Materialists claim that. Materialism - what is it in philosophy, the main ideas of dialectical and historical materialism. The main milestones in the development of materialism

Hello dear readers of the blog site.

The question of what is primary in relation to each other - matter or idea - excites the minds of philosophers for more than one century

The dispute gave rise to the existence of two fundamentally different ways of understanding the nature of things, called in science materialism and idealism.

Today we will talk about the materialistic approach to explaining the essence, which states that the world is purely material and develops on the basis of the laws of motion of matter.

Materialism is ...

Materialism (lat. Materialis - material) is a philosophical trend, whose representatives recognized matter as the primary principle in relation to everything ideal and spiritual in the sphere of being.

The term was introduced into circulation by the German philosopher, mathematician, logician G. Leibniz.

Matter is recognized by the supporters of this ideological position as an "absolute" category that stands out. The interaction of the latter gives rise to ideal phenomena (consciousness, values, and others).

Materialists claim that material laws govern the entire surrounding world, including human society.

Materialism in philosophy is a direction that aims to explain the world, consisting of itself as a whole.

This large-scale task is natural and at the same time very difficult. Materialists are fundamentally convinced of the knowability of the world and they argue that everything conscious appeared as a result of the existence of material processes.

The main milestones in the development of materialism

The development of the materialistic worldview can be traced from the era of antiquity to the present day. Ancestor direction in ancient philosophy is considered Democritus, who argued that the true reality belongs to atoms.

Scientists perceived them as the last indivisible elements of matter that make up the whole world. The ideas of Democritus were developed in the III century BC epicureans, who believed that the human soul consists of light and extremely mobile atoms.

A number of ancient thinkers tried to find material source... Thales considered them water, Anaximenes and Diogenes - air, Hippasus - fire, and Anaximander spoke of non-quality matter ("apeiron").

Lucretius in his poem "On the Nature of Things" explained that the emergence of the living from the lifeless is analogous to the emergence of a worm from the mud. He claimed about the materiality of the soul, in essence, which is for the body something like an arm or a leg.

In modern times the direction was actively developed by T. Hobbes and the French enlighteners, who supported the mechanistic understanding of materialism, reducing the complex to the simple. In the 19th century, teaching.

A great contribution to this was made by the German thinker L. Feuerbach, as well as K. Marx and F. Engels.

In the XX century on the basis of materialism, neo-positivism, empiricism, naturalism and other concepts arose. At the same time, a mechanistic interpretation was preserved, and individual philosophers continued to develop thought in the direction of dialectics.

In the XXI century became popular "ontological philosophy" (philosophical materialism).

Basic ideas of materialism

Materialism in philosophy claims that matter is everything, and apart from it there is nothing... She is able to exist in different forms and is constantly in motion, which is its integral property.

Different types of matter constantly interact with each other, giving rise to changes in objects.

According to materialists, matter that has formed as a new state of a quantitative process and is capable of more perfectly reflecting the surrounding reality.

Thought also has a material character, since it is born under the influence of neurons.

The key object of materialistic philosophy, through the prism of which everything that exists in the surrounding world is considered.

Thinkers absolutize the cognitive capabilities of mankind and interpret the ideal as a form of reflection of the objective and the real. More on materialism and the teachings opposing it can be found here:

Dialectical materialism

Dialectical materialism is a direction in philosophy, whose ideas are based on a combination of materialism and the materialist interpretation of Hegel's dialectics.

The main contribution to the development of this idea was made by K. Marx and F. Engels, on the basis of whose teachings V. Lenin and other Marxists proposed their development of the direction.

The apologists of dialectical materialism reworked and "put upside down" the teaching of Hegel in order to search for a rational principle under the mystical shell of dialectics.

In their views, matter appears as a mental abstraction, which means the sum of physically existing objects that make up objective reality.

