The philosophy of Marxism in brief. A Brief Overview of Marxism
Historical conditions for the emergence of Marxism
Marxism as a system of philosophical, economic and socio-political views arose in the mid-19th century; its founders were the German scientists Karl Marx (1818-1883) and Friedrich Engels (1820-1895).
Marxism is a direction economic theory, the purpose of which is to study the laws of capitalism and determine its historical place, “the discovery of the economic law of movement of modern society.” The emergence of Marxism as an integral theoretical system reflecting the interests of the proletariat was prepared by the entire course of development of society, preceding the development of capitalism.
The material prerequisite for the formation of Marxism is the development of productive forces and further changes in the system of production relations of capitalism.
The industrial revolution that occurred in the early 19th century, first in England and then in other countries Western Europe, led to the fact that machine production became the basis of the economy, the rapid growth of factories, factories, changes in old forms of production relations, and the class structure of society. The development of machine production in the early stages caused a deterioration in the position of the working class and an aggravation of contradictions between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, which manifested itself in the uprising of the Lyon weavers in Germany (1844)
The aggravation of social and economic contradictions predetermined the need to rethink a number of provisions of economic theory that were associated with industrial revolution social progress and growth in the well-being of the people. The deepening contradictions of capitalism and the inability of old bourgeois economic theories to find ways to resolve them are also prerequisites for the formation of Marxism. In addition, the proletariat entered the arena of historical struggle, and its class struggle with the bourgeoisie in the most developed countries of Europe came to the fore. There was a need for a theoretical substantiation of the economic and political demands of the working class. These tasks were realized by Marxism. The creative heritage of the founders of this doctrine includes several dozen volumes, among which priority belongs to the four-volume “Capital” by K. Marx. The first volume of “Capital” was published in 1867. After the death of K. Marx, F. Engels edited volumes II and III, Volume IV was published by the leader of German Social Democracy K. Kautsky in 1905-1910 and is called “Theory surplus value”.
The creative legacy of K. Marx has much in common with the achievements of his predecessors in the “classical” school of economic thought, especially A. Smith and D. Ricardo. K. Marx, who brought the science of wealth production to perfection, is also a classic of political economy.
K. Marx, like all the classics, considered the subject of political economy to be the historical study of problems in the sphere of production. He gives only the production relations of people regarding production a class character and considers them from the position of the interests of the proletariat, justifying its historical mission.
5.2. Methodology of K. Marx
According to K. Marx himself, as a scientist, methodologically he proceeded simultaneously from three scientific sources: the English classical political economy of A. Smith and D. Ricardo, the German classical philosophy of Hegel and Feuerbach, and French utopian socialism.
The Marxist school differs from other directions and schools of economic theory, first of all, in its methodology. One of them is a historical approach to the analysis of the phenomena and processes being studied.
Marx's historicism lies in the conclusion that capitalism is inevitably replaced by a more progressive social system. However, in the works of K. Marx and F. Engels, criticism did not turn into a complete denial of the achievements of bourgeois science. On the contrary, the scientific elements of existing theories were preserved and developed.
The labor theory of value, the provisions of the law of the tendency of the rate of profit to decrease, productive labor, etc. were borrowed and creatively developed from representatives of the classical school of political economy.
The critical analysis was carried out on the basis of the method of materialist dialectics.
Materialism, as a direction of philosophy, was known in ancient times and as a method of cognition, it proceeds from the primacy of the material and the secondary nature of the spiritual.
The dialectical approach, in addition to the principle of historicism, presupposes, according to K. Marx, the clarification of the causes of the emergence, evolution and disappearance of phenomena, development from simple to complex, from lower to higher, in the study the transition from the concrete to the abstract, the presence in them of contradictory principles, as they seemed class interests of the proletariat and bourgeoisie.
The name of K. Marx is associated with the widespread use of the method of abstraction, through which the most typical, stable essential features of a phenomenon are identified, categories and laws of science are formed.
The abstraction method involves abstracting from secondary phenomena in research, highlighting the main, essential and analyzing it. Thus, when analyzing the structure of class society under capitalism, K. Marx identified two main classes of this society - the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, abstracting at this stage of the study from the other classes and social groups society.
In the theory of K. Marx, such an element as systematic analysis is manifested. Empirical, statistical, and mathematical methods play the role of auxiliary tools of cognition. This set of methodological principles of analysis was used by K. Marx when developing his economic doctrine.
K. Marx defined the subject of economics as a science that studies the production relations of people and the laws of their development. The creative legacy of K. Marx has much in common with the achievements of his predecessors in the “classical school” of economic thought, especially A. Smith and D. Ricardo. K. Marx, like all classics, considered the study of production a priority as the subject of political economy. According to him, political economy, starting with W. Petty, explores the internal dependencies of bourgeois relations of production.
Thus, political economy, as defined by K. Marx, in the broadest sense is the science of the laws governing the production and exchange of material and vital goods in human society. The subject of political economy is relations of production, that is, certain economic connections between people that arise in the process of production, distribution, exchange and consumption of material goods and services.
History of Economic Teachings: Marxism. Economic views of K. Marx. Proof of the labor theory of value.
One of the most interesting trends in economic thought of the second half of the nineteenth century is Marxism, which can be considered as a unique development of classical political economy. This applies both to the problems studied by Marxist theory and to the methodology
The founder of this doctrine is Karl Marx (1818-1883), a German economist, journalist and philosopher. Taking as the starting point of his research the statements of Smith and Ricardo that the value of all goods is based on the amount of labor expended on their production, K. Marx tried to create a coherent theory describing the laws of functioning and development of the capitalist economic system. However, Karl Marx was unable to complete his theory before his death...
