First, Marxist methodology is practical methodology.
Throughout the history of philosophy, from Aristotle's Instrumentalism to Francis Bacon's New Tools, Descartes' Methodology, Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, Hegel's Logic, Gadamer's Truth and Method, Adorno's Dialectics of Negation and Faye Abend's Method of Opposition all involve methodological research, but Marx rarely does so in his life. Some people think that it is wrong to say that Marx has no special methodological works, and Marx's Capital is a masterpiece of methodology, a unity of dialectics, epistemology and logic, and a model of scientific methodology. Of course, this statement has its rationality, but it has two shortcomings: First, it has made a category mistake, that is, no matter how many methodological ideas Das Kapital contains, it cannot be regarded as a scientific methodological work. Second, "scientific methodology" is not the best methodology. Its mechanical and metaphysical nature not only often leads to empiricism, positivism, phenomenology and anti-humanitarianism, but also contains many irrational contents. Besides, Marx never praised the scientific method. He just regards science as an "independent force that is opposite to labor and serves capital." It is not a compliment for later generations to label Marx's philosophy as "scientific methodology". Because he pays more attention to social practice and active dialectics. This is the key to the continuous display of vigorous vitality of Marxism for more than 100 years.
(A) the social practice of saving mankind is more important than the general method research.
In Germany, Marx lived in an era in which Hegelian philosophy dominated, and Germany, which was relatively backward in politics and economy, began to wake up and had a great dislike for classical philosophy. Especially in the eyes of some scientists: full of empty talk and fantasy, lacking real knowledge and reliable research; Only a series of rude experience mistakes, worthless criticisms or quotations without any judgment can be formed; "Even if you look at modern philosophers-Schelling, Hegel and their accomplices, you will be horrified by their rules." This metaphysics, which regards philosophy as far away from social reality, does not become a philosopher's outlook on life and values without leaving Konigsberg like Kant, and was soon spurned by him. Especially after the 1848 German bourgeois revolution swept away the muddy water of feudalism, with the help of the youthful vitality of the new class, German scientists were urged to go deep into nature, study nature, join in society and transform society, trying to change Germany's backward state. This magnificent revolutionary enthusiasm also inspired philosophers to return from heaven to earth, from fantasy to reality, and no longer expected to save everything by rhetoric and speculative methods.
Therefore, although Marx was a loyal and thoughtful hegelianism in his early years, with his concern and understanding of social reality, insight into the irrational system of capitalism, and correct judgment and analysis of the world proletarian revolutionary situation, he began to doubt the cognitive value and social value of Hegel's philosophy in his dissertations and notes after 184 1, thinking that it was only the other side of the world, not this one of the world. That's just a criticism of heaven, not the world. In Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right published by 1843, Marx analyzed the defects of Hegel's whole philosophy and thought that his philosophy was absolutely abstract and a purely methodological concept. In the Paris Manuscript completed in 1844, he continued to systematically criticize Hegel, and extended it to more extensive and controversial works by young hegelians (such as Holy Family, Morality and Italian Ideology) and proudhon (such as Poverty of Philosophy), and clearly determined that the purpose of life is to make as many people happy as possible, not just to make themselves comfortable. Fighting for the liberation and freedom of all mankind will be everyone's noblest responsibility. Regarding the return from abstract philosophical research to sincere concern for social reality, he gave a true and clear statement in a letter to Lischi: "It is very important for me to promote this beneficial development and present a work that refutes German philosophy and German socialism so far. It is necessary to prepare my' economics' view for the public. My economic position itself is the opposite of the previous German science. " In the face of this society that turns ordinary workers into demons and deprives them of all their freedom rights, "I will never be satisfied with peace, but will continue to roar" and "openly challenge the vast world." In particular, we should fire on the German system, fight against this decadent constitutional monarchy, and fight against this completely contradictory mixture that is sublating itself. "Although this system is lower than the historical level and any criticism, it is still the object of criticism, just as criminals below the human level are still the object of executioners." From then on, Marx was no longer a general philosopher who just stayed in his study or podium, fiddling with and inventing several empty and useless concepts and nouns, nor a timid scholar who dragged out an ignoble existence, but fought for the revolutionary cause of the proletariat all his life. His concern for society and people themselves, his exploration of various realistic relationships between people and his pursuit of the road to the liberation of all mankind are better than his concern for general logic and methods. After he arrived in Paris in the autumn of 1843, he devoted himself with great enthusiasm to the boiling life of various revolutionary groups in Paris at that time and had a fierce political debate with various petty-bourgeois socialist theories, striving to "return the political country to the real world". 1845 was regarded as a "dangerous revolutionary" by counter-revolutionary forces in many countries, and was expelled, arrested and tried many times. During the revival of the democratic movement in the 1950s and 1960s, he devoted himself to intense and busy practical activities. Especially after the famous "First International Working Men’s Association" was founded in London on 1864, he devoted almost all his heart and soul to the liberation of the proletariat all over the world, tried his best to unify the workers' movements in various countries, put all kinds of non-proletarian socialism into the track of concerted action, and tried to make the proletariat gain the right to survive in the world, completely break the shackles locked in them and realize the true colors of human beings. He is the most knowledgeable philosopher who is full of sympathy and love for the working people all over the world; His kindness and humanity can be said to be unparalleled among literati. His lifelong ambition is not just to create some abstract methodological dogmas for other people's behavior and practice, but to go deep into the society, practice it personally, and transform the cannibal society wholeheartedly with fearless revolutionary spirit.