Among other provisions dialectical materialism:

matter has always been and will always be, therefore it is impossible to create it, as F. Engels wrote in the book "Anti-Duhring", "eternity in time, infinity in space";
matter is closely related to thinking;
motion acts as a form of existence of matter, therefore it cannot be destroyed;
movement is, which characterizes the general quality of physical types of movement;
the movement is due to the mutual influence of its conflicting sides, therefore it has a dialectical character;
matter capable of reflecting itself;
the thinking of an individual person is considered as the highest way of reflection, any thought is an expression of a certain relationship of material reality in relation to itself.

Historical materialism

This separate direction in the philosophy of history was developed by K. Marx and F. Engels.

Historical materialism recognizes the development of productive forces as the main factor in the development of society, opposing it to shifts in social consciousness. As Karl Marx wrote, public being determines consciousness people.

The latter are distinguished by their objectivity, therefore the task of historical materialism is to establish these laws and predict the stages of the further existence of society.

Marx did not deny that mankind creates history by itself, but he considered it necessary to approach its study from the standpoint of the general laws of the existence of this process, taking into account its versatility and inconsistency.

Conclusion

Now we know that materialism is a philosophical trend that considers matter to be primary relative to everything ideal. He plays one of the most important methodological roles in all areas of scientific knowledge.

Often, when science studies a problem that is difficult to understand, the materialistic worldview sets a benchmark on the search and discovery of natural laws that extend to what has not yet been cognized.

Good luck to you! See you soon on the pages of the blog site

See what "MATERIALISM" is in other dictionaries:

- (from Lat. materialis material) a polysemantic idea, which is most often given one or some of the following meanings. 1. A statement about existence or reality: only matter exists or is real; matter is ... Philosophical Encyclopedia

MATERIALISM, pl. no, husband. 1. Philosophical doctrine, recognizing the opposite. idealism, the primacy of matter in relation to spirit. Materialism takes nature as primary, spirit as secondary, puts being in the first place, thinking second. "Idealism ... ... Ushakov's Explanatory Dictionary

- (from Lat. materialis material) philosophical direction, which proceeds from the fact that the world is material, exists objectively, outside and independently of consciousness, that matter is primary, not created by anyone, exists eternally, that consciousness, thinking ... ... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary

Materialism- Materialism ♦ Matérialisme Any doctrine or system of views that in one way or another gives priority to matter. Usually the word "materialism" is used in two meanings, broad and philosophical. But in both cases, he opposes ... Sponville's Philosophical Dictionary

- (from Latin materia substance). Denial of the existence of spirit in nature, all spiritual. strength, disbelief. Dictionary foreign words included in the Russian language. Chudinov AN, 1910. MATERIALISM 1) the system of philosophy, which denies everything in nature ... ... Dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language

Materialism- (from the Latin materialis material), a philosophical trend, which proceeds from the fact that the world is material, exists objectively, outside and independently of consciousness, that matter is primary, not created by anyone, exists eternally, that consciousness, thinking ... Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary

- (materialism) In the conventional sense of the word, this is the belief that only material well-being has meaning (as opposed to spiritual and other ideals). But there is also a scientific interpretation. In response to the idealism of the philosophers of the 19th century, in ... ... Political science. Dictionary.

materialism- a, m. matérialisme m. 1. Scientific direction in philosophy, recognizing the primacy of matter, nature, objective reality in relation to consciousness, thinking (opposite to idealism). ALS 1. Galeva The system is based on the most desperate materialism ... Historical Dictionary of Russian Gallicisms

Materialism- (lat.materialis zattyқ) philosophyday negіzgі baғyttardyң birі. Ol sonau antikalyқ zamannan bastau alada. Bul kuzkaras boyinsha, bolmystyk barlyk formalarynyn negizi zhne substances retinde materialdyk bastamans eseptidі. Matter, tabiғat, ... ... Philosophies

materialism- MATERIALISM (from Lat. Materialis material) is a philosophical worldview that affirms the primacy of matter and the secondary nature of human consciousness. No other consciousness, according to M., does not exist. M. admits, in contrast to the subjective ... ... Encyclopedia of Epistemology and Philosophy of Science

Books

Materialism and Critical Realism, P. Yushkevich. Reproduced in the original author's spelling of the 1908 edition (Zerno publishing house) ...
Materialism and Empirio-Criticism: Critical Notes on a Reactionary Philosophy, V. I. Lenin. The main philosophical work of V.I. Lenin, written by him in February-October 1908 and published in May 1909, is offered to the readers' attention.

