = Folly (Lies)

However, the Trivium also has an evil twin, a cyclical system that mirrors it and enables a person or group to manipulate others for their own selfish gain.  This evil twin is called “Thesis, Antithesis, and Synthesis”, otherwise known as “Hegel’s Dialectic”.  Whereas the Trivium is meant for the “free man”, Hegel’s Dialectic is meant to enslave men. It goes like this:

Thesis → Antithesis → Synthesis

In more modern terms:

Problem → Reaction → Solution

According to Wikipedia:

The triad is usually described in the following way:

  1. The thesis is an intellectual proposition.
  2. The antithesis is simply the negation of the thesis, a reaction to the proposition.
  3. The synthesis solves the conflict between the thesis and antithesis by reconciling their common truths and forming a new thesis, starting the process over.

The powers that be (PTB / Elite) create a problem, such as an event, topic, or situation that is divisive among the people, they then broadcast it through the media and other channels of information dissemination to foment an emotional reaction from the people on both sides of the debate, and they finally offer the people a solution to the original problem that satisfies aspects of both sides of the debate—as a “compromise”.  The “problem” represents the “what” question/answer, the reaction is the “why” of the emotions/feelings, and the solution is an actionable “how” the Elite and power brokers plan on resolving the original problem (the one they created in the first place).

For a great theatrical example of Hegel’s Dialectic, look no further than to the Star Wars prequels (written by George Lucas) as a brilliant metaphor.  Each episode represents one of the three steps of Hegel’s Dialectic, and in the correct order too:

  1. In “Star Wars Episode 1, The Phantom Menace”, Senator Palpatine / Darth Sidious creates a problem in the form of the Trade Federation’s blockade of Naboo, and the formation of the droid armies.
  2. In “Star Wars Episode 2, The Clone Wars”, the reaction to the problem is a galactic war of epic proportions, where the Clone armies of the Republic are used to fight the Trade Federation Separatist’s droid armies.  In an emotional scene, Anakin also reacts violently to the loss of his mother.
  3. In “Star Wars Episode 3, The Revenge of the Sith”, the ultimate solution is offered up when Emperor Palpatine / Darth Sidious is granted emergency powers, so that he can finally defeat the Separatists (that he originally created in episode 1), and restore “peace” to the galaxy.  He then decrees that he is the Emperor of the New Galactic Empire, and dissolves the old Republic.

The key to breaking free from the manipulative tactics of the Hegelian Dialectic is the use of our critical thinking skills (Trivium), which produces discernment.  When we are able to slow down our reaction and first ask “what, why, and how” questions for each problem that they purposefully create, we are able to bypass an emotional reaction to the situation—to respond instead.  Without our reactions, they will be unable to implement their solutions, and even if they try to anyway, they will not create binding agreements with us, as it was our initial ignorance to the fact that they created the problems, and our emotional reactions to them, that allowed them to bring us into an agreement with their pre-packaged solutions in the first place.

If after asking the needed questions we still find ourselves feeling emotionally charged by the divisive problems that we see broadcast in the media, we can use each trigger as an opportunity to do our emotional process work, where we work on our susceptibilities to being manipulated.  When we notice a problem and we feel ourselves reacting to it, we can ask ourselves “what is the problem”, “why am I feeling this way”, and “how can I heal this initial wound causing the susceptibility”?   Finding the answers to these questions helps us to integrate our root traumas, perceptions, and beliefs that are responsible for our triggers, which allows us to experience healthy emotional neutrality to divisive issues; for when we’re divided within we will experience division without, but when we’re whole within we will not fall for their divisive tricks.   When we do emotional process work (such as the Unity Process), we stop their manipulative attempts prior to the implementation of their solutions—as we’re choosing to be responsible and find a solution within instead.  When new a problem arises that plays on the issues that we’ve neutralized and integrated within, we will no longer react to them, but rather respond; leaving their manipulative attempts ineffective and harmless against us.

About Nathan

Leave a Reply