Dialectical Materialism Cornforth

8/13/2019 Dialectical Materialism Cornforth

1/112

Contents

Part One: Materialism

1. Party Philosophy 42. Materialism and Idealism 133. Mechanistic Materialism 254. From Mechanistic to Dialectical Materialism345. The Dialectical Conception of Development41

Part Two: Dialectics

6. Dialectics and Metaphysics 47. Chan!e and Interconnections "#8. The $a%s of Development "9. The &e% and the 'ld ()10. The &e!ation of the &e!ation )511. Criticism and *elf+Criticism 212. Dialectical Materialism and *cience )

Concl,sions 1#)

-ilio!raphy 11#

1


2/112

Forward by M. Hyland

This book was typed up from the International Publishers opy!

ri"ht 19#$. %ediated& 'In (emory of %a)id *uest& +ho %ied in ,pain

in the ,tru""le -"ainst asism./

This tet is& in the opinion of the editorial board and a sur)ey ofa doen or so older omrades& the best 3n"lish lan"ua"e tet on %ialet!ial (aterialism a)ailable& perhaps best written to date. +e hope that

you will find it informati)e and easy to approah. ornforth writes to themasses in the plain 3n"lish of his re"ion and time 41958 3n"land& and

stiks to a strai"ht presentation of the theory and the fats& withoutdel)in" into detailed tehnial proofs not appropriate for introdutory

readers of philosophy or (arism.

It has been out of print for many years& likely due to the unfortu!nate and freuent referenes to the works of . ,talin& who has sine the

ori"inal publiation beome a ontro)ersial fi"ure. It is the opinion of

myself as well as the PP that we are as a ommunity smart enou"h to

take the "ood and lea)e the bad& realie that e)en broken loks are ri"ht

twie a day& and "ood or bad& the man knew his way around a dialeti

well enou"h to be ited.

It is not the intention of this forward or this republiation to

rehabilitate ,talin& or e)en to disuss him at all beyond makin" it learthat lea)in" ornforth:s itations as they appear in the ori"inal tet wasan editorial deision to preser)e for posterity& and maintain the inte"rity

of the tet as it was written. I will lea)e the rest of the eplanation to theauthor& "ood luk;

eel free to send your uestions& and your hate mail to!

pusawashin"ton


3/112

Forward by M. Cornforth, the Author

The present )olume deals with the basi ideas of (arist materi!

alism and the dialetial method. - seond )olume will deal with the fur!ther de)elopment of these ideas in their appliation to soiety and the

"rowth of human onsiousness=historial materialism and the theoryof knowled"e.

I ha)e tried to onfine myself to a strai"htforward eposition of

the leadin" ideas of dialetial materialism& so far as I myself ha)e su!

eeded in understandin" them& without burdenin" the eposition with

di"ressions into more tehnial uestions of philosophy& or with disus!

sions about the polemis a"ainst any of the more abstruse philosophial

theories& past or present& or with muh of the ar"umentation about parti!

ular points whih mi"ht be neessary to defend them a"ainst philosoph!ial opponents.

I ha)e done my best to limit the use of tehnial terms to theminimum& and to "i)e an eplanation of the meanin" of all suh terms as

and when they our.

3


4/112

Part One: Materialism

. Party Philoso!hyEvery philosophy expresses a class outlook. But in contrast tothe exploiting classes, which have always sought to uphold

and justify their class position by various disguises and falsi-

fications, the working class, from its very class position and

aims, is concerned to know and understand things just as they

are, without disguise or falsification.

The party of the working class needs a philosophy which

expresses a revolutionary class outlook. The alternative is to

embrace ideas hostile to the working class and to socialism.This determines the materialist character of our philosophy.

arty hilosophy and !lass hilosophy%ialetial materialism has been defined by ,talin as 'The

world outlook of the (arist!>eninist Party./1This definition must appear a stran"e one& both to many politi!

ians and to many philosophers. ?ut we will not be"in to understand dia!letial materialism unless we an "rasp the thou"ht whih lies behind

this definition.>et us ask& first of all& what oneption of philosophy lies behind

the idea epressed in this definition of party or=sine a party is alwaysthe politial representati)e of a lass=lass philosophy.

?y philosophy is usually meant our most "eneral aount of the

nature of the world and of mankind:s plae and destiny in it=our world

outlook.That bein" understood& it is e)ident that e)erybody has some

kind of philosophy& e)en thou"h he has ne)er learned to disuss it.

3)erybody is influened by philosophial )iews& e)en thou"h he has not

thou"ht them out for himself and annot formulate them.,ome people& for eample& think that this world is nothin" but 'a

)ale of tears/ and that our life in it is the preparation of a better life inanother and better world. They aordin"ly belie)e that we should suffer

whate)er befalls us with fortitude& not stru""lin" a"ainst it& but tryin" todo whate)er "ood we an to our fellow reatures. This is one kind of

philosophy& one kind of world outlook.@ther people think that the world is a plae to "row rih in& and

that eah should look out for himself. This is another kind of philosophy.

1 oseph ,talin&"ialectical and #istorical $aterialism,A.B.& 1950.

4


5/112

?ut "ranted that our philosophy is our world outlook& the taskarises of workin" out this world outlook systematially and in detail&

turnin" it into a well!formulated and oherent theory& turnin" )a"uelyheld popular beliefs and attitudes into more or less systemati dotrines.

This is what the philosophers do.?y the time philosophers ha)e worked out their theories& they

ha)e often produed somethin" )ery ompliated& )ery abstrat and )ery

hard to understand. ?ut e)en thou"h only a omparati)ely few people

may read and di"est the atual produtions of philosophers& these pro!

dutions may and ha)e a )ery wide influene. or the fat that philo!

sophers ha)e systematied ertain beliefs reinfores those beliefs& and

helps to impose them upon wide masses of ordinary people. Cene&

e)eryone is influened in one way or another by philosophers& e)enthou"h they ha)e ne)er read the works of those philosophers.

-nd if this is the ase& then we annot re"ard the systems of thephilosophers as bein" wholly ori"inal& as bein" wholly the produts of

the brain!work of the indi)idual philosophers. @f ourse& the formulationof )iews& the peuliar ways in whih they are worked out and written

down& is the work of the partiular philosopher. ?ut the )iews them!

sel)es& in their most "eneral aspet& ha)e a soial basis in ideas whih

reflet the soial ati)ities and soial relations of the time& and whih&therefore& do not sprin" ready!made out of the heads of the philosophers.

rom this we may proeed a step further.

+hen soiety is di)ided into lasses=and soiety always has

been di)ided into lasses e)er sine the dissolution of the primiti)e om!

munes& that is to say& throu"hout the entire historial period to whih the

history of philosophy belon"s=then the )arious )iews whih are urrentin soiety always epress the outlooks of )arious lasses. +e may on!

lude& therefore& that the )arious systems of the philosophers also alwaysepress a lass outlook. They are& in fat& nothin" but the systemati

workin" out and theoretial formulation of a lass outlook& or& if youprefer& of the ideolo"y of definite lasses.

Philosophy is and always has been lass philosophy. Philosoph!ers may pretend it is not& but that does not alter the fat.

or people do not and annot think in isolation from soiety& and

therefore from the lass interests and lass stru""les whih per)ade soi!

ety& any more than they an li)e and at in suh isolation. - philosophy isa world outlook& an attempt to understand the world& mankind and man:s

plae in the world. ,uh an outlook annot be anythin" but the outlook of

a lass& and the philosopher funtions as the thinkin" representati)e of a

lass. Cow an it be otherwiseD Philosophies are not imported from someother planet& but are produed here on earth& by people in)ol)ed& whether

5


6/112

they like it or not& in eistin" lass relations and lass stru""les. There!fore& whate)er philosophers say about themsel)es& there is no philosophy

whih does not embody a lass outlook& or whih is impartial& as opposedto partisan& in relation to lass stru""les. ,earh as we may& we shall not

find any impartial& non!partisan& non!lass philosophy.?earin" that in mind& then& we shall find that the philosophies of

the past ha)e all& in one way or another& epressed the outlook of the so!

alled 'eduated/ lasses& that is to say& of the eploitin" lasses. In "en!

eral& it is the leaders of soiety who epress and propa"ate their ideas in

the form of systemati philosophies. -nd up to the appearane of the

modern workin" lass& whih is the peuliar produt of apitalism& these

leaders ha)e always been the eploitin" lasses. It is their outlook whih

has dominated philosophy& Eust as they ha)e dominated soiety.+e an only onlude from this that the workin" lass& if today it

intends to take o)er leadership of soiety& needs to epress its own lassoutlook in philosophial form& and to oppose this philosophy to the

philosophies whih epress the outlook and defend the interest of theeploiters.

'The ser)ies rendered by (ar and 3n"els to the workin" lass

may be epressed in a few words thus they tau"ht the workin" lass to

know itself and be onsious of itself& and they substituted siene fordreams&/ wrote >enin.2

'It is the "reat and histori merit of (ar and 3n"els that they

pro)ed by sientifi analysis the ine)itability of the ollapse of apital!

ism and its transition to ommunism& under whih there will be no more

eploitation of man by man...that they indiated to the proletarians of all

ountries their role& their task& their mission& namely& to be the first torally around themsel)es in this stru""le all the toilers and eploited./$

Teahin" the workin" lass 'to know itself and be onsious ofitself&/ and to rally around itself 'all the toilers and eploited&/ (ar and

3n"els founded and established the re)olutionary theory of work!in"!lass stru""le& whih illumines the road by whih the workin" lass

an throw off apitalist eploitation& an take the leadership of all themasses of the people& and so free the whole of soiety one and for all of

all oppression and eploitation of man by man.