Marx outlined his ideas in the widely known work “Capital,” which he wrote over 40 years, and only the first volume was published during the author’s lifetime (1864), the remaining volumes were edited by Marx’s friend and comrade-in-arms, F. Engels.
Let's talk in more detail about K. Marx's method of economic research and the premises he made. First, the basis of Marx's method was abstraction and simplification; i.e., one might say, building an economic model. Other representatives of the classical school also built simplified models, but Marx built the most simplified model of the economy for his theoretical constructions. Secondly, Marx analyzed the resulting model using deduction to construct the provisions of his theory. Third, Marx's analysis is primarily macroeconomic in nature, using the concept of equilibrium in the economy. In some places, K. Marx uses mathematical analysis of his models, but his mathematical method is not developed, in particular, Marx does not use limit analysis of the economy. In some of his constructions, Marx uses the historical method of economic analysis, i.e. examines the history of economic development. This forces him to sometimes use dynamic model analysis.
Karl Marx showed how from simple commodity production, the goal of which is consumption, and where money is only an intermediary in exchange, capitalist production flows quite logically, where the goal is to increase money and make profit. Like representatives of classical political economy, Marx distinguishes two aspects of a commodity: use value and exchange value. The first refers to the ability of a thing to satisfy any human need, regardless of whether it is caused by “stomach or imagination”; the second refers to the ability of a thing to be exchanged in certain proportions for another product. Marx argues that the proportions of exchange are based on labor costs, which determine the value of the commodity. But it is quite obvious that a homogeneous commodity is produced by different commodity producers and each of them spends different quantities time to produce a unit of goods. However, the proportion of exchange of this product for others on the market will be the same. Marx answers that the cost of a commodity will be determined by the costs of the group that produces the overwhelming majority of the product. To illustrate this point, the following example can be given. Suppose there are three groups of commodity producers who produce a certain product at different costs:
Group 1 - production costs per unit of goods - 4 hours,
Group 2 - production costs per unit of goods - 6 hours,
Group 3 - production costs per unit of goods - 10 hours.
Let us assume that the group producing the vast majority of products is the second group of commodity producers, whose costs are equal to 6 hours, and it is their costs that will determine the proportions of exchange of this product for other goods. What will happen to the first and second groups of commodity producers? The first will receive in exchange more than they spent, that is, they will get rich, the second will receive less, that is, they will go bankrupt. Next, we need to turn to the logic of A. Smith, to his concept of self-interest as the main engine of economic development and the condition for the prosperity of a nation. The natural desire to receive additional income will push commodity producers of the second and third groups to reduce labor costs for the production of goods, that is, to increase labor productivity. How? Better labor organization, introduction of new processing methods, etc. Let's assume it succeeded. But what is the result? The overwhelming majority of production will be produced at a cost equal to 4 hours, and it is they who will determine the proportions of exchange. This means nothing more than a reduction in price of this product relative to others. What better illustration could there be of Smith's point about the beneficence of self-interest? After all, it is he who forces people to improve production and contributes to the development of the productive forces of society. But this is only one side of the coin. The downside is the stratification of commodity producers. In our example, the third group of commodity producers, whose costs exceed socially necessary ones, go bankrupt. Critics of the capitalist mode of production, in particular S. Sismondi, drew attention to this process. However, it should be noted that this is an inevitable price to pay for technological progress. It was Marx who was the first to clearly formulate this position.
Note that Marx himself, having noted the ruin of the second group of producers, did not deduce from this that these producers would leave the market, which would lead to a decrease in production and an increase in the price of goods. As a result, it turns out that the price is determined by the marginal producer, and not by the average one.
Having indicated that the value of goods is equal to the average amount of labor spent on production, Marx thereby proves that in production that does not require tools or objects of labor, the value is equal to the amount of labor expended alive labor. Those. there can be no profit here. After this, Marx argues that the value of the means of production is also equal to the amount of labor spent on them. And in the production process reified in the means of production, labor is transferred to the product. Since with such a transfer profit cannot arise, then under the capitalist method of production profit should not arise (i.e. capital should not be a factor of production).
But where does the profit come from then? K. Marx claims that it is a product of exploitation, i.e. the robbery of the working class by the capitalist class. The reason for the emergence of exploitation for Marx is the separation of the direct producer from the means of production. As a result of this, the direct producer, i.e. the worker is forced to sell his labor power, the value of which is lower than the value created by the worker in the labor process. The cost of labor power is lower than the cost of labor because the first is determined by the cost of reproduction of the worker, and the second is determined by labor productivity, which, by the way, increases as the capital-labor ratio increases. Those. will increase with the development of capitalism.