Materialism (from Lat. Materialis - material) has two meanings.

First: this direction in philosophy, which proceeds from the fact that the fundamental principle of the Universe is matter that is, all things are of a material nature.

Materialism denies the participation of the spirit or divine power in the creation of the world. The pillar of materialism is knowledge, science and experience.

Materialism is contrasted idealism... Another philosophical direction, which lays the divine, spiritual or otherworldly principle at the basis of the world. For idealism, matter is secondary, and spirit is primary.

Another meaning is when a person pragmatically and realistically refers to life. But this is a colloquial expression. Usually they say, "He is materialistic."

Materialist has three meanings:

he is a follower of the direction of materialism in philosophy;
a person who realistically looks at things, soberly evaluates what is happening;
a very pragmatic person who only cares about his own benefit.

Basic ideas of materialism

The world was created from matter, and not by divine or supernatural means.
Reality exists by itself and is not connected with the person who cognizes it.
The truth of things is, it can be grasped, but it is limited by each thing.

History and forms of materialism

Ancient materialism

Materialism originated in ancient Greece. The most famous materialist philosophers were Democritus, Epicurus and Lucretius.

The ancient Greek philosopher Democritus (460-370 BC) argued that the matter from which everything originated is composed of atoms. They constantly move and, meeting, form objects. In addition to atoms, there must be a void where they make their movement.

The ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus (341–270 BC) spoke of the absence of the supersensible. He also criticized religion. Therefore, it is believed that materialism and atheism are present in his philosophy.

The ancient Roman philosopher Lucretius Kar also denied the presence of "divine will" in the creation of the world, as well as in the fate of man.

According to Lucretius, the soul is made of atoms. When a person dies, the atoms of the soul scatter. Afterlife does not exist. And life and death never touch. Because when a person dies, he no longer feels anything. Therefore, there is nothing to be afraid of.

Materialism of modern times

Metaphysical materialism

Metaphysical materialism is the materialism of the 17th – 18th centuries. Representatives of this trend: Francis Bacon, Thomas Hobbes, Denis Diderot, Paul Holbach, Julien Lamettrie, Claude Helvetius Ludwig Feuerbach, Pierre Gassendi and others.

These philosophers tried to explain the first matter with the help of both mechanics (Galileo Galilei, Leonardo da Vinci) and geometry (Thomas Hobbes).

Common to these philosophers were the ideas of involving science in the cognition of primary matter. Moreover, science must be absolutely practical. Any knowledge should be accompanied by experiments, experiments.

Metaphysical materialism was characterized by the absence of religious prejudices and hypotheses.

Feuerbach's materialism

The doctrine of materialism by the German philosopher Ludwig-Andreas Feuerbach (1804-1872) is also worth a separate article. His teaching is called Feuerbach's anthropological materialism.

The philosopher argued that faith is inherent in human nature. A person must necessarily believe in something.

But Feuerbach believed that man should come out on top. God is given second place. It turns out that the main idea is about man, not about God.

Dialectical materialism

Representatives of dialectical materialism: German philosophers Karl Marx (1818-1883) and Friedrich Engels (1820-1895).

In their ideas, they relied on the dialectics of the German philosopher Friedrich Hegel, as well as on the materialism of Feuerbach.

Marx and Engels believed that first there was matter, and then only spirit arose. Human consciousness is formed when matter projects itself. There is no divine factor.

According to philosophers, dialectics lies at the basis of humanity, directs its movement.

Historical materialism

Later, Marx and Engels arrived at historical materialism. Historical materialism has focused on society and sociology - the science that studies society and relationships in it.

Historical materialism focused on production relations between people, on modes of production.

The economic system is the basis of all relationships. In a society, in order for it to develop, there must be a class struggle.

As for the state, in the opinion of Marx and Engels, capitalism must be established in it and a socialist revolution must take place. As a result of this revolution, the proletariat will come to power.

