1. The correctness of dialectical content must be tested by the history of science
Lenin proposed that unity of opposites is the essence of dialectics, and in fact it clearly affirms the objectivity and universality of the law of unity of opposites . It is not only the most fundamental law of the objective world, but also the most fundamental law of human cognition and thinking. However, Lenin was not satisfied with summarizing and extracting the principles, and further explained how to argue and test the truth and scientific nature of theoretical principles. In the second paragraph, Lenin immediately pointed out clearly that "the correctness of this aspect of the content of dialectics must be tested by the history of science", and this test is briefly made in paragraphs 3 to 7.
Here, the so-called " this aspect of dialectical content " refers to the principle that unity of opposites is the essence of dialectics. The so-called " is tested by the history of science and " here, which means using the actual history of scientific development to confirm its truth and scientificity. From a perspective of the actual history, it includes the development history of each specific science, including both natural science and social science, as well as thinking science, , technical science, and various marginal sciences and comprehensive sciences.
From the connotation of each science history, it includes both scientific achievements in historical development, namely various specific scientific discoveries, scientific conclusions and scientific theories, etc.; it should also include the basis of scientific development, namely human social practice, that is, scientific experiments, and production struggles and class struggles related to the science. Of course, the main and direct manifestation is the accumulation and development of scientific achievements and scientific ideas.
Why is the unity of opposites the essence of dialectics " must " tested by the history of science? In short, it is because it is a principle of philosophy. Marxism believes that any theory, viewpoint and principle of philosophy is a summary and reflection of the most general characteristics and most common laws in the world. It has the most extensive applicability. It cannot be proved by simply extracting examples, nor can it be confirmed by individual practices and a certain type of practice. It must be tested by the historical development of science, and prove its universal scientific nature and universal truth from the historical development of all sciences.
The principles of philosophy must be tested by the historical development of specific science. This is determined by the nature and characteristics of philosophy itself, and determined by the relationship between philosophy and specific science. In " Philosophical Notes ", Lenin attached great importance to Hegel in " Philosophical Notes ", " logical things can only be truly evaluated by themselves when they become the result of scientific experience; at this time, for the spirit, it is the general truth. This truth is not as individual knowledge as parallel with other objects and reality, but constitutes the essence of all other contents.
Lenin fully affirms that philosophy is "summary of the experience of each science" and "the fundamental content of all other knowledge of ." It is precisely because philosophy has the most extensive and universal characteristics that it is summarized and summarized from each specific science, and it must conform to the results of each scientific experience. Therefore, the scientific nature and truth of the principles of philosophy must be tested by the historical development of all sciences, that is, the scientific achievements and conclusions that mark the development of science and social practice that promotes scientific development are tested.
materialistic dialectics is the most general law of science about nature, human society and cognitive thinking. It requires itself to use all the history of science to confirm it. To borrow Hegel's words, " is the general truth only when it becomes the result of scientific experience...it is the general truth ." In "Philosophical Notes", Lenin emphasized the study of the history of science very much, and believed that the principles and development of dialectics must be based on the history of science and the criterion.
He clearly stipulates that " the history of each science " is an important part of " constitutes the knowledge field of epistemology and dialectics ". To propose that "To inherit Hegel and Marx's cause, we should dialectically study the history of human thought, science and technology." means to develop dialectics through the study of the history of science. This is a major issue related to the scientific nature and vitality of Marxist philosophy. We should deeply understand and implement it.
Lenin
Lenin's thought on testing the correctness of the principles of philosophy in history of science is a dialectical application and profound expression of the theory of Marxist's truth standard. It not only goes hand in hand with the idea that " people prove their ideas and concepts through their own practice, and the objective correctness of knowledge and science", but also deeply demonstrates the truth test. The complexity and dialecticity of the test process.
, especially the scientific explanation of the criteria for the objective correctness of philosophical principles. Practical testing of truth not only has the dialectical unity of " determinism " and " uncertainty ", but also has the dialectical unity of directness and indirectness. The objective standard of truth can only be social practice. In the test of the history of science, it itself includes the social practice of the basis of scientific development. However, because philosophical principles are universal, they are more and more importantly proved directly through various specific scientific conclusions that have been proved by practice. , the test of philosophy principles by practice is only used as the basis for the final analysis. It is indirectly verified by intermediary, that is, specific science. In real life, people's test of universal truth is often a practical test of the combination of directness and indirectness.
