Author Liu,

Introduction Unit: School of Philosophy and Social Sciences, Jilin University

Marxist philosophy

main body

On the understanding of the general nature of Marxist philosophy and the essence of the philosophical change realized by Marx, China's philosophical circle has experienced the transformation from material ontology to practical philosophy. In recent years, many scholars believe that Marx's new materialism is historical materialism. However, there are great differences in understanding the overall nature of historical materialism: some people call historical materialism "ontology of social relations of production" and others call it "historical phenomenology". I think Marx's historical materialism is a kind of "historical existentialism" based on existentialism.

First, traditional textbooks: dialectical materialism

The understanding of the overall nature of Marxist philosophy in China academic circles has generally gone through the following stages:

The first stage is dialectical materialism represented by traditional philosophy textbooks. The principle of materialism is summarized as follows: the world is material, the world and material are unified, and consciousness is the characteristic and reflection of material; Matter is in motion, and motion is the way of existence of matter; Matter moves in time and space, which is the form of movement; Exercise regularly. We generalize it as "material ontology". In fact, the materialism mentioned in textbooks did not exceed the level of 16 and 18 th century British and French materialism. As its basic principle, the above propositions are all propositions of old materialism. In fact, these propositions are really put forward by old materialism. Textbooks try to create "dialectical materialism" by adding dialectics to this materialism. This simplifies the problem. Without a thorough philosophical revolution, it is impossible to simply graft the old materialism onto Hegel's conceptual dialectics and create the road of dialectical materialism. This is because this materialism is mechanistic and anti-dialectical in nature, and it does not belong to the same "lineage" as dialectics, so we cannot "lose" the "lineage" of dialectics to this materialism. It is in the criticism of this kind of mechanical materialism that Hegel founded the conceptual system of dialectics. In Hegel's view, dialectics is the dialectics of spiritual self-generation, self-creation and self-transcendence, the dialectics of concept and the dialectics of anti-old materialism.

People often understand dialectical materialism in this simple way: because we admit that the world is material and things move and develop dialectically, we have achieved the combination of materialism and dialectics, and what we call materialism is dialectical materialism.

This explanation is unreasonable. The argument that "the external world is moving dialectically" does not mean that this "materialism is dialectical". This is because when we say that "the world is moving and developing dialectically", we answer a scientific question, not a philosophical question, and we have not solved the philosophical question of how philosophical materialism is dialectical. Dialectics to answer philosophical materialist questions can only be manifested in the answers to basic philosophical questions. This kind of dialectics is the dialectics that stipulates the nature of materialism; This kind of materialism has been changed in form by dialectics. Only when dialectics and materialism answer the same question and it is the basic question of philosophy can materialism and dialectics be unified. In other words, materialist dialectics solves the dialectics of the relationship between thinking and existence, and between matter and consciousness.

Dialectics in the relationship between thinking and existence, matter and consciousness is dialectics in human practice. Because this relationship occurs in practice, it can only be solved through practice. In this sense, the old materialism only adhered to the basic principle of material first, but did not solve the problems of how consciousness originated in the material world, how it reflected the material world and how it acted on the material world. Because this problem can't be solved without practice, and the old materialism not only doesn't understand practice, but is anti-practice in essence. Therefore, the old materialism did not and could not solve the basic problems of philosophy.

Practice is the unity and interaction of material reality and conscious reality. Therefore, the relationship between matter and consciousness in practice eliminates the ontological problem of "what is primary". Engels said: "Interaction eliminates the absolute primacy ……", while the problem of ontology pursues "absolute primacy". The concept of practice is not an ontological concept. The history of modern philosophy tells us that if we treat practice with ontological thinking, then in the end, we will either reduce practice to matter or spirit. Although the consequences of reduction are opposite, both of them dissolve the practice. Therefore, practical philosophy can only exist outside ontological thinking.

In this way, "practical materialism" has encountered a new problem: if the concept of practice "eliminates absolute primacy" and can only exist outside ontology, then why do we call Marx's practical philosophy "practical materialism"? What is the basis for practical philosophy to become materialism? In my opinion, practical materialism is a new materialism that has changed the form of old materialism. The reason why this new materialism is still called the basis of materialism is no longer a question of whether thinking and existence, matter and spirit are primary, but whether people's practical activities are recognized as objective and regular. It is on this issue that Marx's new materialism is different from both traditional idealism and old materialism, because the old materialism did not "understand human activities as objective activities". This new materialism is no longer the old materialism opposite to the traditional idealism, but a brand-new materialism opposite to both idealism and old materialism. Therefore, the real dialectical materialism is practical materialism.