Another prominent representative of historical materialism was Vladimir Ilyich Lenin(1870-1924). He paid great attention to the struggle of the proletariat for power, the building of socialism in the USSR, as well as the psychology of the masses and the individual.

(from Lat. materialis - material) - a polysemantic idea, which is most often attached to one or some of the following meanings.
1. A statement about existence or reality: only matter exists or is real; matter is the original and fundamental component of the universe; only the essences and processes given in sensations are real; the universe is not governed by some reason, purpose or ultimate cause; everything is strictly causal due to material (inanimate, inanimate) processes or entities; mental entities, processes or events (although they exist) are always causally conditioned by material entities, processes or events and by themselves do not produce c.-l. causal influence (epiphenomenalism), nothing supernatural exists (naturalism); nothing mental exists.
2. A statement regarding the cognition of the existing or the real: everything is explainable in terms of matter in motion, or matter and energy, or, finally, just matter (depending on how matter is understood); all qualitative differences are reducible to quantitative differences; only objects available scientific research are physical or material (i.e. accessible to all, controlled, non-mental, natural or perceivable).
3. Affirmation of values: health, bodily satisfaction, sensual pleasures and the like are the only or highest value that a person can strive for or can achieve.
4 statement of explanation human history: human actions and cultural changes are determined exclusively or predominantly by economic factors (economic determinism or positions close to it).

Philosophy: Encyclopedic Dictionary. - M .: Gardariki.Edited by A.A. Ivina.2004 .

(from lat. materialis - real), one of two main Philos. directions that decide main the question of philosophy in favor of the primacy of matter, nature, being, physical, objective and considers consciousness, spirit, thinking, psychic, subjective as a property of matter in contrast to idealism, which takes for the original, primary consciousness, spirit, idea, thinking and T. nn. Recognition of the primacy of matter means that it has not been created by anyone, but exists eternally, that space, time and motion are objectively existing forms of the existence of matter, that thinking is inseparable from matter, that the unity of the world consists in its materiality. Material-list. second party decision main the question of philosophy, about the cognizability of the world, means the conviction of the possibility of an adequate reflection of reality itself in a human. consciousness, in the cognizability of the world and its laws. The word "M." started using at 17 v. ch. arr. in the sense of physical. concepts of matter (R. Boyle), and later more generally Philos. sense (Leibniz) to oppose M. to idealism. The exact definition of M. was first given by K. Marx and F. Engels. “Philosophers were divided into two big camps,” according to how they answered the question about the relation of thinking to being. “Those who asserted that spirit existed before nature ... constituted the idealist camp. Those who considered nature to be the main principle joined various schools of materialism " (Engels F., cm. K. Marx and F. Engels, Works, T. 21, With. 283) ... Lenin also adhered to this understanding. (cm. PSS, T. 18, With. 98) ... Opponents of M. use incorrect terminology to designate M. 1) Those who deny or question the existence of something outside of sensations, called M. "metaphysics" (since M. recognizes the independent existence ext. peace)... On the same basis, "metaphysics" are called objective idealism and fideism, which recognize the existence of abs. spirit or god outside of our consciousness; M. here is mixed with the definition. kinds of idealism. 2) M. is called "realism" because M. recognizes objective reality ext. the world. Noting that the term “realism” is sometimes used in the sense of the opposite of idealism, Lenin wrote: “Following Engels, I use in this sense only the word: materialism, and I consider this terminology to be the only correct one, especially in view of the fact that the word“ realism "captured by positivists and other confusionists who vacillate between materialism and idealism" (ibid., ls. 56)... 3) Trying to belittle M „to the level of an ordinary, philosophically unformed beliefs of people in reality ext. the world, M.'s enemies call it "naive realism." 4) Identifying M. as a whole as a direction with mechanical. M., some critics M. called his "mechanism".

Typology of schools of materialism. V Philos. M.'s literature is characterized from various sides, in his connections with dr. social phenomena, which serves as the basis for its various classifications.

1) Two historians stand out. epochs in the progressive development of M., which correspond to pre-Marxist M. and Marxist M. Pre-Marxist M. covers all forms of M. that historically preceded the emergence of dialectical. M.