Economic theory of K. Marx
One of the largest philosophers and economists of the 19th century in terms of their influence on social thought. was Karl Marx (1818-1883). He was a lawyer by training, a journalist and a professional revolutionary by occupation. His closest assistant and co-author of a number of his works was Friedrich Engels (1820-1895). A certain milestone in Marx's life was 1847-1848. By this time, his philosophical theory of historical materialism had already been developed. In 1847, with the participation of Marx and Engels, the international Union of Communists (the forerunner of the First International) was organized, for which Marx and Engels wrote the programmatic work “Manifesto of the Communist Party” (1848). After the European Revolution of 1848, Marx and Engels moved to England, where they lived until the end of their days. Here Marx finally began to develop his economic theory. At the end of the 1850s. he prepared the first version of his main work "Capital" and in 1859 he published the first small edition of this work under the title "Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy." But then Marx stopped publication, deciding to finalize the manuscript. Two more drafts of Capital were written until finally, in 1867, the first volume was published, the only one published during Marx’s lifetime. The second and third volumes of Capital were published by Engels, based on Marx’s drafts, in 1885 and 1894. Subject and method The subject of study in Marx's economic theory, like all representatives of classical political economy, was the sphere of production. Marx attached such paramount importance to it that he called all economic relations production relations. The method was based on his philosophical theory of historical materialism. Marx's materialist approach to social relations was as follows. Marx calls a certain set of social relations a “social formation.” He considers the “basis” of these social relations to be the economy, which, in turn, is determined by the level of development of technology (“productive forces”). All social relations that are not economic (political, cultural, etc.) are a “superstructure” over the “base”. Thus, technology (“productive forces”) determines the nature of the economy (“relations of production”), and the economy determines the nature of all other social relations. At the same time, unlike other representatives of classical political economy, who considered certain social (and economic) relations to be “natural” (capitalist, petty commodity or socialist), Marx used a historical approach, proving that social formations naturally replace each other in a revolutionary way. True, the idea of “naturalness” is still latently present in him, since the communist formation is the last and final in his scheme. Marx used his theory of social formations to prove the historically transitory nature of the capitalist economy, which, in his opinion, would inevitably have to be replaced by a socialist economy. Basic theoretical principles Just like Mill, Marx systematized the theoretical principles developed by previous representatives of classical political economy. The structure of Capital was as follows. In the first two volumes, Marx examined capitalist industry, with the problems of production in the first volume and the problems of circulation in the second. In the third volume, the areas of trade, credit and agriculture are included in the consideration. In addition, in all sections of Marx’s economic research there is a “super-task” - to show the “unfair”, exploitative essence of the capitalist economy as evidence of the need for its elimination. 1. Cost. In his research, Marx resorts to a special methodological technique - the consideration of economic categories with varying degrees of abstraction. In particular, the first two volumes examine cost in the most general view , as a result of the worker’s labor costs. Marx divides value into three parts: “constant capital” (c), i.e. the cost of material costs, “variable capital” (v), i.e. the cost of labor power, and “surplus value” (m). The division of capital into constant and variable was new; before Marx there was only a division into fixed and circulating capital. The appropriation by the capitalist of the “surplus value” created by the workers is what Marx calls “exploitation.” He calls the ratio of the capitalist's income to the workers' income m/v the “norm of surplus value” and an indicator of the degree of exploitation of workers. In the third volume, Marx introduces a new concept - “price of production”, treating it as a transformed form of value. It consists of the costs of purchasing means of production and labor and the average profit for all industries. The concept of "price of production" has sparked debate among economists. Let us recall that after Smith, the theory of labor value and the theory of value determined by costs were opposed within the framework of classical political economy. Therefore, after the release of the third volume of Capital, a statement appeared about the contradiction between the first and third volumes of Capital, since they use different theories of value - labor theory and cost theory. Marxists (Marx himself had already died by the time the third volume of Capital was published) responded by repeating that one category is a transformed form of another; the famous German economist W. Sombart argued that labor value is only a logical prerequisite for the real concept of value, determined by costs, but in general the discussion did not have much scope, since classical political economy was already leaving the scene. Among other economic categories of “Capital,” modern economics considers Marx’s greatest contribution to be the theory of social reproduction and the theory of intersectoral competition and capital flow. 2. Social reproduction. In his theory of social reproduction, Marx returned to scientific circulation the problem of redistribution of the gross national product, the study of which began in F. Quesnay’s “Economic Table” and was lost due to the advent of “Smith’s dogma.” In contrast to the three-sector model, Quesnay Marx built a two-sector model, dividing the sphere of production into the production of means of production, i.e. elements of constant capital, and the production of consumer goods for workers and capitalists, and derived a formula for the exchange between sectors of that part of the product that goes beyond the scope of intra-sector turnover. I(c + v + t) - the cost of the product of sector I. II(c + v + t) - the cost of the product of sector II. In physical terms, the product of sector I is intended for Ic and IIc, therefore, after replenishing Ic, the remaining product of sector I, equal in value to I(v + m), is sent to sector II to replenish Ps. The result is a formula for the exchange of sectors I and II: I(v + m) = IIc. Another difference between Marx’s theory and Quesnay’s “table” was that Quesnay considered only simple reproduction, while Marx presented both simple and extended reproduction. Marx's schemes of expanded social reproduction are, in fact, the first model of economic growth. 3. Inter-industry competition and capital flow. Marx introduced the concept of inter-industry competition, which, unlike intra-industry competition, does not represent competition for the sale of homogeneous goods, but competition for the most profitable investment of capital. Here (in the third volume of Capital) Marx no longer operates with the concept of “surplus value”, but with its “transformed form” - “profit”. Since different sectors of the national economy have different rates of profit, i.e. the ratio of profit to advanced capital (t/c + v), then the flow of capital from less profitable industries to more profitable ones begins. This is reflected in the fact that enterprises in less profitable industries are closed, while new ones are built in more profitable ones. As a result, in less profitable industries, supply decreases, and prices and profits rise, while in more profitable industries the reverse process occurs. In general, the economy strives to generate average profits for all industries.
