Would you mind explaining what you mean be dialectic?
the link would do better at that, post 1, but be advised that there is also a "dialectic" that is defined as not Eastern thinking but like "satan's way of arguing," that you might find by searching "dialectic" onsite. Personally i think they are just denials of Eastern thought by lovers of logic--which i don't mean to imply that logic does not have a place--who are eager to insist that the Bible is the Word, and Jesus is God, by way of validating their beliefs and discounting everyone else's, but that is just imo.
Western Logic Versus Eastern Dialecticism
Aristotle placed at the foundations of logical thought the following three propositions.
1. Identity: A = A. Whatever is, is. A is itself and not some other thing.
2. Noncontradiction: A and not A can't both be the case. Nothing can both be and not be. A proposition and its opposite can't both be true.
3. Excluded middle: Everything must either be or not be. A or not A can be true but not something in between.
Modern Westerners accept these propositions (but Easterners do not)...
...three principles underlie Eastern dialecticism. Notice I didn't say "propositions..." the term "proposition" has much too formal a ring for what is a generalized stance toward the world rather than a set of ironclad rules.
1.
Principle of change:
Reality is a process of change.
What is currently true will shortly be false.
2.
Principle of contradiction:
Contradiction is the dynamic underlying change.
Because change is constant, contradiction is constant.
3.
Principle of relationships (or holism):
The whole is more than the sum of its parts.
Parts are meaningful only in relation to the whole...
These principles are intimately linked...
The principles also imply another important tenet of Eastern thought, which is the insistence on finding the "middle way" between extreme propositions...
...
and Talmudic scholars developed it over the next two millennia and more.
"Mindware" Richard E. Nisbett, pp. 224-5