(ar and 3n"els wrote in the period when apitalism was still in

the asendant and when the fores of the workin" lass were first bein"rallied and or"anied. Their theory was further ontinued by >enin& in the

2 %enin on Engels& A.B.& 19$6

$ &bid.

6


7/112

period when apitalism had reahed its final sta"e of monopoly apital!ism or imperialism& and when the proletarian soialist re)olution had

be"un. It is bein" further ontinued by ,talin.(ar and 3n"els tau"ht that without its own party& the workin"

lass ertainly ould not win )itory o)er apitalism& ould not lead thewhole of soiety forward to the abolition of apitalism and the establish!

ment of soialism. The workin" lass must ha)e its own party& independ!

ent of all bour"eois parties. urther de)elopin" the (arist teahin"s

about the party& >enin showed that the party must at as the )an"uard of

its lass& the most onsious setion of its lass& and that it is the instru!

ment for winnin" and wieldin" politial power.

To fulfill suh a role& the party must e)idently ha)e knowled"e&

understandin" and )isionF in other words& it must be euipped withre)olutionary theory& on whih its poliies are based and by whih its

ati)ities are "uided.This theory is the theory of (arism!>eninism. -nd it is not Eust

an eonomi theory& nor yet elusi)ely a politial theory& but a worldoutlook=a philosophy. 3onomi and politial )iews are not and ne)er

an be independent of a "eneral world outlook. ,peifi eonomi and

politial )iews epress the world outlook of those who hold suh )iews&

and on)ersely& philosophial )iews find epression in )iews on eonom!is and politis.

Geo"niin" all this& the re)olutionary party of the workin" lass

annot but formulate& and ha)in" formulated& hold fast to& de)elop and

treasure its party philosophy. In this philosophy=dialetial materialism

=are embodied the "eneral ideas by means of whih the party under!

stands the world whih it is seekin" to han"e and in terms of whih itdefines its aims and workin" out how to fi"ht for them. In this philo!

sophy are embodied the "eneral ideas by means of whih the party seeksto enli"hten and or"anie the whole lass& and to influene& "uide and

win o)er all the masses of workin" people& showin" the onlusionswhih must be drawn from eah sta"e of the stru""le& helpin" people to

learn from their own eperiene how to "o forward towards soialism.-nd so we see why it is that in our times a philosophy has arisen

whih epresses the re)olutionary world outlook of the workin" lass&

and that this philosophy=dialetial materialism=is defined as 'the

world outlook of the (arist!>eninist Party./3periene itself has tau"ht the party the need for philosophy.

or eperiene shows that if we do not ha)e our own re)olutionary

soialist philosophy& then ine)itably we borrow our ideas from hostile&

anti!soialist soures. If we do not adopt today the outlook of the work!in" lass and of the stru""le for soialism& then we adopt=or slip into&

7


8/112

without meanin" to do so=that of the apitalists and of the stru""lea"ainst soialism. This is why the workin" lass party=if it is to be the

"enuine re)olutionary leadership of its lass& and is not to mislead itslass by the importation of hostile apitalist ideas& and of poliies orres!

pondin" to suh ideas=must be onerned to formulate& defend andpropa"ate its own re)olutionary philosophy.

!lass hilosophy and Truth-"ainst what has Eust been said about a lass and party philo!

sophy& the obEetion is bound to be raised that suh a oneption is aomplete tra)esty of the whole idea of philosophy.

lass interests may inline us to belie)e one thin" rather than

another& some will say& but should not philosophy be abo)e thisD ,houldnot philosophy be obEeti)e& and impartial& and teah us to set lass and

party interests aside& and to seek only for the truthD or surely what is

true is true& whether this suits some or other lass interests or notD If

philosophy is partisan=party philosophy=how an it be obEeti)e& how

an it be true philosophyD

In reply to suh obEetions& we may say that the workin" lass

standpoint in philosophy is )ery far indeed from ha)in" no onern for

truth.Is there no suh thin" as truthD @f ourse there is=and men are

"ettin" nearer to it. or different outlooks& partisan as they may be& are

not on a le)el so far as nearness to the truth is onerned. 3)ery philo!sophy embodies a lass outlook. Bes& but Eust as one lass differs from

another lass in its soial role and in its ontribution to the de)elopmentof soiety& so one philosophy embodies positi)e ahie)ements in ompar!

ison with another in the workin" out of the truth about the world andsoiety.

People are prone to belie)e that if we adopt partisan& lass stand!

point& then we turn our baks on truthF and that& on the other hand& if we

"enuinely seek for truth& the we must be stritly impartial and non!par!

tisan. ?ut the ontrary is the ase. It is only when we adopt the partisan

standpoint of historially the most pro"ressi)e lass that we are able to

"et nearer to the truth.

The definition of dialetial materialism& therefore& as the philo!sophy of the re)olutionary workin"!lass party& is in no way inompat!

ible with the laim of dialetial materialism to epress truth& and to be ameans of arri)in" at truth. @n the ontrary. +e ha)e e)ery ri"ht to make

this laim& in )iew of the atual historial position and role of the work!in" lass.

8


9/112

3ept for the workin" lass& all other lasses whih ha)easpired to take the leadership of soiety ha)e been eploitin" lasses. ?ut

e)ery eploitin" lass& whate)er its ahie)ements& has always to findsome way of disguisingits real position and aims& both from itself and

from the eploited& and of makin" out that its rule is Eust and permanent.or suh a lass an ne)er reo"nie its real position and aims as an

eploitin" lass& or the temporary harater of its own system.

or eample& in anient sla)e soiety& -ristotle& the "reatest

philosopher of antiuity& made out that the institution of sla)ery was

dereed by nature& sine some men were by nature sla)es.

In the heyday of feudal soiety the "reatest philosopher of the

middle a"es& Thomas -uinas& represented the entire uni)erse as bein" a

kind of feudal system. 3)erythin" was arran"ed in a feudal hier!arhy&5with *od surrounded by the hief arhan"els at the top.

3)erythin" depended on what was net abo)e it in the system& and noth!in" ould eist without *od.

-s for apitalism& it dissol)es all feudal ties and& as (ar and3n"els obser)ed& 'has left remainin" no other neus between man and

man than naked self!interest& than allous ash payment./#This was

refleted in the be"innin" of apitalist philosophy& espeially in ?ritain.

This philosophy saw the world as onsistin" of independentatoms& eah omplete in itself& onerned only with itself& and all inter!

atin". This was a mirror of apitalist soiety& as seen by the risin" bour!

"eoisie. -nd by means of suh ideas they sueeded too& in dis"uisin"

their own aims of domination and profit. +orker and apitalist were 'on

a le)el&/ eah was a free human atom& and they entered into a free on!

trat& the one to work& the other to pro)ide apital and pay wa"es.?ut the workin" lass does not need any suh 'false onsious!

ness/ as is ontained in suh philosophies. It does not want to set up anew system of eploitation& but to abolish all eploitation of man by

man. or this reason& it has no interest whate)er in dis"uisin" anythin"&but rather in understandin" thin"s Eust as they really are. or the better it

understands the truth& the more is it stren"thened in its stru""le.(oreo)er& other lasses ha)e always wanted to perpetuate them!

sel)es and to last out for as lon" as they ould. -nd so they ha)e fa)ored

philosophial 'systems/ whih "i)e themsel)es a permanent plae in the

5 - hierarchy is an order in whih the thin"s at the top rule o)er the thin"s

below them. Thus the serfs were at the bottom of the feudal hierarhy and

the kind was at the top. ,imilarly& the Pope is the head of the 'atholi

hierarhy./

# Harl (ar and rederik 3n"els& The !ommunist $anifesto, hapter I& A.B.&

1958.

9


10/112

uni)erse so as to represent ertain thin"s and ertain relations as bein"neessary& eternal and unhan"eable. -nd then they make it appear that a

partiular soial system is a neessary part of the whole.?ut the workin" lass does not want to perpetuate itself. @n the

ontrary& it wants to do away with its own eistene as a lass as uiklyas possible& and to establish a lassless soiety. Therefore& the workin"

lass has no use at all for any philosophial 'system/ whih establishes

any false permanene. Its lass position and aims are suh that it an

afford to and needs to reo"nie and trae out the han"e& omin" into

bein" and easin" to be of everythingin eistene.

Party philosophy& then& has a ri"ht to lay laim to truth. or it is

the only philosophy whih is based on a standpoint whih demands that

we should always seek to understand thin"s Eust as they are& in all theirmanifold han"es and interonnetions& without dis"uises and without

fantasy.