Second, the system reform: practical materialism

Marx's founding of "new materialism" did not simply return to mechanical materialism from the 16th century to the 18th century. Marx's "inversion" of Hegel's idealistic dialectics is not to invert the spirit into matter, but to invert Hegel's abstract history of spiritual activities into the history of realistic human perceptual activities. Therefore, Marx's dialectics is about the history of realistic perceptual activities and realistic human perceptual activities, and Marx's "new materialism" is about the history of human perceptual activities. Materialism in textbooks is a retrogression even for Feuerbach. German classical philosophy attributed philosophical problems to human problems. Feuerbach's materialism is humanistic materialism. This kind of materialism, which even Feuerbach can't accept, is a real theoretical retrogression when Marx puts it on his head.

In the mid-1980s and 1990s, China's academic circles began to criticize the philosophy of material ontology based on the view of practice in traditional textbooks. People regard the concept of practice as the core concept of Marx's philosophy, and interpret Marx's philosophy on this basis, forming the viewpoints of "practical ontology" and "practical materialism". The viewpoint of practical ontology is not only to deal with a non-ontological problem with ontological thinking mode, but also has no basis in Marx's text. Even those who adhere to the viewpoint of "practical materialism" do not embody Marx's original thought. Most people regard "practical materialism" or "practical viewpoint" as Marx's new materialistic worldview, but they only regard historical materialism as Marx's historical view. In this way, the practical concept of Marxist philosophy is regarded as an abstract practice that transcends and surpasses historical materialism, rather than a realistic concrete practice. Although people have repeatedly stated that the practice we understand is the practice of social history. However, if only historical materialism is regarded as a historical view subordinate to the world view of practical materialism and has no world view significance, then the practice as a "practical world view" beyond the historical view cannot have the nature of social history, can not be a realistic practice, but can only be an abstract practice in modern German philosophy. This interpretation of practice cannot go beyond the abstract interpretation of the concept of practice in modern German philosophy. Actually, it's the same. The practical principles used by China's practical materialism to explain philosophical problems in 1980s and 1990s are mainly the principles of subjectivity, initiative, transcendence, criticism, creativity and selectivity, which are also the main principles of modern German philosophy. The social and historical principles did not enter the world outlook, so its understanding of practical principles did not go beyond modern German philosophy.

Therefore, only by adhering to the practical viewpoint can we understand the essence of the philosophical change realized by Marx. Marx realized the change of philosophy by establishing historical materialism; Historical materialism truly embodies the revolutionary essence of Marxist philosophy. We admit that Marx emphasized the significance of the concept of practice when criticizing Feuerbach, because what Feuerbach's philosophy lacks is the dynamic and revolutionary principle of practice. But this is not a universal feature of modern philosophy. Philosophers such as Hegel and Kant not only understand the initiative of practice, but also give full play to it. The philosophical change realized by Marx lies in transforming the abstract practice of German philosophy into the concrete practice of reality. Such practice can only be a practice that embodies the principle of social and historical interpretation. This change was achieved through the creation of historical materialism. Without historical materialism, it is impossible to surpass modern German philosophy. We can say that the new materialism that truly transcends the old philosophy is practical materialism, but it is not the kind of practical materialism that transcends historical materialism. Marx's practical materialism is historical materialism. Historical materialism is not only a materialistic view of history, but also a new materialistic view of the world.

Thirdly, back to this article: historical materialism.

I put forward in an article published in 199 1 that Marx's new materialist world outlook is historical materialism: "Without historical materialism, there is no practical materialism, and practical materialism must be historical materialism." In this article, I propose that "Marx's historical materialism contains two meanings, namely, historical materialism in two senses." First, historical materialism in the sense of historical view. The function of historical materialism in this sense is to reveal the general laws of social history and provide people with a philosophical theoretical principle for observing social history. Second, historical materialism in the sense of world outlook. The main function of historical materialism in this sense is to provide a philosophical theoretical principle for people to solve philosophical problems such as human perceptual activities, human nature and the relationship between man and nature. This is a new materialistic worldview different from the old materialism. Of course, this does not mean that there are two different historical materialism in reality, but that the same Marxist historical materialism has the above two functions and significance. "In some later papers, I further reiterated this view, and further expounded that Marxist familiarity theory is also based on historical materialism, and it is not enough to find a practical basis for Marxist familiarity theory. Without the foundation of historical materialism, there will be no new understanding of Marx. Marx's familiarity theory is the familiarity theory of historical materialism.

This involves the relationship between dialectical materialism, practical materialism and historical materialism. From the perspective of the unity of dialectics and materialism, we can call Marx's new materialism "dialectical materialism". But the "dialectical materialism" mentioned here is not the kind of "dialectical materialism" mentioned in textbooks. This dialectical materialism is actually historical materialism. We can also call Marx's new materialism "practical materialism", but the "practical materialism" mentioned here is not the kind of "practical materialism" above historical materialism. This kind of practical materialism is based on the basic principles of historical materialism. This kind of practical materialism is actually historical materialism. Textbooks regard historical materialism as the promotion and application of dialectical materialism, while the mainstream practical materialism in China regards historical materialism as the promotion and application of practical materialism. In my opinion, just the opposite: dialectical materialism and practical materialism are essentially the promotion and application of historical materialism, because the so-called dialectical materialism and practical materialism can only be based on the basic principles of historical materialism.

