How The Dialectic Process Works by Dean Gotcher

How The Dialectic Process Works.
(And How It Affects You.)

by
Dean Gotcher

"For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." 1 John 2:16

If you start with facts (and truth), your "feelings" of the 'moment' become subject to facts (and truth), requiring the humbling, denying, dying to, controlling, and disciplining of "self" in order to learn and apply the facts (and truth). If you start with your "feelings" of the 'moment,' facts (and truth) becomes subject to your "feelings" of the 'moment,' making facts (and truth) relevant only if thy initiate and/or sustain, i.e., 'justify,' i.e., support, i.e., do not get in the way of your "feelings" of the 'moment.' It is the difference between preaching, teaching, and discussing facts (and truth), which divide between "right and wrong" and dialoguing opinions ("feelings") to a consensus, which makes all "one"—based upon "feeling." Both methods are antithetical to (antagonistic toward) one another.

In the current (Facebook) culture of 'change,' where "feelings" are the platform from which to "think," it is next to impossible, if not impossible to get people to think. In order to think we must be willing to put aside our carnal "feelings" (desires and dissatisfactions, i.e., "self interest") of the 'moment' and (humbling, denying, dying to, controlling, disciplining our "self") focus upon the facts and truth being presented (accepting or rejecting them based upon their being right or wrong). When our "feelings" of the 'moment' get in the way of facts and truth, we become blind to the consequences of our thoughts and actions. Those who "push" "feelings" over and therefore against facts and truth (the "third way" or "method," seeking to overcome the antithesis between "feelings" and facts and truth by making "feelings" the basis of facts and truth) do so for their own carnal desires of the 'moment,' seeking to use you as "human resource" for their own pleasure and gain (with your approval, i.e., affirmation), leaving you (denying, i.e., rejecting the truth) to die in your sins. "There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 16:25

In order for "feelings" to become "facts" (and "truth")—in a facts (and truth) based environment, where "doing right and not wrong," i.e., obedience is the issue—someone must come between facts (and truth) and your "feelings" of the 'moment,' moving the preaching, teaching, and discussing of facts and truth to the dialoguing of opinions, i.e., to your "feelings" of the 'moment'—in order to produce consensus, i.e., a "feeling" of "oneness," i.e., affirmation—negating the preaching, teaching, and discussing of facts (and truth), i.e., that which divides, negating the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in the process. It is your dialoguing with your "self" where you bypass, i.e., circumvent "top-down," "right-wrong" thinking, 'justifying' your "self," i.e., your desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world is stimulating, establishing your "self," i.e., your "self interest" over and therefore against any restraint (authority) which is getting you your way. The role of the "group psychotherapist," i.e., the facilitator of 'change' is to seduce, deceive, and manipulate men, women, and children into using the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, i.e., the dialectic process to solve "personal-social issues," i.e., to deal with the crisis of the 'moment,' i.e., life—not only in the classroom, in the workplace, in government, but in the "church" and in the home as well—negating that which created the crisis in the first place (according to those who 'reason' dialectically), the preaching, teaching, and discussing of facts (and truth), which divides. As long as the preaching, teaching, and discussing of facts (and truth) remains in place—in the classroom, in the workplace, in government, in the "church," and in the home, preventing the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus—'liberalism'-socialism-globalism can not be initiated and sustained, i.e., all "that is in the world" and "of the world" ONLY can not become a 'reality,' i.e., the meaning, i.e., the 'drive' and 'purpose' of 'life.' It is the father's/Father's authority that initiates and sustains the preaching, teaching, and discussing of facts and truth. It is the child, 'justifying' his "self," i.e., 'justifying' his carnal nature that initiates (along with those who support, i.e., affirm, i.e., 'justify' his and therefore their carnal nature as well) that sustains the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process, negating not only the father's/Father's authority but the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning as well. This is why the affective domain, i.e., the child's "feelings" toward authority (restraint), having been introduced into education in the 50's via "Bloom's Taxonomies," has had such a major impact on America, not only in the classroom, but in the home, the neighborhood, city, county, state, nation, and the "church" as well, turning the children who participate against the restraints of authority, i.e., against parental authority which gets in the way of their "self interests," i.e., their carnal desires of the 'moment'—their dissatisfaction with, resentment toward, hatred against authority having been 'justified' and reinforced (affirmed) in their "relationship building," "group grade," dialoguing opinions to a consensus, i.e., socialist, globalist, Marxist classroom experiences.