' (evolution in hilosophy'The (arian dotrine is omnipotent beause it is true&/ wrote

>enin. 'It is omplete and harmonious& and pro)ides men with an inte"!

ral world oneption whih is irreonilable with any form of supersti!

tion& reation or defense of bour"eois oppression./6

-nd he further wrote'There is nothin" resemblin" :setarianism: in (arism& in the

sense of its bein" a hidebound& petrified dotrine& a dotrine whih aroseaway from the hi"hroad of de)elopment of world i)iliation. @n the

ontrary& the "enius of (ar onsists preisely in the fat that he fur!nished answers to uestions the foremost minds of mankind had already

raised. Cis teahin"s arose as the diret and immediate continuation ofthe teahin"s of the "reatest representati)es of philosophy& politial eo!

nomy and soialism./7

(arism is a re)olution in philosophy. This re)olution appears

as the ulmination of a whole "reat de)elopment of philosophial

thou"ht& in whih the problems of philosophy were posed and took shape

in the ourse of a series of re)olutions& the hi"hest point bein" reahed in

the lassial *erman philosophy of the early nineteenth entury. (ar!

ism is thus the ontinuation and ulmination of the past ahie)ements ofphilosophy. -nd it is a ontinuation whih puts and end to an epoh and

6 Harl (ar& rederik 3n"els& . I. >enin& oseph ,talin& )n the Theory of

$arxism& >enin& 'The Three ,oures and Three omponent Parts of

(arism&/ A.B.& 1958.

7 &bid.

10


11/112

onstitutes a new point of departure. In omparison with past philo!sophies& it launhes out on new lines. It puts an end to the 'systems/ of

the past& and is a philosophy of an entirely new kind.(arism!>eninism is no lon"er a philosophy whih epresses

the world outlook of an eploitin" lass& of a minority& stri)in" to imposeits rule and its ideas upon the masses of the people& in order to keep them

subEetsF but it is a philosophy whih ser)es the ommon people in their

stru""le to throw off all eploitation and to build a lassless soiety.

(arism!>eninism is a philosophy whih seeks to understand

the world in order to han"e it. 'The philosophers ha)e only interpreted

the world in )arious ways&/ wrote (ar. 'The point& howe)er& is to

han"e it./8Therefore& if we ould say of past philosophy that it has been

an attempt to understand the world and man:s plae and destiny in it=anattempt neessarily onditioned by the lass outlook& preEudies and illu!

sions of the )arious eploitin" lass philosophers=we ha)e to say of(arist!>eninist philosophy that it is an attempt to understand the world

in order to han"e the world and to shape and realie man:s destiny in it.%ialetial materialism is a theoretial instrument in the hands of the

people for use in han"in" the world.

(arism!>eninism& therefore& seeks to base our ideas of thin"s

on nothin" but the atual in)esti"ation of them& arisin" from and testedby eperiene and pratie. It does not in)ent a 'system&/ as pre)ious

philosophies ha)e done& and then try to make e)erythin" fit into it.

Thus dialetial materialism is in the truest sense a popular

philosophy& a sientifi philosophy and a philosophy of pratie.

'The diso)ery of (ar and 3n"els represents the end of the old

philosophy& i.e. the end of that philosophy whih laimed to "i)e a uni!)ersal eplanation of the world&/ said -. -. Jhdano).

'+ith the appearane of (arism as the sientifi world outlookof the proletariat there ends the old period in the history of philosophy&

when philosophy was the oupation of isolated indi)iduals& the posses!sion of philosophial shools onsistin" of a small number of philosoph!

ers and their disiples& detahed from life and the people& and alien to thepeople.

'(arism is not suh a philosophial shool. @n the ontrary& it

supersedes the old philosophy=the philosophy that was the property of a

small elite& the aristoray of the intellet. It marked the be"innin" of aompletely new period of history of philosophy& when it beame a si!

entifi weapon in the hands of the proletarian masses in their stru""le for

emanipation from apitalism.

8 rederik 3n"els&%udwig *euerbach,-ppendies& Harl (ar& 'Theses on

euerbah&/ KI& A.B.& 1951.

11


12/112

'(arist philosophy& as distin"uished from preedin" philosoph!ial systems& is not a siene abo)e other sienesF rather& it is an instru!

ment of sientifi in)esti"ation& a method& penetratin" all natural andsoial sienes& enrihin" itself with their attainments in the ourse of

their de)elopment. In this sense& (arist philosophy is the most om!pletely and deisi)e ne"ation of all preedin" philosophy. ?ut to ne"ate&

as 3n"els emphasied& does not mean merely to say :no:. Ae"ation

inludes ontinuity& si"nifies absorption& the ritial reformin" and uni!

fiation in a new and hi"her synthesis of e)erythin" ad)aned and pro!

"ressi)e that has been ahie)ed in the history of human thou"ht./9

The re)olutionary harateristis of dialetial materialism are

embodied in the two features of (arist!>eninist philosophy whih "i)e

it its name=dialetis and materialism.In order to understand thin"s so as to han"e them we must study

them& not aordin" to the ditates of any abstrat system& but in theirreal han"es and interonnetions=and that is what is meant by dia!

letis.+e must set aside preonei)ed ideas and fanies about thin"s&

and stri)e to make our theories orrespond to the real onditions of

material eistene=and that means that our outlook and theory are

materialist.In the dialetial materialism& wrote 3n"els& 'the materialist

world outlook was taken really seriously for the first time and was ar!

ried throu"h onsistently.../ or 'it was resol)ed to omprehend the real

world=nature and history=Eust as it presents itself to e)eryone who

approahes it free from preonei)ed idealist fanies. It was deided

relentlessly to sarifie e)ery idealist fany whih ould not be brou"htinto harmony with the fats onei)ed in their own and not in a fantasti

onnetion. -nd materialism means nothin" more than this./10

9 -ndrei -. Jhdano)&Essays on %iterature, hilosophy, and $usic, hapter II&

A. B.& 19#0.

10 3n"els&%udwig *euerbach, hapter I.

12


13/112

". Materialism and #dealism$aterialism is opposed to idealism since, while idealism hold

that the spiritual or ideal is prior to the material, materialism

holds that matter is prior. This difference manifests itself in

opposed ways of interpreting and understanding every +ues-tion, and so in opposed attitudes in practice.

hile idealism takes many subtle forms in the writings of

philosophers, it is at bottom a continuation of belief in the

supernatural. &t involves belief in two worlds, in the ideal or

supernatural world over against the real material world.

&n essence idealism is a conservative, reactionary force and

its reactionary influence is demonstrated in practice. $arxism

adopts a consistent standpoint of militant materialism.

$aterialism and &dealism)pposed ays of &nterpret-

ing Every /uestion@ur philosophy is alled %ialetial (aterialism& said ,talin&

'beause its approah to the phenomena1of nature& its method of study!

in" and apprehendin" them& is dialetial& while its interpretation of the

phenomena& its theory& is materialisti./2

(aterialism is not a do"mati system. It is rather a way of inter!pretin"& onei)in" of& eplainin" e)ery uestion.

The materialist way of interpretin" e)ents& of onei)in" of

thin"s and their interonnetions& is opposed to the idealist way of inter!pretin" and onei)in" of them. (aterialism is opposed to idealism. +ith

e)ery uestion& there are materialist and idealist ways of interpretin" it&materialist and idealist ways of tryin" to understand it.

Thus the materialism and idealism are not two opposed abstrat

theories about the nature of the world& of small onern to ordinary pra!

tial folk. They are opposed ways of interpretin" and understandin"

e)ery uestion& and onseuently& they epress opposite approahes in

pratie and lead to )ery different onlusions in terms of pratial ati)!

ity.

Aor are they& as some use the terms& opposite moral attitudes=

the one hi"h!minded& the other base and self!seekin". If we use the terms

like this& we will ne)er understand the opposition between apitalist andmaterialist oneptions.

or this way of speakin" is& as 3n"els said& nothin" but 'anunpardonable onession to the traditional philistine preEudie a"ainst the

word materialism resultin" from the lon"!ontinued defamation by the

1 -phenomenon,pluralphenomena,is anythin" whih we obser)e.

2 ,talin&"ialectical and #istorical $aterialism.

13


14/112

priests. ?y the word materialism the philistine understands "luttony&drunkenness& lust of the eye& lust of the flesh& arro"ane& upidity& miser!

liness& profit!huntin" and stok!ehan"e swindlin"=in short& all thefilthy )ies in whih he himself indul"es in pri)ate. ?y the word idealism

he understands the belief in )irtue& uni)ersal philanthropy and in a "en!eral way a :better world:& of whih he boasts before others./$

?efore tryin" to define materialism and idealism in "eneral

terms& let us onsider how these two ways of understandin" thin"s are

epressed in relation to ertain simple and familiar uestions. This will

help us to "rasp the si"nifiane of the distintion between a materialist

and an idealist interpretation.

irst let us onsider a )ery familiar natural phenomenon=a

thunderstorm. +hat auses thunderstormsD-n idealist way of answerin" this uestion is to say that thunder!

storms are due to the an"er of *od. ?ein" an"ry& he arran"es for li"ht!nin" and thunderbolts to desend upon mankind.

The materialist way of understandin" thunderstorms is opposedto this. The materialist will try to eplain and understand thunderstorms

as bein" solely due to what we all natural fores. or eample& anient

materialists su""ested that far from thunderstorms bein" due to the an"er

of the "ods& they were aused by material partiles in the louds ban"in"a"ainst one another. That this partiular eplanation was wron"& is not

the point the point is that it was an attempt at materialist as opposed to

idealist eplanation. Aowadays a "reat deal more is known about thun!

derstorms arisin" from the sientifi in)esti"ation of the natural fores

in)ol)ed. Hnowled"e remains )ery inomplete& but at all e)ents enou"h

is know to make it uite lear that the eplanation must be on materialistlines& so that the idealist eplanation has beome thorou"hly disredited.