Second, the method is to understand the logic of things through practice.
Although Marx paid attention to reality and devoted all his energy to discovering social laws and organizing the struggle of proletarian unity all over the world, he did not forget to think about methodology. He knows that method is a bridge to the other side and a tool for success. Therefore, he did not completely silence the previous methodology, but made a general reflection. For example, in the introduction of Critique of Political Economy, he decided that it was too arbitrary to regard the method only as a general reflection. He said: "I am compressing a general statement that I can easily complete, because after careful thinking, every prediction that will prove to produce results seems to confuse me, and those readers who have been following me are determined to rise from special to general." Therefore, the method should not be an abstract and formal procedure, which overrides the specific content of science. But the method needs to be shaped from the careful study of specific things; Hegel confuses the road to truth with subjective form; It violates his own dialectics of the unity of content and form. In fact, as early as 1837, Marx expressed in a letter to his father that he would give up Kant-Fichte's formal method to reach a law. From then on, he further regarded the method as a kind of logic to grasp the laws of things themselves. Since this logic is not a transcendental thing, pure and formal methodology should not occupy a place in epistemology. Thus, Marx criticized Hegel's logic in Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right. It is pointed out that in the relationship between logical science and special real science such as social science, Hegel fell into a new formalism, and he applied pure logic established by logic to special groups in social life. In this way, when he puts social entities under his pre-established logic, he loses the logical connection with things themselves, especially with civil society and modern countries. Marx not only criticized Hegel's formal logic, but also criticized some "real socialists" for applying formalism to the study of political economy. For example, in his letters to Engels from 65438 to 0858, he belittled Ferdinand Lasalle's attempt to apply Hegel's logic to political economy. He said: "I saw in a note about this attempt that this guy intends to introduce political economy as Hegel did in his second masterpiece. The injury to him made him begin to understand that it would be completely different to bring the dialectical description into a science for the first time, although it was to criticize rather than apply an abstract, gestalt logic system to such a system. " For Marx, the dialectical description of political economy in Volume 5 of Journal of Southeast University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition) is only possible through the most thorough empirical and conceptual study of that system. Dialectical description must be formed from the comprehensive analysis of political economy, not through the application of prefabricated dialectics. Therefore, Marx opposed the application of Hegel's logic as a "new research method" to real science without criticism; Oppose to describe logic as an independent science and introduce it to natural science and human society. However, he admitted that Hegel's logic expressed some dialectical foundations, and always praised Hegel's great empiricism and historical consciousness. This awareness enabled him to construct a logic to reveal so many truths about the specific science he explored. Many things that he needed to criticize political economy can be found in Hegel's works at hand. It is precisely because Marx's research has obtained irreplaceable spiritual weapons from Hegel that when he talks about Hegel's logic, on the one hand, he thinks that applying Hegel's logic as a research method to real science will inevitably fall into the mystery of logic; However, on the other hand, people think that the application of newly decorated Hegel's logic can always show great methodological ability in concrete scientific research. Marx's retouching of Hegel's logic can be seen in the introduction of his critique of political economy. There, when discussing the research methods of political economy, he did not completely deny Hegel's abstract reasoning function conceptually, but first criticized metaphysical positivism, pointing out: "Starting from reality and concreteness, starting from the premise of reality, therefore, for example, starting from population as the basis and subject of all social production behaviors in economics, it seems correct. However, careful observation, this