"And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God." Luke 16:15

While the carnal nature of the child engenders the desire, in the child, for 'change,' i.e., for 'liberation' from facts and truth that restrain, it is the "group psychotherapist," i.e., the facilitator of 'change' who initiates and sustains the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, i.e., the dialectic process—in an effort to circumvent, i.e., negate the father's/Father's authority, i.e., negate the facts and truth that gets in the way of his "feelings" of the 'moment,' preventing, i.e., inhibiting or blocking him from doing what he wants to do, i.e., what he "feels" like doing in the 'moment.' In the garden in Eden, man (with the "help" of the first, and master facilitator of 'change' and the woman, who was seduced, deceived, and manipulated, i.e., "beguiled" by him) took on the carnal nature of the child. Through his praxis of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "self" 'justification' he established his carnal nature, i.e., the carnal nature of the child over and therefore against God's authority, i.e., the Father's authority. The dialectic process is the praxis of Genesis 3:1-6, i.e., "self" 'justification' being used to negate Hebrews 12:5-11, i.e., the father's/Father's authority, negating Romans 7:14-25, the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in the process. The Lord came to 'redeem' us from the consequences of that praxis, 'reconciling' us to the Father instead.

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6

"For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother." Matthew 12:50

The dialectic process, i.e., the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, i.e., men, women, children 'justifying' themselves before one another is antithetical to the way, the truth, and the life which comes with following the Son, obeying the Father, doing the Father's will. Those promoting dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., the dialectic (dialogue) process understand the impact the father's/Father's authority has upon "society"—preventing 'change, i.e., inhibiting or blocking "worldly peace and socialist harmony." They see the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus as the only solution to the preaching, teaching, and discussing of facts (and truth), which inhibits or blocks 'change'—why they refuse to respond to facts and truth (unless it is their subjective, i.e., "feelings," i.e., emotionally based "facts" and "truth"), trying to get you into dialogue with them instead.

"The dialectical method was overthrown—the parts [the children—obeying the father/Father, doing the father's/Father's will, accepting his/His preaching and teaching of facts and truth (authority) to be accepted as is, by faith] were prevented from finding their definition within the whole [within themselves and the world—which is only made possible through the dialoguing of opinions ("feelings") to a consensus—which the father's/Father's authority prevents]." (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism?)

The answers are in the questions. If you ask facts based questions you get facts based answers—the result of preaching, teaching, and discussing facts, making feelings subject to facts. If you ask opinion (feelings) based question you get opinion (feelings) based answers, the result of dialogue opinions (feelings), making facts subject to feelings. Treating feelings as "facts" makes facts subject to feelings (therefore anything you imagine becomes 'reality,' i.e., the "real" world, with any facts that get in the way of your imagined "facts" becoming irrelevant). This is why 'liberal's' do not (can not) answer facts based question, rephrasing them to feelings based questions so they can answer them without becoming subject to facts and the truth which get in the way of the world they imagine.

One is "of and for" the "old" world order, i.e., the father's/Father's authority. The other is "of and for" the "new," i.e., the carnal nature of the child. How children respond to their parents (authority)—whether facts and truth or their feelings of the 'moment' is the basis of their thinking and acting—reveals by which method they are being educated. Using didactic/deductive (facts and truth based) reasoning sustains the father's/Father's authority. Using dialectic (dialogue)/inductive (feelings or opinion based) 'reasoning' 'liberates' the carnal nature of the child from the father's/Father's authority.