Marxism is a philosophical system that occupies an intermediate position between classical and non-classical philosophy. On the one hand, Marx was the first philosopher to abandon the thesis about the rational nature of man. On the other hand, Marx believed that change social conditions is capable of changing the nature of a person by turning him into a rational being (NEW MAN), i.e. The classical understanding of man is an ideal that needs to be realized. Marx said: “Philosophers have only explained the world, but the point is to change it.
Basic ideas of Marxism.
1. Materialistic understanding of history.
“Before thinking, loving, creating, a person must eat, drink and dress, i.e. a person is not a rational being, but an economic being, i.e. he is driven not by reason, but by greed.”
2. The doctrine of classes and class struggle.
According to Marx, the question of the meaning of life (why live?) is deprived of normal person no meaning. The main question of human life is the question of lifestyle (how to live?). From the point of view of Marxism, two main ways of life are possible:
1. you can live through the transformation of nature, through labor;
2. You can live through exploitation.
Since exploitation is more effective than labor, in all societies the exploiters form the upper class. Along with the upper class, a lower class (the exploited) and a middle class (people living by their own labor) are being formed. Class division is relative.
3. The doctrine of socio-economic formations.
A socio-economic formation is a historical type of society, characterized by a certain level of economy and a specific method of forced labor. Marx identifies five formations:
1. primitive system. The level of productive forces is extremely low, so this is not economically profitable.
2. slave system. Main classes: slave owners and slaves. Forced labor is physical in nature. Middle class - free peasants. Slavery is not economically profitable because it does not involve complex labor.
3. feudal system. Main classes: feudal lords and peasants. The middle class are city dwellers. Forced labor is in the nature of an agreement. This form of exploitation is also ineffective, since agreements are not respected.
4. capitalist system. Main classes: bourgeoisie and proletariat. The middle class is people employed in the service sector. Forced labor here is of an economic nature. Under capitalism, money is elevated to the highest degree, i.e. everything is bought and sold. To exist, you need to sell something. Two types of life arise:
1. “commodity – money – commodity”
2. “money – goods – money”
The second type of life is characteristic of capitalists. If a person has nothing to sell, then under capitalism he sells himself, turning into a proletarian.
According to Marx, the development of capitalist society leads to the erosion of the middle class and the absolute impoverishment of the majority of the population. The polarization of society leads to a social revolution and the emergence of a new classless formation - communism.
24 RUSSIAN PHILOSOPHY: MAIN DIRECTIONS AND FEATURES OF DEVELOPMENT
The initial period of the formation of Russian philosophy is the 11th–17th centuries, it is called differently: Old Russian philosophy, Russian medieval philosophy, philosophy of the pre-Petrine period. The main feature of this period is the lack of independent status and interweaving into the fabric of a religious worldview.
The second period of development of Russian philosophy begins in the 18th century.
Two main interrelated factors:
– the process of Europeanization of Russia associated with the reforms of Peter the Great;
– secularization public life.
At this time, philosophy moved away from scholastic images and became free from the church. The first supporters of scientific knowledge and philosophy of the New Age in Rus' were:
– M.V. Lomonosov;
– A.N. Radishchev;
– Feofan Prokopovich;
– V.N. Tatishchev;
– A.D. Cantemir et al.
Mikhail Vasilievich Lomonosov (171 1-1765) laid the foundation for the materialist tradition. He spoke from a materialist position, but, like all materialists of that time, understood matter only as substance.
Independent philosophical creativity in Russia begins in the 19th century, which is the third stage in the development of Russian philosophy.
The first who began independent philosophical creativity in Russia was Petr Yakovlevich Chaadaev(1794–1856). He expressed his thoughts in the famous Philosophical Letters. The main principles in Chaadaev’s teachings were the philosophy of man and the philosophy of history.
Following Chaadaev, two directions appear, opposite in understanding the meaning and significance of the Russian idea:
– Slavophiles(laid the foundation of Russian religious philosophy of the second half of the 19th century V.);
– Westerners(they criticized the church and gravitated towards materialism).
In the late 60s - early 70s. XIX century a worldview emerges in Russia populism. His main idea was the desire to come to socialism, bypassing capitalism, and the recognition of the originality of Russia's development path. Continuers of Slavophilism in the 60-70s. appeared soil scientists, the idea of their philosophy is national soil as the basis for the social and spiritual development of Russia.
Next stage ( late XIX– first half of the 20th century) of Russian philosophy is associated with the emergence of philosophical systems.
– anthropocentrism;
– humanism;
– religious character;
– the emergence of Russian cosmism(mystical, theological).
End of work -
This topic belongs to the section:
Subject of philosophy
The structure of philosophical knowledge.. ontology, philosophy of being.. epistemology, theory of knowledge, logic, knowledge of the principles of thinking..
If you need additional material on this topic, or you did not find what you were looking for, we recommend using the search in our database of works:
What will we do with the received material:
If this material was useful to you, you can save it to your page on social networks:
| Tweet |
All topics in this section:
Subject of philosophy
Philosophy (from the Greek phileo - love, sophia - wisdom) - love of wisdom.