It will be seen that while the idealist eplanation tries to relatethe phenomenon to be eplained to somespiritualause=in this ase the

an"er of *od=the materialist eplanation relates it to material auses.In this eample& most eduated people today would a"ree in

aeptin" the materialist interpretation. This is beause they "enerallyaept thescientificeplanation of natural phenomena& and e)ery

ad)ane of natural siene is an ad)ane in the materialistunderstandin"

of nature.

>et us take a seond eample& this time one arisin" out of soiallife. or instane +hy are there rih and poorD This is a uestion whih

many people ask& espeially poor people.

$ 3n"els&%udwig *euerbach, !hapter &&.

14


15/112

The most strai"htforward idealist answer to this uestion is tosay simply=It is beause *od made them so. It is the will of *od that

some should be rih and other poor.?ut other less strai"htforward idealist eplanations are more in

)o"ue. or eample it is beause some men are areful and farsi"hted&and these husband their resoures and "row rih& while others are thrift!

less and stupid& and these remain poor. Those who fa)or this type of

eplanation say that it is all due to eternal 'human nature./ The nature of

man and of soiety is suh that the distintion of rih and poor neessar!

ily arises.

ust as in the ase of the thunderstorm& so in the ase of the rih

and poor& the idealist seeks for some spiritual ause=if not in the will of

*od& the di)ine mind& then in ertain innate harateristis of the humanmind.

The materialist& on the other hand& seeks the reason in the mater!ial& eonomi onditions of soial life. If soiety is di)ided into rih and

poor& it is beause the prodution of the material means of life is soordered that some ha)e possession of the land and other means of pro!

dution while the rest ha)e to work for them. Cowe)er hard they may

work and howe)er muh they may srape and sa)e& the non!possessors

will remain poor& while the possessors "row rih on the fruits of theirlabor.

@n suh uestions& therefore& the differene between a materialist

and an idealist oneption an by )ery important. -nd the differene is

important not merely in a theoretial but in a pratial sense.

- materialist oneption of thunderstorms& for eample& helps us

to take preautions a"ainst them& suh as fittin" buildin"s with li"htnin"ondutors. ?ut if our eplanation of thunderstorms is idealist& all we an

do is to wath and pray. If we aept an idealist aount of the eisteneof rih and poor& all we an do is to aept the eistin" state of affairs=

reEoiin" in our superior status and bestowin" a little harity if we arerih& and ursin" our fate if we are poor. ?ut armed with a materialist

understandin" of soiety we an be"in to see the way to han"e soiety.It is lear& therefore& that while some may ha)e a )ested interest

in idealism& it is in the interests of the "reat maEority to learn to think and

to understand thin"s in the materialist way.

Cow& then& an we define materialism and idealism& and the dif!ferene between them& in "eneral terms& so as to define the essene of the

uestionD This was done by 3n"els.

'The "reat basi uestion of all philosophy& espeially of modern

philosophy& is that onernin" the relation of thinkin" and bein"...Theanswers whih the philosophers ha)e "i)en to this uestion split them

15


16/112

into two "reat amps. Those who asserted the primay of spirit to natureand therefore in the last instane assumed world reation in some form or

another...omprised the amp of idealism. The others& who re"ardednature as primary& belon" to the )arious shools of materialism./ 5

Idealism is the way of interpretin" thin"s whih re"ards the spir!itual as prior to the material& whereas materialism re"ards the material as

prior. Idealism supposes that e)erythin" material is dependent on and

determined by somethin" spiritual& whereas materialism reo"nies that

e)erythin" spiritual is dependent on and determined by somethin" mater!

ial. -nd this differene manifests itself both in "eneral philosophial on!

eptions of the world as a whole& and in some oneptions of partiular

thin"s and e)ents.

&dealism and the 0upernatural-t bottom& idealism is reli"ion& theolo"y. 'Idealism is lerial!

ism&/ wrote >enin.#-ll idealism is a ontinuation of the reli"ious

approah to uestions& e)en thou"h partiular idealist theories ha)e shed

their reli"ious skin. Idealism is inseparable from superstition& belief in

the supernatural& the mysterious and unknowable.

(aterialism& on the other hand& seeks for eplanations in terms

belon"in" to the material world& in terms of fators whih we an )erify&understand and ontrol.

The roots of the idealist oneption of thin"s are& then& the same

as those of reli"ion.To belie)ers& the oneptions of reli"ion& that is to say& onep!

tions of supernatural spiritual bein"s& "enerally seem to ha)e their Eusti!fiation& not& of ourse& in any e)idene of the senses& but in somethin"

whih lies deep within the spiritual nature of man. -nd& indeed& it is truethat these oneptions do ha)e )ery deep roots in the historial de)elop!

ment of human onsiousness. ?ut what is their ori"in& how did suh

oneptions arise in the first plaeD +e an ertainly not re"ard suh on!

eptions as bein" the produts& as reli"ion itself tells us& of di)ine re)ela!

tion& or as arisin" from any other supernatural ause& if we find that they

themsel)es ha)e a natural ori"in. -nd suh an ori"in an in fat be

traed.

oneptions of the supernatural& and reli"ious ideas in "eneral&owe their ori"in first of all to the helplessness and i"norane of men in

the fae of fores of nature. ores whih men annot understand arepersonified=they are represented as manifestations of the ati)ity of

spirits.

5 3n"els&%udwig *euerbach, hapter II.

# . I. >enin& 0elected orks& ol. 11& '@n %ialetis&/ A. B.& 195$.

16


17/112

or eample& suh alarmin" e)ents as thunderstorms were& as weha)e seen& eplained fantastially as due to the an"er of "ods. -"ain&

suh important phenomena as the "rowth of rops were put down to theati)ity of a spirit it was belie)ed that it was the orn spirit that made the

orn "row.rom the most primiti)e times men personified natural fores in

this way. +ith the birth of lass soiety& when men were impelled to at

by soial relations whih dominated them and whih they did not under!

stand& they further in)ented& supernatural a"enies doublin"& as it were&

the state of soiety. The "ods were in)ented superior to mankind& Eust as

the kin"s and lords were superior to the ommon people.

-ll reli"ion& and all idealism& has at its heart this kind of doub-

ling of the world.It is dualisti& and in)ents a dominatin" ideal or super!natural world o)er a"ainst the real material world.

ery harateristi of idealism are suh antitheses as soul andbody F "od and manF the hea)enly kin"dom and the earthly kin"domF the

forms and ideas of thin"s& "rasped by the intellet& and the world ofmaterial reality& pereptible by the senses.

This 'doublin"/ of the world is arried to its furthest limits in

subEeti)e idealism& whih ends by re"ardin" the material world as a

mere illusion and asserts that only the non!material world is real. Thedualisti harater of all idealism is most marked in subEeti)e idealism&

whih posits a omplete antithesis between the mehanisti system of the

illusory material world and the 'freedom/ of the hi"her& non!material

reality. This antithesis& dis"uised as it often is behind alle"edly 'si!

entifi/ and 'empiriist/ theoriin"& harateries all subEeti)e idealist

philosophies& from ?erkeley to ohn %ewey.or idealism& there is always a hi"her& more real& non!material

world=whih is prior to the material world& is its ultimate soure andause& and to whih the material world is subEet. or materialism& on the

other hand& there is oneworld& the material world.?y idealism in philosophy we mean any dotrine whih says that

beyond material reality there is a hi"her& spiritual reality& in terms ofwhih the material reality is in the last analysis to be eplained.

0ome 1arieties of $odern hilosophy -t this point a few obser)ations may be useful onernin" someharateristi dotrines of modern bour"eois philosophy.

17


18/112

or nearly three hundred years there has been put forward a )ari!ety of philosophy known as 'subEeti)e idealism./ This teahes that the

material world does not eist at all. Aothin" eists but the sensations andideas in our minds& and there is no eternal material reality orrespond!

in" to them.-nd then a"ain& this subEeti)e idealism is put forward in the

form of a dotrine onernin" knowled"e it denies that we an know

anythin" about obEeti)e reality outside oursel)es& and says that we an

ha)e knowled"e of appearanes only and not of 'thin"s in themsel)es./

This sort of idealism has beome )ery fashionable today. It e)en

parades as etremely 'sientifi./ +hen apitalism was still a pro"ress!

i)e fore& bour"eois thinkers used to belie)e that we ould know more

and more about the real world& and so ontrol natural fores and impro)ethe lot of mankind indefinitely. Aow they are sayin" that the real world is

unknowable& the arena of mysterious fores whih pass our omprehen!sion. It is not diffiult to see that the fashion for suh dotrines is Eust a

symptom of the deay of apitalism.+e ha)e seen that& at bottom& idealism always belie)es in two

worlds, the ideal and the material& and it plaes the ideal prior to and

abo)e the material. (aterialism& on the other hand& knows one world

only& the material world& and refuses to in)ent a seond& ima"inary&superior ideal world.

(aterialism and idealism are irreonilably opposed. ?u this

does not stop many philosophers from tryin" to reonile and ombine

them. In philosophy there are also )arious attempted ompromises

between idealism and materialism.