While Georg Hegel did not use the words Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis himself—in regard to the dialectic (dialogue) process—Johann Fichte before him and those following after him, i.e., philosophers, socialists, psychotherapists, etc., did—and still do. The trickery of dialectic 'reasoning' is, while there is only Thesis and Antithesis, i.e., "right and wrong" (the "old" world order), it 'creates' Synthesis (a "new" world order) by making "right and wrong," i.e., facts and truth subject to "feelings," i.e., subject to theories and opinions, making "right and wrong" subjective, i.e., subject to 'change'—which directly affects you, all that is yours, and the world you live in. The key to understanding the dialectic process (or formula) is that it switches Thesis and Antithesis, making Thesis (facts and truth) subject to Antithesis ("feelings"), making Synthesis, i.e., "feelings," i.e., "subjective 'truth'" the basis of 'reality'—negating Thesis (established facts and truth) in the process.

"We recognize the point of view that truth and knowledge are only relative and that there are no hard and fast truths which exist for all time and all places" (Benjamin Bloom, et al., Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Book 1, Cognitive Domain)

"The philosopher Hegel said that truth is not found in the thesis nor the antithesis [in opposing positions] but in an emerging synthesis [with both parties 'discovering' through dialogue what they have in common] which reconciles the two." (Martin Luther King Jr., Strength to Love)

Hebrews 12:5-11 explains the (earthly) father's authority this way. "Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence:" "For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure;"—with the Heavenly Father chastening us, as the earthly father, but "for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness." In other words, while children (Antithesis) disobey the father because they want to "do their own thing," the earthly father, despite his position of authority (Thesis), wants to—just like his children—"do his own thing" as well. According to dialectic 'reasoning,' this common thread—where both the children's "feelings" for pleasure and the father's "feelings" for pleasure are the same—makes both the children and the father one and the same in nature (Synthesis). By getting the father to set aside his authority (for the 'moment') in order to focus upon the children's "feelings," i.e., by the father focusing upon that which he has in common with the children and that which they have in common with him, instead of upon their obeying him, he and his children are 'changed,' i.e., the father's authority in the father as well in his children—controlling their (and his) thoughts and actions—is negated, producing in both the children and the father Synthesis aka Common-ism. The problem, according to dialectic 'reasoning' does not lie in the children, i.e., in the children's carnal nature, but in the father's authority, preventing the children and the father from becoming at-one-with one another according to what they have in common, i.e., their "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., their natural desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, which includes their desire to relate with one another in peace and harmony, i.e., affirmation (which the father's authority prevents, i.e., blocks or inhibits—forcing the children to "reverence" him and his authority, getting in the way of them being themselves, thinking and acting according to their carnal nature, i.e., according to that which comes naturally, i.e., from the world only).

Putting it into application, making it easier to understand: the dialectic process of dialoguing opinions to a consensus (there is no parental authority in dialogue) makes the parents authority subject to the children's "feelings" of the 'moment,' making the children's "feelings" of the 'moment' the 'drive' and 'purpose' of life—negating the parents authority in the process. In this way of thinking, 'reconciliation' is not the result of children accepting the father's/Father's authority and obeying him/Him (a biblical structure of thought), it is the result of the father's abdicating his authority—through dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., dialogue, i.e., "self" 'justification' setting aside his authority—in order (as in "new" world order) to becoming at-one-with the children, thinking and acting according to what he has in common with them (and they have in common with him), becoming at-one-with each other according to what they have in common with one another, i.e., their common carnal nature, i.e., their love of pleasure and hate of restraint, in the process negating "doing right and not wrong"—according to the father's/Father's will—in the thoughts and actions of all who participate, so that all can do wrong, disobey, sin with impunity, i.e., so that all can do wrong, disobey, sin without having a guilty conscience—what the father's/Father's authority engenders.