Philosophy is the science of the universal, it is free and universal
Philosophy and worldview Every philosophy is a worldview, that is, a set of the most general views on the world and the place of man in it. Philosophy is
theoretical basis
m
Specificity of philosophical knowledge
1. The oldest philosophical school is Miletus (VII–V centuries BC). Its founders: – Thales – astronomer, politician,
School of Pythagoras
Pythagoras (6th century BC) was also concerned with the problem: “What is everything made of?”, but he solved it differently than the Miletians. “Everything is a number,” is his answer. He organized a school, which included
School of Socrates
Socrates (469–399 BC) did not write anything, was a sage close to the people, philosophized in the streets and squares, entered into philosophical debates everywhere: he is known to us as one of the
The Life and Philosophy of Socrates
SOCRATES (469-399 BC) - great ancient Greek philosopher. Contributed to logic with his rejection of dogmatism and use of inductive proof. One of the ro
Plato's objective idealism. Theory of ideas
Plato was able to create the first philosophical system, “Objective Idealism.” He was one of the first to identify the dual nature of man. On the one hand, man is part of the material m
Philosophical ideas of Aristotle
Aristotle (ancient Greek Ἀριστοτέλης) (384 BC, Stagira - 322 BC, Chalkis) - ancient Greek philosopher and scientist. Disciple of Plato. WITH
Philosophy of the Middle Ages (periodization, specificity, main topics)
The philosophy of the Middle Ages is the philosophy of a feudal society, characterized by the dominance of theology and religion.
The main part of the feudal
The teaching of Thomas Aquinas on the harmony of reason and faith In the question of the relationship between faith and reason, religion and philosophy, Thomas proceeded from the fact that religion and philosophy different ways
reach the truth. Religion finds its truths in revelation, but philosophy
Anthropocentrism and Renaissance humanism Since the 15th century A transitional era in the history of Western Europe begins - the Renaissance, which created its own brilliant culture. The most important condition
the flowering of culture during the Renaissance was
Baconian Materialism and Empiricism Materialism (from Latin materialis - material), one of the two main philosophical directions
, which solves the main question of philosophy in favor of the primacy of matter, nature, being, phi
Dualism and rationalism of Descartes
Rene Descartes (1596-1650) is the founder of modern philosophy or, as he is also called, the father of modern philosophy. From Descartes' point of view, it is not enough to have a good mind,
T. Hobbes and D. Locke about the state and natural human rights
Basic ideas of the philosophy of education of the 18th century
French philosophy of the 18th century. commonly called the philosophy of Enlightenment. This is the name of French philosophy of the 18th century. received due to the fact that its representatives were destroying established ideas
Ethical teachings of I. Kant
Kant's ethical teaching is set out in the Critique of Practical Reason. Kant's ethics is based on the “as if” principle. God and freedom cannot be proven, but one must live as if they exist. Practical
Objective idealism of G. Hegel
Objective idealism is one of the main. varieties of idealism. Recognizing the primacy of spirit and the secondary, derivative nature of matter, O. and. in contrast to subjective idealism, the fundamental principle of existing
Anthropological materialism of L. Feuerbach
According to Feuerbach, there cannot be objective thinking, an absolute idea independent of man. The real subject of reason is man. Only man thinks. He is a product of nature. Sciences, especially physiology,
Russia in the dialogue of cultures. Slavophilism and Westernism in Russian philosophy
Westernism is a direction of Russian social and philosophical thought that emerged in the 1830s-1850s, whose representatives denied the idea of the originality and uniqueness of the historical destinies of Russia.
Tolstoy
Criticizing the socio-political structure of Russia, he relied on moral and religious progress in the consciousness of mankind. Historical progress, he believed, resolved the question of the appointment of man and see
Dostoevsky
There are several periods in F. Dostoevsky's quest.
1) passion for the ideas of utopian socialism (the Petrashevites circle);
2) fracture associated with the assimilation of reli
Philosophy of common cause Fedorov
The main thing for Fedorov is the question of life and death, about “why the living suffers and dies.” Life is the most vital, most necessary thing for a person; life and death turn out to be synonymous with good
Berdyaev's philosophy of freedom
he views freedom as an idea. He distinguishes three types of freedom: irrational (unreasonable), rational (fulfillment of moral duty), freedom imbued with love for God. Human irrationality. freedoms
Basic ideas of the philosophy of existentialism
Existentialism – (French existentialisme from Latin exsistentia - existence), “philosophy of being” - a direction of philosophy in the twentieth century, here a person according to
Consciousness. General concept, main approaches, origin
the problem of consciousness (the mechanism of origin, internal essence, influence on matter) still remains a big mystery. Philosophy explores this problem, discussions take place, hypotheses are put forward,
Specifics and basic forms of sensory and rational knowledge
Sensory cognition is carried out through the senses (vision, hearing, smell, touch, taste). It is characterized by: - spontaneity (direct reproduction of the object); - visibility and
Specificity of scientific knowledge. Forms and methods of scientific knowledge
Scientific knowledge grew out of everyday knowledge, but at present these two forms of knowledge are quite far apart. What are their main differences? 1. Science has its own special set of objects
The concept of dialectics principles and laws of dialectics
Dialectics – recognized in modern philosophy the theory of the development of all things and the philosophical method based on it Ø the principle of development (the movement of the main attr
Alternatives to dialectics
Dialectics is not the only theory about the development of all things. Along with it, there are other theories with a similar subject of philosophical interest (development), which are also philosophically
Society as a subject of philosophical research
There are philosophical approaches to the study of society: 1. Materialistic (the starting point for the explanation of all social processes is material production (economy)) 2
Nature and society and their interaction
Man is part of the world. WITH material world, he has developed certain connections and relationships with nature. Without nature and outside of nature, man does not exist and cannot exist. Nature is m
Philosophy as axiology. doctrine of values
Axiology (from ancient Greek ἀξία - value) - theory of values, section of philosophy.