@ne suh attempted ompromise is often known as 'dualism./,uh a ompromise philosophy asserts the eistene of the spiritual as

separate and distint from the material=but it tries to plae the two on ale)el. Thus it treats the world of non!li)in" matter in a thorou"hly mater!

ialist way this& it says& is the sphere of ati)ity of natural fores& andspiritual fators do not enter into it and ha)e nothin" to do with it in any

way. ?ut when it omes to mind and soiety& here& says this philosophy&is the sphere of ati)ity of spirit. Cere& it maintains& we must seek

eplanations in idealist and not in materialist terms.

,uh ompromise between materialism and idealism& therefore&

amounts to this=that with re"ard to all the most important uestionsonernin" men& soiety and history we are to ontinue to adopt idealist

oneptions and to oppose materialism.

-nother ompromise philosophy is known as 'realism./ In its

modern form& this philosophy has arisen in opposition to subEeti)eidealism.

18


19/112

The 'realist/ philosophers say that the eternal material worldreally eists independent of our pereptions and is in some way refleted

by our pereptions. In this the 'realists/ a"ree with the materialists inopposition tosubjectiveidealismF indeed& you annot be a materialist

unless you are a thorou"h!"oin" realist on the uestion of the real eist!ene of the material world.

?ut merely to assert that the eternal world eists independent of

our perei)in" it& is not to be a materialist. or eample& the "reat ath!

oli philosopher of the middle a"es& Thomas -uinas& was in this sense a

'realist./ -nd to this day most atholi theolo"ians re"ard it as a heresy

to be anythin" but a 'realist/ in philosophy. ?ut at the same time they

assert that the material world& whih really eists& was reated by *od&

and is sustained and ruled all the time by the power of *od& by a spiritualpower. ,o& far from bein" materialists& they are idealists.

-s for modern 'realism&/ it onedes to materialism the bareeistene of matter and& for the rest& is ready to onede e)erythin" to

idealism.(oreo)er& the word 'realism/ is muh abused by philosophers.

,o lon" as you belie)e that somethin" or other is 'real&/ you may all

yourself a 'realist./ ,ome philosophers think that not only is the world of

material thin"s real& but that there is also& outside spae and time& a realworld of 'uni)ersals&/ of the abstrat essenes of thin"s so these all

themsel)es 'realists./ @thers say that& althou"h nothin" eists but the

pereptions in our minds& ne)ertheless these pereptions are real so

these all themsel)es 'realists/ too. -ll of whih "oes to show that some

philosophers are )ery triky in their use of words.

The Basic Teachings of $aterialism in )pposition to

&dealismIn opposition to all the forms of idealism& and of triky om!

promises between materialism and idealism& the basi teahin"s of

materialism an be formulated )ery simply and learly.

To "rasp the essene of these teahin"s we should also under!stand what are the main assertions made in e)ery form of idealism. There

are three suh main assertions of idealism.

1. Idealism asserts that the material world is dependent onthe spiritual.

2. Idealism asserts that spirit& or mind& or idea& an and

does eist in separation from matter. 4The most etremeform of this assertion is subEeti)e idealism& whih

asserts that matter does not eist at all but is pure illu!

sion.

19


20/112

$. Idealism asserts that there eists a realm of the mysteri!ous and unknowable& 'abo)e&/ or 'beyond&/ or 'behind/

what an be asertained and known by pereption&eperiene and siene.

The basi teahin"s of materialism stand in opposition to thesethree assertions of idealism.

1. (aterialism teahes that the world is by its )ery nature

material& that e)erythin" whih eists omes into bein"

on the basis of material auses& arises and de)elops in

aordane with the laws of motion of matter.

2. (aterialism teahes that matter is obEeti)e reality eist!

in" outside and independent of the mindF and that far

from the mental eistin" in separation from the material&e)erythin" mental or spiritual is a produt of material

proesses.$. (aterialism teahes that the world and its laws are fully

knowable& and that while muh may not be known thereis nothin" whih is by nature unknowable.

The (arist!>eninist philosophy is harateried by its abso!

lutely onsistent materialism all alon" the line& by its makin" no ones!

sions whate)er at any point to idealism. Thus ,talin points out'4a ontrary to idealism& whih re"ards the world as the embod!

iment of an :absolute idea&: a :uni)ersal spirit&: :onsiousness&: (ar:s

philosophial materialism holds that the world is by its )ery nature

material& that the multifold phenomena of the world onstitute different

forms of matter in motion...and that the world de)elops in aordane

with the laws of mo)ement of matter and stands in no need of a :uni)er!sal spirit.:

'4b ontrary to idealism& whih asserts that only our mind reallyeists...the (arist materialist philosophy holds that matter& nature& bein"

is an obEeti)e reality eistin" outside and independent of our mindF thatmatter is primary& sine it is the soure of sensations& ideas& mind and that

mind is seondary& deri)ati)e& sine it is a refletion of matter& a refle!tion of bein"F that thou"ht is a produt of matter whih in its de)elop!

ment has reahed a hi"h de"ree of perfetion& namely& of the brain& and

the brain is the or"an of thou"htF and that& therefore& one annot separate

thou"ht from matter without ommittin" a "ra)e error.'4 ontrary to idealism& whih denies the possibility of know!

in" the world and its law..(arist philosophial materialism holds that

the world and its laws are fully knowable& that our knowled"e of the laws

of nature& tested by eperiment and pratie& is authenti knowled"e ha)!in" the )alidity of obEeti)e truth& and that there are no thin"s in the

20


21/112

world whih are unknowable& but only thin"s whih are still not known&but whih will be dislosed and made known by the efforts of siene

and pratie./6

$aterialism and &dealism in ractice-s was pointed out abo)e& the opposition of materialism andidealism=whih has now been stated in its most "eneral terms=is not

an opposition between abstrat theories of the nature of the world& but isan opposition between different ways of understandin" and interpretin"

e)ery uestion. That is why it is of suh profound importane.>et us onsider some of the )ery pratial ways in whih the

opposition of materialism and idealism is manifested.

Idealists tell us& for eample& not to plae 'too muh/ reliane onsiene. They tell us that the most important truths are beyond the reahof siene. Cene& they enoura"e us not to belie)e thin"s on the basis of

e)idene& eperiene& pratie& but to take them on trust from those who

pretend to know best and to ha)e some 'hi"her/ soure of information.

In this way idealism is a )ery "ood friend and standby of e)ery

form of reationary propa"anda. It is the philosophy of the apitalist

press and the radio. It fa)ors superstitions of all sorts& pre)ents us from

thinkin" for oursel)es and takin" a sientifi approah to moral andsoial problems.

-"ain& idealists tell us that what is most important for us all is

the inner life of the soul. They tell us that we shall ne)er sol)e ourhuman problems eept by some inner re"eneration. This is a fa)orite

theme in the speehes of well!fed persons. ?ut many workers fall for ittoo=in fatories& for eample& where a '(oral Gearmament/ "roup is

ati)e. They tell you not to fi"ht for better onditions& but to impro)eyour soul. They do not tell you that the best way to impro)e yourself

both materially and morally is to Eoin in the fi"ht for peae and soialism.

-"ain& an idealist approah is ommon amon"st many soialists.

(any sinere soialists& for eample&think that what is essentially wron"

with apitalism is that "ood are unfairly distributed& and that if only we

ould "et e)eryone& inludin" the apitalists& to aept a new oneption

of fairness and Eustie& then we ould do away with the e)ils of apital!

ism. ,oialism to them is nothin" but the realiation of an abstrat ideaof Eustie.

The idealism of this belief lies in its assumption that it is simplythe ideaswhih we hold that determine the way we li)e and the way

soiety is or"anied. Those who think in this way for"et to look for thematerialauses. or what in fat determines the way "oods are distrib!

6 ,talin&"ialectical and #istorical $aterialism.

21


22/112

uted in apitalist soiety=the wealth enEoyed by one part of soiety&while the other and "reater part li)es in po)erty=is not the ideas whih

men hold about the distribution of wealth& but the material fat that themode of prodution rests on the eploitation of the worker by the apital!

ist. ,o lon" as this mode of prodution remains in eistene& so lon" willetremes of wealth and po)erty remain& and so lon" will soialist ideas

of Eustie be opposed by apitalist ideas of Eustie. The task of soialists&

therefore& is to or"anie and lead the stru""le of the workin" lass a"ainst

the apitalist lass to the point where the workin" lass takes power from

the apitalist lass.

If we do not understand this& then we annot find the way to fi"ht

effeti)ely for soialism. +e shall find that our soialist ideals are on!

stantly disappointed and betrayed. ,uh& indeed& has been the eperieneof ?ritish soialism.

It an be seen from these eamples how idealism ser)es as aweapon of reationF and how when soialists embrae idealism they are

bein" influened by the ideolo"y of the apitalists. +e an no more takeo)er and use apitalist ideas for the purposes of soialist theory than we

an take o)er and use the apitalist state mahine& with all its institutions

and offiials& for the purposes of buildin" soialism.

Gi"ht throu"h history& indeed& idealism has been a weapon ofreation. +hate)er fine systems of philosophy ha)e been in)ented& ideal!

ism has been used as a means of Eustifyin" the rule of an eploitin" lass

and deei)in" the eploited.

