What are the likely results from the dialectic process and how can these be obtained
See also The Dialectic Process - Argumentation without Concensus and What is the difference between an accommodation and a consensus
Based on the provided sources, the dialectic process is a structured method of inquiry that generates knowledge by forcing a confrontation between opposing views (Thesis vs. Antithesis). It is specifically designed to handle “wicked problems” or “messes” where no single objective formulation exists.
Here are the likely results of the dialectic process and the specific mechanisms to obtain them.
1. The Likely Results (Outcomes)
The dialectic process does not typically result in “proving” one side right and the other wrong. Instead, it produces higher-order outcomes that resolve the conflict at a new level.
A. Synthesis (A New Mental Model)
The primary goal of a dialectical inquiry is Synthesis. This is not a compromise (meeting halfway), but a completely new conceptualization of the problem that absorbs the valid assumptions of both the Thesis and the Antithesis.
• The Result: A new worldview that creates a “third reality,” bridging the opposing policies by reformulating the problem entirely [Mitroff 33, 44].
• The Benefit: This prevents the “Error of the Third Kind” (E3)—solving the wrong problem precisely—by ensuring the problem definition is broad enough to encompass multiple valid perspectives [Mitroff 35].
B. Accommodation (Actionable Agreement)
In pluralist contexts where values differ fundamentally, “consensus” (total agreement) is impossible. The dialectic process produces Accommodation.
• The Result: A version of the situation that conflicting stakeholders can “live with” and act upon, even if they do not share the same Weltanschauung (worldview) [Checkland 24, 25; Jackson 35].
• The Benefit: It allows for “culturally feasible” change to occur despite permanent conceptual differences between stakeholders [Checkland 29].
C. Emergence of the “X-Element” (Innovation)
In the Triz (technical dialectic) framework, the conflict between two mutually exclusive properties leads to the birth of a new element.
• The Result: The “X-element” (or “Baby”). This is a resource, field, or configuration that resolves the contradiction (e.g., creating a system that is both rigid and flexible) by creating a new stable cycle (homeostasis) [Triz 7, 16].
• The Benefit: The system evolves to a higher level of complexity rather than remaining stuck in a trade-off [Triz 18].
D. Strategic Fit via Viability
In Cybernetics (VSM), the dialectic occurs between the “Now” (System 3) and the “Future” (System 4).
• **The Result:**Identity and Policy. System 5 (Policy) resolves the tension between current stability and future adaptation. If this dialectic is resolved well, the result is a “Viable System” that can survive in a changing environment [Beer 26, 28; Hoverstadt 21].
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. How to Obtain These Results (The Methodology)
To obtain these results, you cannot simply hold a discussion. You must artificially induce and structure conflict using the following steps:
Step 1: Form Adversarial Groups (The Setup)
You must create a structure that prevents groupthink.
• Action: Divide participants into groups advocating for opposing plans (e.g., Plan A vs. Plan B, or Status Quo vs. Radical Change).
• Mechanism: Use Maximum Diversity. Group people by conflicting personality types, functional areas (e.g., Finance vs. Marketing), or vested interests to ensure the widest possible divergence of worldviews [Mitroff 4, 5].
Step 2: Surface the “Givens” as “Takens” (The Assumption Attack)
The debate must not focus on conclusions (which are visible) but on assumptions (which are hidden).
• Action: Each group must identify the Strategic Assumptions of the opposing group.
• Mechanism: Ask the “Assumption Attack” questions:
◦ “Under what worldview is your plan ‘optimal’?” [Mitroff 28]. ◦ “What do you have to assume about the stakeholders (e.g., customers, competitors) for your plan to succeed?” [Mitroff 17]. ◦ “If the opposite of this assumption were true, would your plan fail?” [Mitroff 33].
Step 3: Structured Debate (The Toulmin Schema)
To prevent the dialectic from degenerating into a shouting match, the conflict must be structured using logic.
• Action: Require groups to present their arguments using the Toulmin Schema.
• Mechanism: They must explicitly map the Data (evidence), the Claim (conclusion), the Warrant (the principle connecting them), and the Backing (the underlying belief supporting the warrant) [Mitroff 42, 43].
• Goal: This exposes the “logic of the other,” making synthesis possible [Mitroff 26].
Step 4: The “Unfolding” (Sweeping In the Enemy)
You must expand the system boundaries to include those who disagree with the premise of the design.
• Action: “Sweep in” the perspectives of the “Enemies” of the system (Politics, Morality, Religion, Aesthetics) [Churchman 10, 84].
• Mechanism: Identify the “Witness”—the person affected by the system who has no power to change it. Use their perspective as the antithesis to the planner’s thesis [Churchman 28; Jackson 44].
Step 5: Break Symmetry (Destabilization)
In technical or creative investigations (Triz), you must force the system out of balance to trigger the search for a solution.
• Action: Artificially satisfy one conflicting property (the “Father”) to force the other property (the “Mother”) into a chaotic state.
• Mechanism: Allow the unresolved property to “oscillate” or “hunt” through the information field until it finds the “X-element” that resolves the tension [Triz 5, 8, 12].
Summary Checklist for the Investigator
To ensure you are conducting a true dialectic process, ask:
1. Have we created distinct, opposing positions? (If everyone agrees, the process has failed) [Mitroff 3].
2. Are we debating assumptions rather than conclusions? [Mitroff 9].
3. Have we included the “Witness” or “Victim” to provide the antithesis? [Churchman 10].
4. Are we seeking Synthesis/Accommodation rather than compromise? [Checkland 29; Mitroff 44].