is wrong. " Because here, people only see the chaotic appearance of things, and do not reach thinner and thinner abstraction from the concrete in the appearance until they find some simplest laws. On the other hand, dialectical materialism epistemology adheres to two paths at the same time: one is from concrete to abstract, and the other is from abstract to concrete. The former is to evaporate the complete representation into abstract provisions; The latter is to reproduce abstract rules into concrete rules in the process of thinking. Only taking the former, people's understanding is bound to be vague and superficial; If you only take the latter, you will inevitably fall into an illusion. "Understand reality as the thinking result of self-synthesis, self-deepening and self-movement. In fact, the method of rising from abstraction to concreteness is only a way of thinking to grasp concreteness and regard it as spiritual concreteness, and it is by no means the process of concreteness itself. " [8](P.23) From this, we say that Marx's contribution to methodology is mainly manifested in the following aspects: First, he wants to replace the first formal methodology with a new methodology. Second, once his general criticism is formed, there is nothing to say about the general method, and the rest will be to describe the special science being explored in order to be consistent with the logic of the object under study. Third, the positive result of Marx's reflection method is the actual form captured by specialized science itself.
Third, social theory criticism is the soul of practical methodology.
The essential difference between Marxist philosophy and other philosophies is that his philosophy is always full of critical style and fighting spirit. In the past, "philosophers only explained the world in different ways", but his main thinking was how to change the world. In this case, his unique method is that he advocates a ruthless criticism of everything that exists, especially the criticism of weapons, which has always been his philosophical feature. It is also in the sense of trying to get rid of the old philosophy, that is, religion, that Marx insisted that philosophy should regard the proletariat as its material weapon and the proletariat should also regard philosophy as its spiritual weapon. Moreover, what he called for and carried out was "criticism is not rational passion, but passionate rationality". Including the criticism of all previous economic and philosophical methods, is a reflection and introspection of realistic methods, rather than out of thin air. For example, in his works such as Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right and German Ideology, he started his own creative process by criticizing his predecessors, reviewing history, critically grasping their achievements, and critically overcoming their viewpoints. In 1844' s Economics-Philosophy Manuscripts, he started with a critical analysis of bourgeois economics. In German Ideology, he did not discuss his economic theory from the front, but took criticizing proudhon's economic theory as the starting point. In a series of economic manuscripts from 1857 to 1858, he also criticized the works of Shi Xia, Carey, Darimon and others, trying to discover the real economic laws in the subsequent research process. Here, Marx is very clear: "Of course, the weapon of criticism cannot replace the criticism of weapons, and material power can only be eliminated by material power;" But once the theory has mastered the masses, it will also become a material force. "Because all criticism is dialectical sublation, is a prelude to the revolution, in essence has some progressive significance. As the saying goes, all great social changes are before ruthless and fierce criticism. Critical consciousness, critical methods and critical spirit have been magic weapons to promote human civilization since ancient times. Why does "criticism" play such an important role? This is obviously determined by its nature. The so-called criticism is to evaluate and judge, expose contradictions and solve them. It needs to doubt, ask questions, study, try, grope, practice, compare and identify, and needs extensive knowledge, rich imagination and keen insight. Only with critical spirit can a person make the past serve the present, with keen observation and far-sighted vision, and prevent problems before they happen. On the other hand, if there is no doubt and criticism, it is easy to follow the trend, be conservative and rigid, regard mediocre works as great works, and regard the actions of ordinary people as magical forces. Without criticism, there is no originality, no freedom and self; It is easy to be deceived and enslaved.