This is not to say that truths ha)e not been epressed in an ideal!

ist "uise. @f ourse they ha)e. or idealism has )ery deep roots in our

ways of thinkin"& and so men often lothe their thou"hts and aspirationsin idealist dress. ?ut the idealist form is always an impediment& a

hindrane in the epression of truth=a soure of onfusion and error.-"ain& pro"ressi)e mo)ements in the past ha)e adopted and

fou"ht under an idealist theory. ?ut this has shown only that they on!tained in themsel)es the seeds of future reation 4inasmuh as they rep!

resented the stri)in" of a new eploitin" lass to ome to power or thatthey were themsel)es influened by ideas of reationF or it has been a

mark of their weakness and immaturity.

or eample& the "reat re)olutionary mo)ement of the 3n"lish

bour"eoisie in the se)enteenth entury fou"ht under idealist& reli"iousslo"ans. ?ut the same appeal to *od whih Eustified romwell in the

eeution of the Hin" Eustified him also in the stampin" of the >e)elers.

3arly demorats and soialists had many idealists notions. ?ut in

their ase this demonstrated the immaturityand weaknessof the mo)e!ment. The idealist illusions had to be o)erome if the re)olutionary

22


23/112

workin"!lass mo)ement was to arise and triumph. -s the mo)ement"rew stron"& the ontinuane within it of idealist notions represented an

alien& reationary influene.+e an truly say that idealism is essentially a onser)ati)e fore

=an ideolo"y helpin" the defense of thin"s as they are& and the preser)a!tion of illusions in men:s minds about their true ondition.

@n the other hand& e)ery real soial ad)ane=e)ery inrease in

the produti)e fores& e)ery ad)ane of siene="enerates materialism

and is helped alon" by materialist ideas. -nd the whole history of human

thou"ht has been the history of the fi"ht of materialism a"ainst idealism&

of the o)eromin" of idealist illusions and fantasies.

The *ight for $aterialism(arists& as the or"anied )an"uard of the workin" lass fi"htin"

to end all eploitation of man by man and to establish ommunism& ha)e

no use for idealism in any form.

Cere& for eample& are some of the ways in whih >enin

epressed himself on this uestion.

'The "enius of (ar and 3n"els onsisted in the )ery fat that in

the ourse of a lon" period& nearly half a entury& they de)eloped materi!

alism& that they further ad)aned one fundamental trend in philosophy...'Take the )arious philosophial utteranes by (ar..and you will

find an in)ariable basi motif& vi2.insistene upon materialism and on!

temptuous derision of all obsurantism& of all onfusion and all de)i!ations towards idealism...

'(ar and 3n"els were partisans in philosophy from start to fin!ishF they were able to detet the de)iations from materialism and ones!

sions to idealism...in eah and e)ery :new: tendeny...'The realists et.& inludin" the positi)ists& are all wrethed

mushF they are a ontemptible middle party in philosophy& who onfuse

the materialist and idealist trends on e)ery uestion. The attempt to

esape these two basi trends in philosophy is nothin" but oniliatory

uakery./7

@n e)ery issue we are partisans of materialism a"ainst idealism.

This is beause we know that it is in the li"ht of materialist theory& whih

studies thin"s as they are& without idealist fantasies about them& that wean understand the fores in nature and soiety so as to be able to trans!

form soiety and to master the fores of nature.

7 >enin& 0elected orks& ol. 11& '(aterialism and 3mpirio!ritiism&/

hapter I& ,etion 5.

23


24/112

-nd beause of this& too& materialism teahes us to ha)e onfid!ene in oursel)es& in the workin" lass=in people. It teahes us that

there are no mysteries beyond our understandin"& that we need not aeptthat whih is as bein" the will of *od& that we should ontemptuously

reEet the 'authoritati)e/ teahin"s of those who would set up to be ourmasters& and that we an oursel)es understand nature and soiety so as to

be able to han"e them.

+e hate idealism& beause under o)er of hi"h!soundin" talk it

preahes the subEetion of man to man and belittles the power of human!

ity.

It was the materialist onfidene in humanity whih was

epressed by (aim *orky when he wrote

'or me& there are no ideas beyond manF for me& man and onlyman is the mirale worker and the future master of all fores of nature.

The most beautiful thin"s in this our world are the thin"s made by labor&made by skilled human hands& and all our ideas are born out of the pro!

ess of labor.'-nd if it is thou"ht neessary to speak of sared thin"s& then the

one sared thin" is the dissatisfation of man with himself and his stri)!

in" to be better than he isF sared is his hatred of all the tri)ial rubbish

whih he himself has reatedF sared is his desire to do away with "reed&en)y& rime& disease& war and all enmity between men on earthF and sa!

red is his labor./8

8 (aim *orky&%iterature and %ife,'Cow I >earned to +rite&/ >ondon&

1956.

24


25/112

$. Mechanistic MaterialismThe type of materialism produced in the past by the revolution-

ary bourgeoisie was mechanistic materialism. This took over

the ancient materialist conception that the world consisted of

unchanging material particles 3atoms4, whose interactionsproduced all the phenomena of nature, and further strove to

understand the workings of nature on the model of the working

of a machine.

&t was in its time a progressive and revolutionary doctrine. But

it has three grave weaknesses. 354 &t re+uires the conception of

a 0upreme Being who started the world up 364 it seeks to

reduce all processes to the same cycle of mechanistic interac-

tions and so cannot account for development, for the emer-

gence of new +ualities, new types of processes in nature 374 itcannot account for social development, can give no account

for social development, can give no account of human social

activity and leads to an abstract conception of human nature.

The !hanging orld and #ow to 8nderstand &t?efore (ar& materialism was predominately mechanistic.

+e often hear people omplain that the materialists seek toredue e)erythin" in the world& inludin" life and mind& to a system of

soulless mehanism& to a mere mehanial interation of bodies. This

refers to mehanisti materialism. (arist materialism is& howe)er& not

mehanisti but dialetial. To understand what this means we need to

first understand somethin" about mehanisti materialism itself.

+e an approah this problem by askin" how materialists ha)esou"ht to understand the )arious proesses of han"e whih are obser)ed

e)erywhere in the world.The world is full of han"e. Ai"ht follows day and day ni"htF the

seasons sueed eah otherF people are born& "row old and die. 3)eryphilosophy reo"nies that han"e is an omnipresent fat. The uestion

is how are we to understand the han"e whih we obser)e e)erywhereDhan"e may be understood& in the first plae& in an idealist way

or in a materialist way.

Idealism traes bak all han"e to some idea or intention=if not

human& then di)ine. Thus for idealism& han"es in the material world are&in the last analysis& initiated and brou"ht about by somethin" outside

matter& not material& not subEet to the laws of the material world.

?ut materialism traes bak all han"e to material auses. In

other words& it seeks to eplain what happens in the material world fromthe material world itself.

25


26/112

?ut while the ourrene of han"e has been reo"nied bye)eryone& sine none an i"nore it& philosophers ha)e ne)ertheless

sou"ht to find somethin" whih does not han"e=somethin" permanent&somethin" han"eless& behind or within the han"e.

This is "enerally an essential part of the ideolo"y of an eploit!in" lass. They are afraid of han"e& beause they are afraid that they&

too& may be swept away. ,o they always seek for somethin" fied and

stable& not subEet to han"e. They try to hith themsel)es on to this& as it

were.

The earlier materialists& too& sou"ht for this. ?ehind all the han!

"in" appearanes they looked for somethin" whih ne)er han"es. ?ut

while idealists looked for the eternal and han"eless in the realm of

spirit& these materialists looked for it in the material world itself. -ndthey found it in the ultimate material partile=the eternal and indestrut!

ible atom. 4'-tom/ is a *reek word meanin" 'unbreakable./or suh materialists& then& all changeswere produed by the

mo)ement and interation of unchangingatoms.This is a )ery anient theory& put forward o)er two thousand

years a"o in *reee& and earlier still in India.

In its day it was a )ery pro"ressi)e theory& a "reat weapon

a"ainst idealism and superstition. The Goman poet >uretius& foreample& eplained in his philosophial poem )n 9ature of Thingsthat

the purpose of the atomisti theory of the *reek philosopher 3piurus

was to demonstrate 'what are the elements out of whih e)erythin" is

formed& and how e)erythin" omes to pass without the inter)ention of

the "ods./

Thus there was born a materialism whih saw the world as on!sistin" of hard&impenetrable material partiles& and whih understood all

han"e as arisin" from nothin" but the motion and interation of suhpartiles.

This theory was re)i)ed in modern times. In the siteenth andse)enteenth enturies philosophers and sientists turned to it in their fi"ht

a"ainst feudal& atholi philosophy. ?ut this modern materialism pro)edto be muh riher in ontent than the anient. or it tried to work out

what were the laws of interation of material partiles& and so to present

a piture of how all phenomena& from merely physial han"es to the life

of man& resulted from the motion and interation of the separate parts ofmatter. In this way& but the ei"hteenth entury& there had appeared the

harateristi modern theories of mehanisti materialism.

26


27/112

' Bourgeois hilosophy(ehanisti materialism was in essene an ideolo"y& a mode of

theoriin"& of the risin" bour"eoisie. In order to understand it we must

understand& first of all& that it arose and de)eloped in opposition to feudal

ideolo"y=that its ritial ed"e was direted a"ainst feudal ideas& that itwas in fat the most radial of all bour"eois forms of opposition a"ainst

the feudal outlook.