By making facts and truth (belief, i.e., objective truth), i.e., the father's authority subject to "feelings" (subjective truth), facts become a theory and truth (belief) becomes an opinion, making everything (everyone) subject to 'change,' i.e., subject to the "feelings," i.e., the opinions and theories of those in "authority," i.e., subject to those who seduce, deceive, and manipulate everyone (including you) into accepting their formula—the dialectic (dialogue) process—being seduced, deceived, and manipulated into using it to "better understand and resolve" the crisis of the 'moment,' i.e., the problems (personal-social issues) of life which, according to dialectic 'reasoning,' the father's/Father's authority created. It is how those of the so called "new" world order, i.e., "psychotherapists," i.e., facilitators of 'change' perceive (and deal with) you and the world you live in, making you, your children, your property, your business, your neighbors, etc., subject to "feelings," i.e., to opinions and theories, making you subject to seduction, deception, and manipulation, making you subject to them. It is a formula that is being used on you and all that is yours to turn you, your children, your property, you business, etc., into "natural resource" so you and all that is yours can be used by them for their own pleasure and gain. The "We," "Our," and "Us" "feeling" of the dialectic process negates the "Mine. Not yours" which comes from God.

In the end, you can not hold those who use the dialectic process on you accountable for what happens (what they did) to you, your children, your property, your business, etc., since it is facts and truth that holds them accountable, not your and their feelings, opinions, and theories, which—by there very nature—are ever subject to 'change.' In the end the only one held accountable is you for abdicating facts and truth in order to follow ("lust" after) your feelings, opinions, and theories, i.e., that which is of the world only.

When you set aside (abdicate, i.e. negate) the Father's authority, i.e., suspend the truth (as on a cross) in order (as in "new" world order) to "enjoy," i.e., "lust" after your carnal "feelings" (desires) of the 'moment' (which are stimulated by the world) and justify' your carnal thoughts and actions, with others affirming, you are doing the dialectic process. By putting your carnal (natural) desires (affirmed by others) it into praxis (social action) you make yourself at-one-with the world, being able thereafter to do wrong, disobey, sin with impunity, i.e., without having a guilty conscience.

First there is the Thesis:

the father's/Father's authority (system or paradigm) with its 1) preaching of commands and rules to be obeyed as given, and teaching of facts and truth to be accepted as is, by faith, 2) rewarding or blessing children who obey and do things right, 3) chastening children (depending upon their attitude, correcting, reproving, or rebuking them) when they have disobeyed, disapproving of what they have done when they have done things wrong, that they might learn to obey and/or do things right, 4) discussing (at the father's/Father's discretion) any questions or misunderstanding which the children might have in order for them to do what is right (very important: if there is NEVER discussion—when children are able to understand what the father is saying and/or the father has time to explain, at the father's discretion, and the children honestly want to know right from wrong, i.e., when they are not out to challenge the father's authority—with the father ALWAYS responding to the children's questions with "Because I said so" instead, then the father is NOT a father who loves his children, but is, like Hitler, out to destroy anyone who gets in the way of what he wants, when he wants it; socialists us this issue of no discussion on the part of the father, with the children's "feelings" as their excuse, in order to negate the father's/Father's authority, with all forms of socialism, i.e., common-ism, whether it be fascism with its emphasis upon common-race, i.e., national socialism or globalism with its emphasis upon common-paradigm, i.e., international socialism, or anything in between negating the father's/Father's authority, one rejecting any discussion, always demanding its way without having a heart of compassion, the others insisting upon dialogue instead, which negates discussion as well ["discussion personal-social issues" is dialogue, not discussion], where there is no father's/Fathers' authority both produce the same outcome, totalitarianism), and 5) in order for the father/Father to maintain his/His authority in the home/heaven, casting out children/angels who question, challenge, disregard, defy, attack his/His authority. The father's/Father's authority is based upon doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., rule of law.

While loving the children (having feelings toward the children), the father/Father judges them according to their actions (according to their obedience or disobedience, getting things right or doing things wrong), including their attitude, approving what they do when it is right, disapproving what they do when it is wrong, loving them all the same (though children may not understand that while being chastened or being cast out). He does not hate them, he only hates what they do when they do wrong, since it can (or has) hurt them (and/or him and others) now and/or in the future, chastening them that they might learn to control and discipline themselves, i.e., that they might learn to take control over their own desires of the 'moment' themselves in order to do what is right (and not wrong) in the future, i.e., in order to not hurt themselves or others in the future—thus carrying the father's/Father's authority system with them into the future, ruling over their own children in the same way. While dad and mom are not perfect—they may be or may have been down right tyrant, using their office of authority to satisfy their carnal desires of the 'moment,' acting as rebellious children, hating restraint—the office of authority they hold is perfect, having been given to them by God to serve Him in. Parents, as is God, are not against children having pleasure, giving them gifts. They are against the children's attitude, when they, the children—loving the gifts, i.e., pleasure more than their parent, i.e., the gift giver—hate the gift giver when they tell them to put the gift up (and take it away if they do not obey) and do their chores, go/come and eat, do their homework, etc., the children not only hating not being able to play with the gift but hating the gift giver as well—being, by nature, unable to separate the two.