Axiology studies issues related to the nature of value
Culture as a subject of philosophical analysis of the spur
Culture is a set of religions, traditions, material and spiritual life. Culture is the world of man, only his own way of activity, in the process of which he spiritualizes the things he has created.
Basic approaches to the problem of man in the history of philosophy
The first ideas about man arise long before the formation of philosophy itself. At the initial stages of history, people were characterized by mythological and religious forms of self-awareness. In legends, ska K. Marx and F. Engels are rightfully considered the founders of the philosophy of dialectical materialism, and that is why dialectical materialism is often called Marxist philosophy.
The philosophy of dialectical materialism arose in the middle of the 19th century. The prerequisites for the emergence of Marxist philosophy were:
the industrial revolution in Europe (XVIII-XIX centuries), which meant the transition from manual to machine labor;
the appearance on the historical arena of the proletariat with independent political demands;
ideas of German classical philosophy (especially the philosophy of Hegel and Feuerbach);
discoveries in the field of natural sciences: Darwin's evolutionary theory; the doctrine of the cellular structure of the body; law of conservation and transformation of energy.
Characteristic features of Marxist philosophy:
1. The dialectical method is considered inextricably linked with the materialist principle;
2. The historical process is interpreted from a materialist position as a natural, logical process;
3. Not only the world is explained, but also general methodological foundations for its transformation are developed. As a consequence, the center of philosophical research is transferred from the area of abstract reasoning to the area of material and practical activity of people;
4. Dialectical-materialist views are associated with the interests of the proletariat, all workers, coinciding with the needs of social development.
The most important contribution of K. Marx to philosophy and social science They consider the theory of surplus value he created and the discovery of a materialist understanding of history. According to Marx, society develops naturally from one social formation to another. The characteristic features of each of these formations (stages of development) are determined by the method of production, which is based on certain production relations. A society dominated by commodity production gives rise to exploitation and violence. The transformation of society with the aim of eliminating exploitation is possible with the help of the proletarian revolution and the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat for the period of transition from the capitalist formation to the communist one. Communism, according to Marx, is a social system based on public ownership of the tools and means of production, where the measure of a person’s freedom will be his free time and where the principle “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” will be implemented.
K. Marx's comrade-in-arms was F. Engels. Together they developed the basic ideas of materialist dialectics. F. Engels paid a lot of attention to the essence of matter, the forms of its movement and attributes. His greatest contribution to the philosophy of Marxism is the dialectics of nature.
The initial and basic idea of the philosophy of Marxism is a new concept of man. Why is it the original? The fact is that this or that concept of man, in an explicit or hidden form, constitutes the core, the core of any philosophical or ideological system.
This means that a person is not simply assumed to be an element of the “picture of the world” drawn by a worldview, but that he forms its meaningful center and develops an idea of \u200b\u200bbeing as a prerequisite and basis of his own existence.
The historical merit of the philosophy of Marxism was that it was the first to overcome the mystification of human activity and contemplation, characteristic of metaphysical materialism, and at the same time the idealistic mystification of human activity, bringing sensuality and activity into a single practical life process. It was in practice and activity that the philosophy of Marxism saw the true essence and basis of human existence, as well as the only instrument for the real transformation of the world.
Historically, in classical philosophizing, a person in any sphere of his life was presented simultaneously as a natural and social being. The distinction between the one and the other often ended in reducing the second to the first. Hence, the “natural” in man became something like the basis and criterion for the correct organization of society, its institutions and ideas. This is how the concepts of “natural law”, “natural morality”, “natural in art” arose.
At the same time, the boundaries between the kingdoms of nature and man are relative, since neither man exists outside of nature, nor nature in its original form can be strictly delimited from the man acting in it. This dual existence of man is especially clearly visible in the dual nature of labor, in which, according to Marx, a process takes place between man and nature, a process in which man, by his own activity, mediates, regulates and controls the exchange of substances between himself and nature.
What preliminary conclusion can be drawn from this definition of labor and human activity? On the one hand, a person changes the form of what is given by nature (or is done according to its natural laws). On the other hand, a person simultaneously realizes his conscious goal, that is, his activity is expedient. But here we run into a problem. If an object of nature becomes an object of attention and change due to a goal, then where does the goal itself come from? If this goal is pre-determined in a person, then he himself remains a natural being, since an animal, whose actions are determined by natural factors, acts just as purposefully. And therefore, man is destined to realize in his life the goals pursued by the nature that created him.
This problem was first encountered by I. Kant, who argues as follows: as long as a person acts expediently, he does not freely set his goals, but proceeds from his existing needs (passions, interests, desire for happiness) as devotees. This is his nature, but, obeying it, a person continues to remain unfree, since he acts according to the laws of supreme necessity.
Human freedom is achieved only when a person gives himself the law of activity himself, regardless of his nature. The content of this law is the “categorical imperative,” which for Kant is formal, that is, devoid of any substantive certainty.
Thus, Kant’s attempt to identify the actually human content of human activity ended, in essence, with the devastation of the essence of man, the tacit recognition of its uncertainty.
Marx begins the solution to this problem precisely from the point where Kant stopped – from the “emptying” of man.
But at the same time, Marx points out that this devastation is achieved not simply as a result of the refusal of one or another philosopher to recognize the principle of expediency, but as a consequence of the private property relations of capitalist society.