Marx believes that in modern times, the first thing that human beings should criticize is the spiritual opium that poisons people-religion. Criticism of religion is the premise of all other criticisms. Because from the day of its birth, religion is full of fantasy and absurdity, fallacy and deception. It was not religion that created mankind, but mankind created religion. Not human far from heaven, but heaven itself is human society. Religion has given mankind a world turned upside down by illusion. Religion is the general theory of this upside-down world. It is all-encompassing, self-contradictory, without criticism, only faith and obedience, only God and no ego. Criticism of religion, once picking the illusory flowers decorated in the human spirit, will gradually smash all kinds of shackles bound to the human body and soul. As Marx pointed out in the introduction of Hegel's critique of legal philosophy, after the truth of the other world disappears, the task of history is to establish the truth of this world; It is a sacred image that exposes human self-alienation; Is to expose the self-alienation in the unholy image. "So the criticism of heaven became the criticism of the world, the criticism of religion became the criticism of law, and the criticism of theology became the criticism of politics." Criticism of politics is also a criticism of the real social system. Obviously, this kind of criticism will not only stay in theory, but will eventually evolve from a critical weapon to a weapon criticism.
Although Marx's life was mainly theoretical criticism, he paid more attention to the criticism of weapons. He gave enthusiastic support wherever the proletarian revolutionary struggle broke out. For example, 1848 supports the political parties that advocate agrarian revolution in Poland; 1849 supported the German ultra-revolutionary Democrats; For the French Revolution of 1870, although he warned the French proletariat not to hold an untimely uprising in advance, once the uprising happened, he gladly welcomed the revolutionary initiative of the rising masses. After the failure of the revolution, he made an extremely profound, accurate, outstanding and positive evaluation of the Paris Commune. This critical spirit of Marx was inherited and developed by later Marxists and was highly praised. For example, in Hawke Hammer's view, the critical tradition initiated by Marx in Critique of Political Economy "is not only a research hypothesis that shows its value in the current cause of mankind, but also a basic part of the historic effort to create a world that meets human needs and strength. No matter how extensive the relationship between critical theory and specific scientific is, the purpose of this theory is not only to increase knowledge itself. Its goal is to liberate people from slavery. "
Fourthly, social and historical practice is its methodological feature.
Tracing back to the origin of the concept of practice, we should start with Kant and Hegel. It's just that their practices are inevitably agnostic or idealistic. On the one hand, Kant did not regard practice as a bridge between subject and object, and did not realize that only through practice can the unity of thinking and existence be realized; On the other hand, human practice is mainly limited to ethics and morality, which requires people to reject the fierce political revolution and pursue moral perfection gently, thinking that "the whole unrestricted object of pure practical reason is the so-called' supreme good'." Although Hegel introduced practice into epistemology and regarded truth as the unity of theory and practice, he believed that "the former is the impulse to know truth, that is, the theoretical activity of understanding itself-concept." The latter is the impulse to achieve good, that is, the practice of will or concept. "These two inseparable activities are often two means to eliminate subjective and objective one-sidedness. But his practice is still only a link in the development of absolute idea. The greatest achievement of Marx's practical methodology is that it not only overcomes Hegel's idealism, but also introduces Feuerbach's "perceptual intuition" into human practice and cognitive process. It is believed that the substance of human practical activities is by no means inherent in human subjectivity, but an objective reality that exists outside human consciousness. But "he is by no means in the sense of objectivism without intermediary, that is to say, he is by no means such a person who understands reality in the ontological sense." "Instead, practice and history are regarded as intermediaries to realize the unity of man and nature. In his view, the external world is not only the practical factor of human beings, but also the sum total of everything that exists. As the product of knowledge and practice, human productivity has been branded with the material world. Instead of denying the existence of the material world that does not depend on consciousness, it is better to fully confirm its existence. Because "abstract, isolated and separated nature is meaningless to human beings", a pure natural substance has no value as long as it is not materialized by human labor, that is, as long as it exists independently of human labor. "On the other hand, the reason why natural science does not provide people with any direct understanding of natural reality is also because people's understanding of reality is mainly not in theory, but in practice. In all people's knowledge, "even the simplest and most reliable perceptual object is only provided to him because of social development and industrial and commercial exchanges." "... this kind of activity, this kind of continuous perceptual labor and creation, this kind of production, is the very deep foundation of the whole existing perceptual world. Therefore, recognizing the decisive role of social factors in the process of understanding does not deny the priority of the outside world. On the contrary, it is of great significance in epistemology to insist on the pre-existence of external nature and its laws to social intermediary. This involves the basic philosophical question of whether to affirm matter and practice first or spirit and theory first. Here, Marx obviously insisted on materialism, combined materialism with dialectics and established new materialism. Therefore, the nature and matter in Marx's eyes are different from those in the eyes of all materialists in the past.