Then there is the Antithesis:

the children's feelings and thoughts of the 'moment,' i.e., their natural desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates and their natural dissatisfaction with, resentment, or hatred toward restraint, i.e., toward the father's/Father's authority which prevents them from enjoying (or hoping to enjoy) the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine) which they desire (which the world stimulates). The children's nature is to approach pleasure and avoid pain, i.e., to love pleasure and hate pain, which includes the pain of missing out on pleasure. It is in their practice (praxis) of dialoguing with their "self," that they 'justify' their "self," i.e., 'justify' their natural love of pleasure and hate of restraint over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority, hating not only the missing out on pleasure but the father as well, keeping it private (to their "self") so as not to be punished or cast out. It is the children's private dialoguing within themselves, "discussing" with their "self" their desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment,' that socialists are most interested in, seeking to gain access in order to use it to 'liberate' the children from the father's/Father's authority (as explained below).

It is therefore the children's nature to strike out against and/or disobey the father's/Father's authority—when the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth gets in their way, i.e., cuts off their "lusting" after the pleasures of the 'moment' (which the world stimulates). It is the father's/Father's authority that teaches children to humble, deny, die to their "self," i.e., to discipline and control their "self" in order to not yield to their natural inclination of loving pleasure and hating restraint, in order to do right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's will.

"No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." Matthew 6:24

These two paradigms, i.e., ways of thinking and acting are antithetical to one another:

the father's/Father's authority (the Patriarchal paradigm) which establishes commands, rules, facts, and truth to be accepted as given and obeyed by faith conflicts with the children's carnal nature (the Heresiarchal paradigm of 'change'), i.e., the children's desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, which makes them, by nature, ever subject to 'change,' preventing the children from understanding the father's/Father's authority, since their perception, i.e., 'reasoning' is ever subject to their desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates (sight).

Ironically, when children become fathers (or mothers—under their husbands authority) they tend to embrace the father's/Father's authority system or paradigm themselves, training up their children in it, sustaining the father's/Father's authority system in the world in which they live. It is this continuation (perpetual restoring) of the father's/Father's authority in the world, which comes naturally to children when they grow up, that those who practice dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e., "self" 'justification' seek to negate (Lenin's speech in 1920 was all about that). For them the only answer lies within the children themselves, in their desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment' which they dialogue (privately) with themselves about daily.

"The individual may have 'secret' thoughts which he will under no circumstances reveal to anyone else if he can help it. To gain access is particularly important, for precisely here may lie the individual's potential for democratic ... thought and action in crucial situations." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)

Synthesis:

requires the presence of another "authority figure," i.e., the "psychotherapist," i.e., the facilitator of 'change'—someone who favors the children's carnal nature, i.e., the children's "feelings" of the 'moment' in the "light" of the current situation over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority. This paradigm of 'change,' since it identifies with, i.e., is itself 'driven' by the children's carnal nature instead of the father's/Father's authority (while loving the pleasure which comes with the father's/Father's position of authority, i.e., the pleasure which comes from those under their authority praising them, they hate being exposed, i.e., held accountably, i.e., judged for forcing, i.e., seducing, deceiving, and manipulation those under their "authority" to obey laws which they themselves do not obey, forcing others to accept "facts" they know are only opinions or theories (fables), i.e., lies, which are only used to keep themselves in power), is 'purposed' in coming between the children and the father/Father, "encouraging" the children to dialogue their opinions, i.e., their "feelings," i.e., their desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates (which makes the children seducible, deceivable, and manipulatable by the "psychotherapist," i.e., by the facilitator of 'change') and their dissatisfaction with the father's/Father's authority (which restrains them with facts and truth which gets in their way), to a consensus, i.e., to a "feeling" of "oneness" with one another, affirming each others carnal nature, i.e., 'justifying' each others natural love of pleasure and hate of restraint, in an "open ended," "non-directive," non-offensive, i.e., "positive" environment (which is therefore antithetical, i.e., void of the father's/Father's authority), in order to 'liberate' themselves from the father's/Father's authority, so they, united as one (which is the basis of common-ism/global-ism/human-ism/environmental-ism; class consciousness) can be "of and for self," i.e., of and for the world only, as they were before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into their lives—"repressing" them, preventing them from being at-one-with their "self" and the world, thus "alienating" them from the other children of the world who have the same carnal desires and dissatisfactions—preventing them from having "peace and affirmation" with the children of the world, all who, while thinking according to their carnal nature were unable to put their carnal nature into praxis (social action) because of the father's/Father's authority, i.e., because of the father's/Father's right to chasten them for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning or cast them out for questioning, challenging, disregarding, defying, and/or attacking his/His authority. In this consensus environment of love of pleasure and hate of restraint (being "positive" and not "negative," i.e., being supportive of the children's carnal nature—which is "positive"—and hostile toward the father's/Father's authority—which is "negative"), children (along with the facilitator of 'change') are 'liberated' from having a guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning (which is engendered by the father's/Father's authority) so they can do wrong, disobey, sin with impunity, making the negation the father's authority system or paradigm the 'drive' and the 'purpose' of life (Facebook mentality).

American culture has been rapidly 'changed,' i.e., has been under attack since the 50's. This is the result of the training material (curriculum) that all teachers are certified on and schools are accredited by (commonly referred to as "Bloom's Taxonomies") which requires that the students affective domain, i.e., the children's "feelings" of the 'moment' become the focus ('drive' and 'purpose') of their classroom experience. "We are not attempting to classify the particular subject matter or content [preaching, teaching, and discussing facts and truth which reflect and support the parents way of think and act]." "What we are classifying is the intended behavior of students—the ways in which individuals are to act, think, or feel as the result of participating in some unit of instruction [where the classroom procedure is to "encourage" the students to dialogue their opinions (their "feelings") to a consensus, engendering socialism-globalism instead of preaching, teaching, and discussing facts and truth, supporting parental authority, i.e., individualism-nationalism, i.e., local control]." "Educational procedures are intended to develop the more desirable rather than the more customary types of behavior [develop socialists-globalists, i.e., totalitarianism aka common-ism rather than individualists-nationalists, i.e., local control]." (Benjamin Bloom, et al., Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Book 1, Cognitive Domain) With the children 'discovering' "common ground" in the "group grade" classroom—'justifying' their "feelings," i.e., their common love of pleasure and hate of restraint (the basis of common-ism)—they are empowered to question, challenge, disregard, defy, attack their parent's authority when they get home. "There are many stories of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain)

"In the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself in the other, they experience the common ground of their existence." (Jürgen Habermas, Knowledge & Human Interest, Chapter Three: The Idea of the Theory of Knowledge as Social Theory) By starting with the children's "feelings," i.e., their desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment,' making the children's nature the Thesis, thus making the father's/Father's authority the Antithesis, Synthesis, i.e., consensus, affirmation, common-ism , i.e., the children, united as one, under the "psychotherapist's," i.e., facilitator of 'change's "authority" becomes a 'reality.'