From this point of view, a distinctive feature of Marx’s philosophy is its focus on the need for a revolutionary transformation of the world based on private property: “Philosophers have only explained the world in different ways, the point is to change it,” and philosophy as the spiritual quintessence of its time, according to Marx , is designed to bring wisdom and intelligence into society and thereby promote socio-historical progress.
Purposeful activity, understood as the achievement of a predetermined result, which is then embodied in an external product, is an indispensable moment, although only one of the sides of any practical human activity. Its ultimate goal is not the external product itself, but man and his freedom.
Thus, practice is the most profound basis and characteristic of the human world, primarily because, firstly, practice is initial and primary in relation to the entire spiritual world, culture. Secondly, practice is of a social nature; it does not exist outside the communication of people. Thirdly, practice is objective activity. And finally, fourthly, practice is historical, it consists in the continuous transformation by people of conditions, circumstances and themselves.
It is on the basis of such a non-classical definition of practice that Marx formulates a number of basic ideas of the new philosophical World Outlook:
The idea of a materialistic understanding of consciousness and ideology;
The idea of the dialectical-materialistic method of cognition;
The idea of man as a subject of history.
In this case, let us focus on another idea of the philosophy of Marxism - the idea of human freedom. For Marx, the history of mankind is a history of constant human development and at the same time growing alienation. At the basis of both human existence are the positive and negative aspects of labor, respectively. Therefore, labor is, on the one hand, a specifically human, creative, free force that shapes and develops man and humanity; on the other hand, it is alienated labor that deforms and disfigures man and humanity.
The fact that the entire European culture developed and flourished on the basis of private property is a historically reliable fact. But with the development of private property and the division of labor, labor loses the character of expressing creative forces; it increasingly becomes alienated labor. For Marx, the concept of alienated labor is based on the difference between essence and existence, on the fact that human existence under conditions of private property is removed (alienated) from its essence, that man in reality is not at all what he is in potential, or, in other words, that he is not what he should become and what he can become.
What happens to a person in the process of alienation of labor (forced labor, forced in its essence)?
Firstly, alienation of the very activity of a person who emerges from the labor process impoverished and devastated.
Secondly, the alienation of working conditions from labor itself, when a person is confronted in an alienated form as capital not only by the material, but also by the intellectual conditions of his labor.
Third, alienation of the results of labor. How more people produces things, so more peace objects that do not belong to him.
Fourth, alienation between people. Workers are alien to each other as they compete for the opportunity to work.
Fifthly, the alienation of ideology from life, leading to the formation among members of society of a level of aspirations and expectations that does not correspond to the actual capabilities of society, which is often the cause of deviant behavior.
In generalized form the following conclusion can be made. Alienation leads to a revaluation of all values. If a person considers income, labor, ecology, etc. to be the highest goal, he loses sight of truly moral values: the wealth of a clear conscience and virtue. In a state of alienation, each area of life is not connected with others (economics with morality, etc.). And this is a specific feature of the kingdom of alienation, where everyone revolves in the circle of their own alienation and no one is touched by the alienation of other people (other people's pain).
And if this is so, then a person must build another society, according to Marx, this is socialism, where the main goal will be human freedom. The kingdom of freedom, according to Marx, begins only when work dictated by need and external expediency ceases; therefore, by the nature of things, it lies on the other side of the sphere of material production itself.
A universally developed person, living in unity and harmony with external and internal nature - this is the ideal of the philosophy of man and the future society, which Marx calls “complete humanism,” where the individual carries out the abolition of social alienation, division of labor and private property and thereby becomes a person, “ squeezing a slave out of himself,” a developing person.
Marx understood well that man is a higher being and did not in any way doubt the need to overthrow all relationships in which man is humiliated and enslaved. At the same time, the main meaning of creating a society of real humanism, according to Marx, as the pinnacle of human civilization, lies in the comprehensive development of human forces, in the development of the personality of each as a condition for the free development of all.
Conclusions:
Firstly, the philosophy of Marxism for the first time formulates a new concept of nature, the essence of man.
Secondly Based on this concept, the philosophy of Marxism proves the inevitability of the destruction of all slavery, humiliation, alienation and lack of freedom of people.
Third, the philosophy of Marxism has proven that independence and freedom are based on the act of self-realization and self-development of a person.
Test tasks:
I. Which of the laws of materialist dialectics, according to Marx and Engels, characterizes the source of development?
a) The law of unity and struggle of opposites;
b) The law of negation of negation;
c) The law of mutual transition of quantitative and qualitative changes.
II. What does the concept of “superstructure” express in the philosophy of Marxism?
a) The totality of industrial relations;
b) The system of ideological relations and institutions;
c) Fundamental principles of scientific knowledge;
d) The purpose of scientific knowledge.
Marxism was formed as an integral teaching in the organic unity of all its components. The philosophy of Marxism acts as scientific method knowledge and transformation of the world. The core, the essence of the philosophy of Marxism is formed by the study of classical philosophical questions, centered around the relationship of man to the world, the relationship of people among themselves and the nature (essence) of man. There are two stages in the development of Marxism – “early” and “late”. “Early” is characterized by attempts to develop a holistic worldview primarily through the means of philosophical analysis. “Late” - here, instead of an abstract construction of man and his essential forces, a more concrete one was formed, based on the study of economic and social structure society.