In Marx's view, because the subject of practice always maintains the object of knowledge, nature or matter in the process and relationship with himself, it should not be said that the material object or nature is the highest principle of existence at any time. Moreover, in practice, the substances that people come into contact with are never absolutely abstract, and always give concrete forms of existence in terms of quality, quantity, time and space, movement and speed. For the independence of consciousness, the universality of matter only exists in the concrete and special. The materiality of matter only exists in the connection and relativity with human social practice and consciousness. There is no free entity that exists independently of specific laws. Both nature and human beings are practical, perceptual and intuitive. Only by using perceptual intuition to stipulate and correct their own thinking can they be true and objective. As the main body of thinking, man can only know nature and man himself through social practice and communication with others. Because "social life is practical in essence. All mysterious things that lead theory to mysticism can be reasonably solved in human practice and understanding of this practice. " On the contrary, all theories are "pure scholasticism" if they are divorced from practice. Both natural concepts and social concepts are first defined from the perspective of social practice, not from the perspective of speculation or physics. For example, the solution of contradictions between various opposing theories is only possible with the help of people's practical strength; Only social practice can effectively unify the elements that constitute human cognition and act as an intermediary for their mutual transformation. Whether it is people's generalization of local experience, theoretical understanding of special fields or the formation of the most universal world outlook, it is produced in the process of human practice; And constantly control the object of practice under their own purposes, from explaining the existing reality to transforming the reality, so that people's consciousness not only reflects the objective world, but also creates it. Therefore, practice is not only the principle of theoretical test and scientific demarcation, but also the symbol of testing the subjectivity, initiative and creativity of philosophy.
The characteristics of Marx's methodology are not only the combination of sensibility and rationality, theory and practice, but also the organic unity of history and reality, man and nature. The concept of "history" is particularly important for understanding Marx's methodology. His interpretation of the meaning of history and the world is different from Schopenhauer's so-called accumulation of chaotic facts, nor does he subordinate history to ideas or purposes like Hegel. He believes that the whole dynamic meaning contained in this world is nothing more than the purpose achieved by human beings through various behaviors and practices to adjust their living conditions and living environment. Even if human society can move from a bad society to a better one, there is no need to add any external purpose, and we can only look for a series of explanatory links from the historical facts of historical development. Because human nature is cruelly subordinate to the material conditions for its survival. At present, only when human beings take themselves as their own reasons in theory can they achieve the realistic unity of their own essence and reality. Therefore, Marx's main concern is the nature before the appearance of human beings. In this "absolute first matrix", everything has been intertwined with the knowledge and things produced by social practice. In this way, it is not the absolute first, but the product of history and society. "Since the reality of man and nature, that is, man's existence as nature is to man, and nature's existence as man is practical, perceptual and intuitive, it is actually impossible to talk about the existence of some dissidents and the existence higher than nature and man, that is, to admit the unreality of nature and man." Everything in reality begins with the perceptual knowledge of man and nature in theory and practice. It is precisely from the concreteness of social practice, not from the abstract body of related substances, that materialism holds that it is self-evident that various material forms in nature conform to each other; The development of socio-economic forms and the history of human civilization is essentially a natural historical process. Although the laws and history of social development have their particularity, natural history and social history are unified in differences. Compared with people, "all history is to make' people' the object of perceptual consciousness, and to make' people as people' the preparation of (natural and perceptual) needs. History itself is a realistic part of natural history and a realistic part of the process of nature becoming a human being. " Metaphysical materialism, on the other hand, can't see the dialectical relationship between the two, and thinks that human history is only a subsidiary of natural history and a purely biological phenomenon. Marx, on the other hand, thinks that the foundation of reality is bourgeois society, not general natural history or human history. There is no absolute separation between nature and society in reality. There is always a historical, natural and natural history in front of people. As a regular and general field, nature is always associated with the human goals organized by society in a certain historical structure. "People's historical practice and their physical activities are increasingly becoming an effective link connecting these two obviously separated fields."
Therefore, whether it is natural history or human history, it is the natural consequence of human behavior, not the result of pre-design. The alienation of labor, capital and even science will become an unbearable force, which will bind people's subjectivity and limit the track of historical development. Therefore, "the dialectical description of political economy is only possible through the most thorough experience and concept research of this system." Dialectical description must be formed from the comprehensive analysis of political economy, rather than applying prefabricated dialectics. "