In the period of the rise of the bour"eoisie& the feudal soial rela!tions were shattered& and so were the feudal ideas& embodied in the ath!

oli philosophy& in whih those soial relations were enshrined.The feudal system& whose eonomi basis lay in the eploitation

of the serfs by the feudal proprietors& in)ol)ed omple soial relation!

ships of dependene& subordination and alle"iane. -ll this was refleted&not only in soial and politial philosophy& but also in the philosophy ofnature.

It was typial of the natural philosophy of the feudal period that

e)erythin" in nature was eplained in terms of its supposed position of

dependene and subordination in that system& and of the end or purpose

whih it eisted to ser)e.

The bour"eois philosophers and sientists destroyed these feudal

ideas about nature. They re"arded nature as a system of bodies in intera!tion& and& reEetin" all the feudal do"mas& they alled for the in)esti"a!tion of nature in order to diso)er how nature really worked.

The in)esti"ation of nature ad)aned hand in hand with the "eo!"raphial diso)eries& the de)elopment of trade and transport& the

impro)ement of mahinery and manufatures. The "reatest strides weremade in the mehanial sienes& losely onneted as they were with the

needs of tehnolo"y. ,o it ame about that the materialist theory wasenrihed as the result of the sientifi in)esti"ation of nature& and in par!

tiular by the mehanial sienes.

This determined at one the stren"th and the weakness& the

ahie)ement and the limitation& of the materialist theory.

+hat pushed that theory forward was& so 3n"els writes& 'the

powerful and e)er more rapidly onrushin" pro"ress of siene and

industry./ ?ut it remained 'predominantly mehanial&/ beause only the

mehanial sienes had attained any hi"h de"ree of de)elopment. Its'speifi& but at that time ine)itable limitation/ was its 'elusi)e appli!

ation of the standards of mehanis./1

The mehanisti way of understandin" nature did not arise& how!

e)er& simply from the fat that at that time it was only the mehanial si!enes whih had made any "reat pro"ress. It was deeply rooted in the

1 3n"els& %udwig *euerbach,hapter II.

27


28/112

lass outlook of the most pro"ressi)e bour"eois philosophers& and thisled to their turnin" elusi)ely to the mehanial sienes for their

inspiration.ust as the bour"eoisie& o)erthrowin" feudal soiety& stood for

indi)idual liberty& euality and the de)elopment of a free market& so themost pro"ressi)e philosophers of the bour"eoisie=the materialists=

o)erthrowin" the feudal ideas& prolaimed that the world onsisted of

separate material partiles interatin" with one another in aordane

with the laws of mehanis.

This theory of nature refleted bour"eois soial relations no less

than the theories it replaed had refleted feudal soial relations. ?ut Eust

as the new bour"eois soial relations broke the feudal fetters and enabled

a "reat new de)elopment of the fores of prodution to bein"& so the or!respondin" bour"eois theory of nature broke down the barriers whih

feudal ideas had plaed in the way of sientifi researh and enabled a"reat new de)elopment of sientifi researh to be"in.

The philosophial outlook seemed to find its onfirmation in si!ene& and siene pro)ided materials for the de)elopment and workin"

out in detail of the philosophial outlook.

The orld and the $achineThe world=so thou"ht the mehanisti materialists=onsists of

nothin" but partiles of matter in interation. 3ah partile has an eist!

ene separate and distint from e)ery otherF in their totality they form theworldF the totality of their interations forms the totality of e)erythin"

that happens in the worldF and these interations are of the mehanialtype& that is to say& they onsist simply of the eternal influene of one

partile upon another.,uh a theory is eui)alent to re"ardin" the whole world as noth!

in" but a omple piee of mahinery& a mehanism.

rom this standpoint& the uestion always posed about any part

of nature is the uestion we ask about a mahine what is its mehanism&

how does it workD

This was eemplified in Aewton:s aount of the solar system.

Aewton adopted the same "eneral )iew as the *reek materialist& 3pi!

urus& inasmuh as he thou"ht that the material world onsisted ofpartiles mo)in" about in empty spae. ?ut faed with any partiular nat!

ural phenomenon& suh as the mo)ements of the sun and planets& 3pi!urus was not in the least onerned to "i)e any eat aount of it. +ith

re"ard to the apparent mo)ement of the sun aross the hea)ens from eastto west& for eample& 3piurus said that the important thin" was to under!

stand that the sun was not a "od but was simply a olletion of atoms no

28


29/112

aount of the atual mahinery of its motions was neessary. Perhaps&he said& the sun "oes round and round the earthF but perhaps it disinte"!

rates and its atoms separate e)ery ni"ht& so that it is 'a new sun/ whihwe see the net mornin" to him suh uestions were simply unimport!

ant. Aewton& on the other hand& was onerned to show eatly how thesolar system worked& to demonstrate the mehanis of it& in terms of

"ra)ity and mehanial fores.

?ut Eust as 3piurus was not interested in how the solar system

worked& so Aewton was not interested in how it ori"inated and

de)eloped. Ce took it for "ranted as a stable piee of mahinery=re!

ated& presumably& by *od. Aot how it ori"inated& not how it de)eloped&

but how it worked& was the uestion whih he dealt with.

The same mehanisti approah was manifested in Car)ey:s dis!o)ery of the irulation of the blood. The essene of his diso)ery was

that he demonstrated the mehanism of irulation& re"ardin" the heart asa pump& whih pumps the blood out alon" the arteries so that it flows

bak throu"h the )eins& the whole system bein" re"ulated by a series of)al)es.

To understand the mehanisti outlook better& let us ask what is

a mehanismD +hat is harateristi of a mehanismD

4a - mehanism onsists of permanent parts& whih fit to"ether.4b It reuires a moti)e fore to set it "oin".

4c @ne set "oin"& the parts interat and results are produed

aordin" to laws whih an be eatly stated.

onsider& for eample& suh a mehanism as a wath. 4a It on!

sists of a number of different parts=o"s& le)ers& and so on=fitted

neatly to"ether. 4b It has to be wound up. 4c Then& as the sprin" unoils&the parts interat aordin" to laws eatly known to wathmakers& res!

ultin" in the re"ular mo)ements of the hands on the dial.urther& to know how a mehanism& suh as a wath& works& you

must take it to bits& find out what its parts are& how they fit to"ether andhow& by their interations& one the mehanism is set in motion by the

appliation of the reuired moti)e fore& they produe the total motionharateristi of the mehanism in workin" order.

This is Eust how the mehanisti materialists re"arded nature.

They sou"ht to take nature to bits& to find its ultimate omponent parts&

how they fitted to"ether and how their interations produed all thehan"es we perei)e& all the phenomena of the world. -nd moreo)er&

findin" out how the mehanism worked& they sou"ht to find out how to

repair it& how to impro)e it& how to han"e it and to make it produe new

results orrespondin" to the reuirements of man.

29


30/112

The 0trength and 'chievement of $echanistic $aterial-

ism(ehanisti materialism was an important milestone in our

understandin" of nature. -nd it was a "reat pro"ressi)e step of bour"eois

thinkers& a blow a"ainst idealism.The mehanists were thorou"h!"oin" in their materialism. or

they wa"ed a pro"ressi)e fi"ht a"ainst idealism and lerialism by tryin"to etend to the realm of mind and soiety the same mehanisti onep!

tions whih were used in the sientifi in)esti"ation of nature. Theysou"ht to inlude man and all his spiritual ati)ities in the mehanisti

system of the natural world.

The most radial mehanists re"arded not merely physial pro!

esses& and not merely plant and animal life& but man himself as amahine. -lready in the se)enteenth entury the "reat renh philo!

sopher %esartes had said that all animals were ompliated mahines=

automata but man was different& sine he had a soul. ?ut in the ei"ht!

eenth entury a follower of %esartes& the physiian >a(ettrie& wrote a

book with the pro)oati)e title$an a $achine.(en& too& were

mahines& he said& thou"h )ery ompliated ones.This dotrine was looked upon as eeptionally shokin"& and as

a terrible insult to human nature& not to mention *od. Bet it was in itstime a pro"ressi)e )iew of man. The )iew that men are mahines was an

ad)ane in the understandin" of human nature as ompared with the)iew that they are wrethed piees of lay inhabited by immortal souls.

-nd it was& omparati)ely speakin"& a more humane )iew.

or eample& the "reat 3n"lish materialist and utopian soialist

Gobert @wen told the pious industrialists of his time

'3periene has shown you the differene of the results betweenmehanism whih is neat& lean& well!arran"ed and always in a hi"h state

of repair& and that whih is allowed to be dirty& in disorder& and whih

therefore beomes muh out of repair...If& then& due are as to the state of

your inanimate mahines an produe suh benefiial results& what may

not be epeted if you de)ote eual attention to your vitalmahines&whih are far more wonderfully onstrutedD/2

This humanitarianism was& howe)er& at the best bour"eois

humanitarianism. >ike all mehanisti materialism& it was rooted in thelass outlook of the bour"eoisie. The )iew that man is a mahine isrooted in the )iew that in prodution man is a mere appenda"e of the

mahine. -nd if on the one hand this implies that the human mahine

2 Gobert @wen&9ew 1iew of 0ociety.

30


31/112

ou"ht to be well tended and kept in "ood ondition& on the other hand iteually implies that no more should be epeted for this purpose than is

stritly neessary to keep the human mahine in bare workin" order.