The main theses of Marxism
- the worldview is based not on religious-mystical or idealistic ones, but on the conclusions of modern natural science;
- Marxism openly recognized its connection with the interests of a certain class - the proletariat;
- as a result, a fundamentally new task is set - not to limit ourselves to explaining the world, but to choose a methodology for its transformation, first of all, the transformation of society on the basis of conscious revolutionary activity;
- from here the center of philosophical research is transferred from the area of pure knowledge and abstract human relations, as well as from the field of abstract reasoning about general structure world on the area of practice;
- this leads to the fact that materialism for the first time extends to the understanding of social life;
- finally, knowledge and thinking themselves were understood differently. Thinking began to be viewed not as a product of the development of nature, but as a result of complex historical social and labor activity, i.e. practices.
Basic principle: antagonism between production forces and production relations - the driving force in the transition from one to another socio-economic formation (a historically specific type of society, representing a special stage of its development). Closely related to economics. History is viewed objectively, outside of the individual. For this: social being and consciousness.
- Social existence is the material relationship of people to the surrounding world, primarily to nature, in the process of producing material goods, and the relationships that people enter into among themselves in the production process.
- Social consciousness is society’s awareness of itself, its social existence and the surrounding reality.
- Being determines consciousness; the opposite is generally not true.
Marxism is the knowledge that K. Marx and F. Engels contributed to science. The most important achievements of Marxism are the discovery of the formational development of society and the creation of the theory of surplus value. In the USSR, knowledge added by V.I. Lenin was sometimes classified as Marxism. Then they said: Marxism - Leninism.
In the USSR, Marxism was not subject to criticism, although some shortcomings in it were already obvious. The most vulnerable spot, perhaps, was the forecast for the development of history given in the Communist Manifesto. It was argued there that with the development of capitalism, the proletariat will become poor both relatively and absolutely. The proletariat was declared the gravedigger of the bourgeoisie. It was argued that capitalism had reached the end of its natural development. The actual course of history did not confirm such a forecast. True, capitalism has not outlived its vices: unemployment and cyclical economic development. But the proletarians are not absolutely impoverished; in developed countries they live quite peacefully with the bourgeoisie, and capitalism is progressing both in the field of production and in the social direction, using significant taxes for social programs. Of course, Marxism remains the knowledge without which it is impossible to correctly assess real situations in sociology and economics. For example, only Marxism allows us to give a clear understanding of the nature of the cyclical development of the capitalist economy. Therefore, science is interested in adjusting this knowledge taking into account the real course of history. One can only welcome the scientific criticism of Marxism, since it will help such an adjustment. In light of the above, S. Kara-Murza’s book “Marx against the Russian Revolution” is of particular interest, which contains criticism individual provisions Marxism. graduate School social science does not present its presentation, since it was published in a large, by our modern standards, circulation, but in the form of a lecture he analyzes its main content, commenting on it from the position systematic approach to the analysis of history.
The founders of Marxism became odious and politicized figures, heroes of pamphlets and cartoons. Therefore, it is worth remembering what they really thought, and not what is attributed to them. Let's try to briefly describe the main ideas of Marxism. Moreover, there are enough sources. This did not originate empty space. He was influenced by the theories of Hegel and Feuerbach, as well as other representatives of the German classical school of thought.
Marxism: basic ideas and concepts
First of all, one of the main theories of Marxism is the recognition of the existence of social progress. it's called economics. The main characteristic of man as a being is the presence of work and practice. The latter is aimed at transforming nature and society. In essence, practice is the basis of the story, as well as its meaning. Since the main ideas of Marxism consisted in the extension of materialism to social life, the understanding of history in it was corresponding. Practice is primary in society, and it also acts as a criterion for the correctness of any theory.
Basic ideas of Marxism and materialism in history
Concepts and theories are not the source of life. They only reflect it, sometimes correctly and sometimes distorted. Their totality is called ideology, which can either help or hinder it. People are the cause of processes occurring in society. They interact with each other to satisfy their needs. And since material desires are primary: to eat, sleep, and so on - and then philosophize, the main relationships between people are considered to be labor and production. Therefore, when studying history, it is necessary to pay attention to the basis of social life. And this is the level of the method of production, the basis of the entire society. are the basis of any state. They correspond to a certain level of legal, political connections, as well as a state of public consciousness. This is what Marx called the superstructure. All together represents a socio-economic formation that changes during the transition to new way production. It is often carried out in a revolutionary way if there is an acute conflict between groups of people who differ in relation to property, that is, classes.
Basic ideas of Marxism and the problem of man
There is a reason that becomes the main factor in political struggle. This is private property. It creates not only injustice in society, but also alienation between people. There are several forms of this phenomenon. Alienation can be from the products of production, from labor itself, and, finally, from each other. The need (essentially, compulsion) to work leads to an increase in the desire to have (possess). The only way out of this situation that Marx saw was the emancipation of man, the creation of conditions where he could work not out of necessity, but for pleasure. Then people will turn from creatures striving to possess into real humanists. But the philosopher believed that this solution was rooted in a political solution to the issue: the destruction of private property through the revolution of the proletariat and the onset of communism. True, it should be said that Marx and Engels, with their clear and systematic analysis of the economy of their time and social relations They saw such a society very vaguely. They rather put it forward as an ideal. The practical theory of revolution and communism was already given birth to by Marxism. The basic ideas briefly analyzed in this article have been inherited by many political and philosophical movements and used both for the benefit of humanity and for the detriment of it. But that's a completely different story.