Then, as a historical view, how can historical materialism become a materialistic world view? The significance of historical materialism as a world outlook is mainly manifested in that the basic theoretical principles of historical materialism have become the basic theoretical principles of Marx's new materialist world outlook. In the book German Ideology, Marx regards historical materialism as the basic theoretical principle of his new world outlook. It is generally believed that the first chapter of Marx's German Ideology only talks about historical materialism. In my opinion, Marx not only discussed his historical materialism here, but also discussed his new materialistic world outlook. The subtitle of Feuerbach's chapter-"the opposition between materialism and idealism" is itself the title of a world view, not just a view of history. In this book, Marx transformed the relationship between "thinking and existence" in the old philosophy into the relationship between "social existence and social consciousness". This shows that Marx has transformed the abstract relationship between thinking and existence into the concrete relationship of reality. In Marx's view, the abstract thinking and consciousness mentioned in the old philosophy is actually the thinking and consciousness of social history, and ultimately rooted in people's real life and social and historical reality. Marx said: "Consciousness can only be conscious existence at any time, and human existence is its actual life process." "It is not consciousness that determines life, but life that determines consciousness." Here, Marx no longer uses material to explain consciousness like the old materialism, but uses the "real life process" of people to explain consciousness. The old materialism attributed consciousness to matter and explained consciousness with matter; Marx's new materialism uses the real life process of people to explain consciousness, and the real life process of people is also the social and historical process of people.

Marx's new materialism also surpassed the old philosophy in understanding existence, matter and nature. The existence of old philosophy is an abstract existence that has nothing to do with people. The existence mentioned by the new materialism is the existence related to people's life world, that is, the existence formed by people's social history and entering the historical field of vision. Marx pointed out: Feuerbach "didn't see that the perceptual world around him was by no means something that existed in history, but a product of industrial and social conditions, a product of history, and the result of the activities of several generations, in which each generation continued to develop the industry and communication methods of the previous generation on the basis of what the previous generation had achieved ...". "This kind of nature that existed before human history is not the nature that Feuerbach lived in, nor is it the nature that does not exist anywhere today except some coral islands that appeared in Australia, so for Feuerbach, it does not exist." Neo-materialism also understands the relationship between thinking and existence and between man and nature according to the development of human history: "There has always been a famous' harmony between man and nature' in industry, and this unity has been changing with the rapid or slow development of industry in every era." Here, Marx did not ontologically deny the authenticity of natural existence that does not enter people's field of vision, but said that nature has no meaning for people's lives, so it is unrealistic for people. "Reality" is the basic feature of Marx's new materialism. Marx's concern thinking is realistic thinking, concern about existence is realistic existence, and concern about the relationship between thinking and existence is realistic, which all boils down to the understanding of "realistic people". Hegel and Feuerbach understand that people are abstract people. In the final analysis, the historical task of Marxist philosophical transformation is to realize the transformation from abstract man to realistic man. Engels believes that in the understanding of man, nature and the relationship between man and nature, "Feuerbach can't find the way from the abstract kingdom he hates to the living real world." He only grasps nature and people; But for him, nature and people are just empty words. Whether it is about the real nature or about the real people, he can't say anything definite. Engels believed that in order to realize the transformation from abstract people to realistic people, "we must study these people as people in historical actions." The worship of abstract man, the core of Feuerbach's new religion, must be replaced by science about realistic man and his historical development. This work of further developing Feuerbach's viewpoint beyond Feuerbach was started by Marx in Holy Family 1845. "The historical task of Marx's new materialism is not to solve the relationship between matter and consciousness abstractly under the premise of mechanical materialism in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, but to solve the philosophical problem of transforming from abstract people to realistic people after Feuerbach. The solution of this problem is accomplished by creating historical materialism.

It can be seen that Marx's new materialism's philosophical explanation of thinking, existence and the relationship between thinking and existence is based on historical materialism. In fact, the relationship between abstract thinking and existence in the old philosophy does not exist in the real world. The relationship between realistic thinking and existence comes from social history and changes with the development of social history. It is the basic theoretical principle of historical materialism that becomes the basic theoretical principle of new materialism to solve all philosophical problems. Therefore, if the textbook regards historical materialism as the promotion and application of dialectical materialism, then we can say on the other hand that "dialectical materialism is the promotion and application of historical materialism." If "abstract practical materialism" regards historical materialism as the deduction of abstract practical concept, then we must say that practical materialism is just another expression of historical materialism. This solution to the relationship between thinking and existence based on reality, that is, social history, is not only a revolution in the development of materialistic philosophy, but also a fundamental revolution to all old philosophies.