The eakness and %imitations of $echanistic $aterial-ism

(ehanisti materialism had "ra)e weaknesses.41 It ould not sustain the materialist standpoint onsistently and

all the way.or if the world is like a mahine& who made it& who started it

upD There was neessary& in any system of mehanisti materialism& a

',upreme ?ein"&/ outside the material world=e)en if he no lon"er on!

tinuously interfered in the world and kept thin"s mo)in"& but did nomore than start thin"s up and then wath what happened.

,uh a ',upreme ?ein"/ was postulated by nearly all the meh!

anisti materialistsF for eample& by oltaire and Tom Paine. ?ut this

opens the door for idealism.

42 (ehanisti materialism sees han"e e)erywhere. Bet

beause it always tries to reduceall phenomena to the same system ofmehanial interations& it sees this han"e as nothin" but the eternal

repetitionof the same kinds of mehanial proesses& an eternal yle ofthe same han"es.

This limitation is inseparable from the )iew of the world as amahine. or Eust as a mahine has to be started up& so it an ne)er do

anythin" eept what it was made to do. It annot han"e itself or pro!

due anythin" radially new. (ehanisti theory& therefore& always

breaks down when it is a uestion of aountin" for the emer"ene of

new +uality. It sees han"e e)erywhere=but nothin" new& no develop-ment.

The )arious proesses of nature=hemial proesses and the

proesses of li)in" matter& for eample=annot in fat be all redued to

one and the same kind of mehanial interation of material partiles.

hemial interations differ from mehanial interations inas!muh as the han"es whih take plae as a result of hemial interation

in)ol)e a han"e of uality. or eample& if we onsider the mehanial

interation of two partiles whih ollide& then their ualitati)e harater!istis are irrele)ant and the result is epressed as a han"e in the uantityand diretion of motion of eah. ?ut if two hemial substanes ome

to"ether and ombine hemially& then there results a new substaneualitati)ely different from either. ,imilarly& from the point of )iew of

31


32/112

mehanis heat is nothin" but an inrease in the uantity of motion of thepartiles of matter. ?ut in hemistry& the appliation of heat leads to ual!

itati)e han"es.Aor do the proesses of nature onsist in the repetition of the

same yle of mehanial interations& but in nature there is ontinualde)elopment and e)olution& produin" e)er new forms of the eistene

or& what is the same thin"& motion of matter. Cene the more widely and

onsistently the mehanisti ate"ories are applied in the interpretation

of nature& the more is their essential limitation eposed.

4$ ,till less an mehanisti materialism eplainsocialde)elop!

ment.

(ehanisti materialism epresses the radial bour"eois onep!

tion of soiety as onsistin" of soial atoms& interatin" to"ether. The realeonomi and soial auses of the de)elopment of soiety annot be dis!

o)ered from this point of )iew. -nd so "reat soial han"es seem tosprin" from uite aidental auses. Cuman ati)ity itself appears to be

either the mehanial result of eternal auses& or else it is treated=andhere mehanisti materialism ollapses into idealism=as purely spontan!

eous and unaused.

In a word& mehanisti materialism annot "i)e an aount of

men:s soial ati)ity.

$echanistic $aterialism and 8topian 0ocialismThe mehanisti )iew treated men uite abstratly& eah man

bein" re"arded as a soial atom endowed by nature with ertain inherent

properties& attributes and ri"hts.This was epressed in the bour"eois oneption of 'the ri"hts of

man&/ and in the bour"eois re)olutionary slo"an '-ll men are eual./?ut the oneption of human ri"hts annot be dedued from the

abstrat nature of man& but is determined by the sta"e of soiety in whih

men are li)in". Aor are men what they are 'by nature&/ but they beome

what they are& and han"e& as a result of their soial ati)ity. Aor are all

men 'by nature/ eual. In opposition to the bour"eois oneption of

abstrat euality& whih amounted to more formal euality of ri"hts as

itiens& euality before the law& (ar and 3n"els delared

'The real ontent of the proletarian demand for euality is thedemand for the abolition of lasses. -ny demand for euality whih "oes

beyond that of neessity passes into absurdity./$

$ rederik 3n"els&'nti-"uehring,Part I& hapter K& A. B.& 19$9.

32


33/112

-doptin" their abstrat& mehanisti )iew of men as soialatoms& the pro"ressi)e mehanists tried to work out& in an abstrat way&

what form of soiety would be best for mankind=what would best suitabstrat human nature& as they onei)ed of it.

This way of thinkin" was taken o)er by soialist thinkers whoimmediately preeded (ar& the utopian soialists. The utopian soialists

were mehanisti materialists. They put forward soialism as an ideal

soiety. They did not see it as neessitated by the de)elopment of the

ontraditions of apitalism=it ould ha)e been put forward and real!

ied at any time& if only men had had the wit to do so. They did not see it

as ha)in" to be won by workin"!lass stru""le a"ainst apitalism=it

would be realied when e)eryone was on)ined that it was Eust and best

adapted to the reuirements of human nature. 4or this reason& Gobert@wen appealed to both the -rhbishop of anterbury and Lueen itoria

to support his soialist pro"ram.-"ain& the mehanisti materialists=and this applied abo)e all

to the utopian soialists=thou"ht that what a man was& his harater andhis ati)ities& was determined by his en)ironment and eduation. There!

fore they prolaimed that to make men better& happier and more rational

it was simply neessary to plae them in better onditions and to "i)e

them a better eduation.?ut to this (ar replied

'The materialist dotrine that men are produts of irumstanes

and upbrin"in" and that& therefore& han"ed men are produed by

han"ed irumstanes and han"ed upbrin"in"& for"ets that irum!

stanes are han"ed preisely by men and that the eduator must himself

be eduated./5

If men are simply the produts of irumstanes& then they are at

the mery of irumstanes. -nd men themsel)es are han"ed& not as amehanial result of han"ed irumstanes& but in the ourse of and as a

result of their own ati)ity in han"in" their irumstanes.,o what are the real material soial auses at work in human

soiety& whih "i)e rise to new ati)ities& new ideas and therefore tohan"ed irumstanes and han"ed menD

(ehanisti materialism ould not answer this uestion. It ould

not eplain the laws of soial de)elopment nor show how to han"e soi!

ety.Therefore while it was a pro"ressi)e and re)olutionary dotrine

in its time& it ould not ser)e to "uide the stru""le of the workin" lass in

stri)in" to han"e soiety.

5 3n"els&%udwig *euerbach& -ppendies& (ar& 'Theses on euerbah&/ III.

33


34/112

%. From Mechanistic to Dialectical

Materialism$echanistic materialism makes certain dogmatic assump-

tions: 354 That the world consists of permanent and stable

things or particles, with definite, fixed properties 364 that the

particles of matter are by nature inert and no change ever

happens except by the action of some external cause 374 that

all motion, all change can be reduced to the mechanical inter-

action of separate particles of matter 3;4 that each particle

has its own fixed nature independent of everything else, and

that the relationships between separate things are merely

external relationships.

)vercoming and passing beyond the dogmatic standpoint ofmechanism, dialectical materialism holds that the world is not

a complex of things but of processes, that matter is insepar-

able from motion, that the motion of matter comprehends an

infinite diversity of forms which arise one from another and

pass into one another, and that things exist not as separate

individual units but in essential relation and interconnection.

Things and rocessesIn order to find how the limitations of the mehanist approah

an be o)erome we may onsider first of all ertain etremely do"matiassumptions whih are made by mehanisti materialism. These mehan!

isti assumptions are none of them Eustified. -nd by brin"in" them to theli"ht of day and pointin" out what is wron" with them& we an see how to

ad)ane beyond mehanisti materialism.41 (ehanism sees all han"e as ha)in" at its basis permanent

and stable thin"s with definite& fied properties.Thus for the mehanists the world onsists of indi)isible& indes!

trutible material partiles& whih in their interation manifest suh prop!

erties as position& mass& )eloity.

-ordin" to mehanism& if you ould state the position& mass

and )eloity of e)ery partile at a "i)en instant of time& then you would

ha)e said e)erythin" that ould be said about the world at that time& and

ould& by applyin" the laws of mehanis& predit e)erythin" that was

"oin" to happen afterwards.This is the first do"mati assumption of mehanism. ?ut we need

to reEet it. or the world does not onsist of thingsbut ofprocesses& inwhih thin"s ome into bein" and pass away.

34


35/112

'The world is not to be omprehended as a omple of ready!made thin"s&/ wrote 3n"els& 'but as a omple of proesses& in whih

thin"s apparently stable& no less than their mind!ima"es in our heads& theonepts& "o throu"h an uninterrupted han"e of omin" into bein" and

passin" away./

1

This& indeed& is what siene in its latest de)elopments teahes

us. Thus the atom& one thou"ht to be eternal and indi)isible& has been

dissol)ed into eletrons& protons and neutronsF and these themsel)es are

not 'fundamental partiles/ in any absolute sense& i.e.they are not eternal

and indestrutible& any more t

Dialectical Materialism Cornforth

Documents

Transcript of Dialectical Materialism Cornforth