After Lenin proposed the idea that philosophy must be tested by the history of science, he immediately pointed out: "For this aspect of dialectics, usually (for example, Plekhanov ) does not pay enough attention to it. "The "this aspect of dialectics" mentioned here contains dual content. It refers not only to the "this aspect of dialectics content", that is, the unity of opposites as the fundamental law of objective and universal dialectics, but also to the important idea that the correctness of dialectics must be tested by the history of science.
Here, those who did not pay attention ( that is, did not know and understand) , Not only does it mean that revisionists such as Bernstein have not paid any attention, but it also refers to many Marxists, such as Plekhanov. When Lenin wrote the short article "The Problem", Plekhanov had fallen into a social chauvinist, but before 1903 he was an outstanding Marxist.
He did not pay enough attention to this aspect when he was an outstanding Marxist. They often use individual examples to prove the scientificity and correctness of dialectics. "The same opposite of is regarded as the sum of instances, not as the law of cognition (and the law of the objective world) . "
, the unity of opposition, the negation of qualitative variable change and , the negation of , etc., are the summary and generalization of various scientific knowledge, and the results of logical thinking such as scientific analysis and synthesis. They all have their own unique content and the system and structure of content. They are the universal laws of dialectics and have universal guiding significance. They can be expressed in various instances, but they are not the sum of instances, nor are they simple induction of existing instances.
instances are always specific and always limited in a certain period. Taking the laws of dialectics as the sum of instances will actually make it lose its universal truth and become a regular thing. It will lose its methodological guiding role for people's practice and understanding. Therefore, it is very wrong and harmful to regard the principles of dialectics such as the law of opposition as the sum of instances. It itself violates dialectics and is a tendency to vulgarize and simplify philosophy.
takes the laws of dialectics as the sum of examples, and it will inevitably simply use citing individual instances to prove the laws of dialectics, and it will inevitably simply use the comparison of instances to replace the guidance of the position, viewpoint and method of dialectics. This argument and guidance method is also very wrong and harmful. We know that the real world is infinitely diverse and complex, and everything may have individual accidental exceptions, especially social phenomena.
Therefore, it is impossible to simply extract examples or list examples in general to prove principles, especially the universal laws of dialectics. The method of using individual examples to prove and use example analogies to guide is contrary to the objectivity requirements of dialectics. It can produce both dogmatism and revisionism .
Prekhanov had a dogmatic mistake in treating Marxism. After he fell into social chauvinism, he played with examples and started to make sophistry. He unilaterally extracted examples to prove the correctness of the so-called " defends the motherland " in World War I . Lenin pointed out: "In the noble cause of using sophistry to exchange dialectics, Plekhanov set a new record. Sophists seized one of the 'arguments', and Hegel had long said correctly that people can find 'arguments' for everything in the world. "
Hegel used a far-fetched and hard-working method to argue theorem for some scientific works, and also made sharp and clever criticism. Lenin also admired this very much, believing that this is an unusually correct and profound opposition to subjectivism and one-sidedness, and summed up an important idea from here, that examples can " ridiculously show off clichés ", so in "Problem" In the middle of Lenin, the objectivity and universality of dialectical laws must be tested by the history of science, that is, the essence of the history of science must be proved.
Of course, Lenin did not oppose the use of examples, but only opposed playing with examples as methods of argumentation and guidance, and opposed the principle of dialectics as the sum of examples. The principle of dialectics is universal and is universal in special and individual, and it must be expressed in specific things and processes. Therefore, in order to explain and specifically promote the universal principles of dialectics, Some examples can and should be used.
Engels used barley seeds and examples of public ownership of primitive communism to explain and explain the negation law of negation in " Anti-Durin" ", which is how he did. However, this is just as Lenin pointed out: " is 'to popularize '". Examples can illustrate the principle, but they cannot replace the principle itself and cannot be used as scientific proof of the principle. In "Anti-Durin" Engels criticized Dulin 's attack on dialectics and argued the three basic rules of dialectics Law is not simply used to illustrate it in a simple way.
mainly uses various forms of material movement , using the achievements of each specific science and the essence of the history of science to prove their objectivity and universality. Engels also clearly stated that "the true unity of the world lies in its materiality, and this materiality is not proved by the magician's words, but is proved by the long-term and continuous development of philosophy and natural science. ”
, and Plekhanov did not master this spiritual essence, and regarded the laws of dialectics as the sum of examples. This is a theoretical important reason why he transformed from an outstanding Marxist into a revisionist. Plekhanov's political depravity proves from the opposite side the great significance of the unity of opposition as the essence of dialectics.