Georg Hegel, in defense of the children's carnal nature, i.e., in defiance to the father's/Father's authority explained it this way: "The child, contrary to appearance, is the absolute, the rationality of the relationship; he is what is enduring and everlasting, the totality which produces itself once again as such [once he is 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority so he can be his "self," i.e., as he was before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into his life, i.e., of the world only]." (Georg Hegel, System of Ethical Life)

Karl Marx, in defense of the children's carnal nature, i.e., in defiance to the father's/Father's authority explained it this way: "Once the earthly family [with the children submitting to the father's authority] is discovered to be the secret of the Holy [heavenly] family [with the Son and those following Him submitting to His Heavenly Father's authority], the former [the earthly family which is subject to the father's authority] must be destroyed [Vernunft, annihilated] in theory and in practice [in the children's private thought and social actions]." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis # 4)

Sigmund Freud, in defense of the children's carnal nature, i.e., in defiance to the father's/Father's authority explained it this way: "'It is not really a decisive matter whether one has killed one's father or abstained from the deed,' if the function of the conflict and its consequences are the same [if the father no longer exercises his authority over the family]." (Sigmund Freud in Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization)

According to Karl Marx: "It is not individualism [where children are under the father's/Father's authority, with each, as individuals, being personally held accountable for their actions, according to the father's/Father's top-down, right-wrong way of thinking and acting] that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him [it gets in the way of his carnal nature]. Society ["human relationship based upon self interest" where children are united upon their common carnal nature, i.e., their natural desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' and their natural dissatisfaction with restraint] is the necessary framework through which freedom [from the father's/Father's authority] and individuality [freedom to be "of and for self," i.e., to be of and for their carnal nature and the world which stimulates it only] are made realities." (Karl Marx, in John Lewis, The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx)

The role (duty) of "group psychotherapists," i.e., of facilitators of 'change' is to come between the father/Father and the children in order to "help" the children 'liberate' their "self" from the father's/Father's authority—so they can rule over the children themselves, using them as "human resource" for their own pleasure and gain, disregarding or casting them aside, i.e., "removing" them when they no longer serve their 'purpose' or get in their way ("throwing them under the bus" as Adam did to Eve in the garden in Eden when he got caught doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, becoming the first 'liberal' along with the woman, i.e., Eve who threw the facilitator of 'change' "under the bus" as well, both having been counseled by the first—and master—facilitator of 'change,' becoming like him, liars, refusing to accept the father's/Father's authority, repent, and turn from their deceitful and wicked ways, 'justifying' their deceitful and wicked ways instead). The dialectic process is the praxis of Genesis 3:1-6, i.e., "self" 'justification' being used to negate Hebrews 12:5-11, i.e., the father's/Father's authority, negating Romans 7:14-25, the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in the process

There is no Synthesis.

In the end, despite what the master facilitator of 'change,' i.e., the master "psychotherapist" and his followers might say, there is ONLY Thesis and Antithesis, i.e., Heaven and Hell, eternal life and eternal death—the Father, and His only begotten, obedient son, Jesus Christ, along with His followers spending eternity in Glory and the master facilitator of 'change,' his angels, and his followers, spending eternity in the lake of fire that is never quenched.

It is not that God hates man. He hates sin. If man, rejecting God's call to repentance—having provided, through His son, Jesus Christ, the way to salvation—continues to hold onto sin instead, i.e., 'justifies' his carnal nature, i.e., his love of self and the world over and therefore against God's authority, he will be judged according to his praxis, i.e., according to his sins.

"The heart is deceitful above all things [thinking pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the father's/Father's will], and desperately wicked [hating whoever prevents, i.e., inhibits or blocks it from enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' it desires, which the world stimulates]: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9

"And for this cause [because men, as "children of disobedience," 'justify' themselves, i.e., their love of "self" and the world, i.e., their love of the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates over and therefore against the Father and His authority] God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie [that pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the Father's will]: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth [in the Father and in His Son, Jesus Christ], but had pleasure in unrighteousness [in their "self" and the pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates]." 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 12

"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise." "I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me." "For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak." John 5:19, 30; 12:47-50

"And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven." Matthew 23:9

"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my father which is in heaven." Matthew 7:21

"... and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." 1 John 1:3

Those promoting the dialectic process, i.e., "psychotherapists," i.e., facilitators of 'change' have only one 'drive' and one 'purpose,' that of making sure all men, women, and children die in their sins—so they can join them in the lake of fire that is never quenched. Although they might deny that, that is what they are doing to themselves and all who follow after them, "justifying themselves before men."