2) The only consistent is the Marxist M. Lenin called Marx "... the founder of modern materialism, immeasurably richer in content and incomparably more consistent than all previous forms of materialism ..." (ibid., With. 357) .

Inconsistent M. manifests itself in different ways. a) When the line M. is carried out in the understanding of nature, and societies. phenomena are interpreted idealistically. It was, ex., at French materialists 18 v., at Feuerbach, as well as Russian revolutionary Democrats 19 v. An inconsistent materialist scientist can pursue the line of M. in his specialist. region, and in Philos. to defend idealism (cm. F. Engels, in book: K. Marx and Engels?., Works., T. 22, With. 305) ... b) When one group or side is epistemological. issues are resolved from the standpoint of M. (e.g. first side main the question of philosophy), and the other - from the standpoint of idealism and agnosticism. c) When the universal connection of phenomena and the development of nature, its self-development are denied or ignored. In particular, metaphysical. M, unable to explain the origin of things and phenomena in the world, often comes to idealistic. the concept of "first shock".

3) In relation to the socio-historical. practice, contemplative M. and M. practically effective (active)... M., who sets the task not only to explain the world, but to change it, is the Marxist M.

4) Art. sp. method of thinking, which is used by materialists, stand out dialectical. M. and metaphysics. M. For dialectic. M. are characteristic int. unity, indivisible fusion of dialectics and materialistic. theory-knowledge. Metaphysical. M. has many varieties, depending on which side of reality or the process of cognition turns into an absolute.

5) From the point of view of the role assigned to consciousness, scientific and vulgar materialism are opposed. Sci. M. sees qualities, the difference between the mental and the physical. On the contrary, vulgar M. identifies consciousness with matter. In the understanding of societies. phenomena manifestation of vulgar M. is economical. M., the opposite historian. M. Historical M. is opposed by various schools of simplified M., which provide an incorrect explanation of societies. phenomena: a) anthropological. M. (Feuerbach, partly Chernyshevsky); b) geographic. M; c) naturalistic. M., who considers nature to be the determining factor in the development of society.

6) From the point of view of attitudes towards various stages, or sides, of the process of cognition, the schools of the rationalistic were different. and sensational. M. (cm. Rationalism and Sensualism)... 7) The conscious M. and the spontaneous, or naive, philosophically unformed M. are distinguished. The spontaneous M. of natural scientists Lenin called natures, -storich. M. (cm. Natural science materialism).

8) Various schools of M. are characterized by national-geographic. and chronological. features that usually come together (e.g., ancient Greek M., French M. 18 v., Russian M. 19 v.) .

The criterion of the truth of M. is the socio-historical. practice. It is in practice that the false constructions of idealists and agnostics are refuted and the truth of M. is indisputably proved. To successfully wage an active struggle against idealism, M. must be philosophically conscious; M.'s active orientation against idealism expresses his partisanship. In this regard, distinguish between militant M. and M., not leading an active struggle against idealism.

V modern conditions militant M., carrying out the principle of partisanship, is atelistic. M. However, until 19 v. advanced Philos. currents were often forced to adapt to the prevailing religion ideology (pantheism, deism).

Types of materialism. Under the content of M. is understood, first of all, the totality of its initial premises, its principles. M.'s form is understood as its general structure, which is determined primarily by the method of thinking.

Accordingly, three ch. stages of development of knowledge are allocated main types M: naive (or spontaneous) M. - the ancient Greeks and Romans; metaphysical. (or mechanical)-M. 17-18 centuries; dialectical M., in which M. and dialectics are organically reunited, so that the complete unity of dialectics is established (developmental teachings), logic (teachings about thinking) and the theory of knowledge.

Shape change (or kind) M. is performed primarily under the influence of progress. scientific. knowledge and societies. development. M., wrote Engels, “... like idealism, went through a series of stages of development. With each discovery constituting an epoch, even in the natural ^ toric domain, materialism must inevitably change its form. And since then, as history was given a materialistic explanation, it also reveals new way for the development of materialism " (ibid., T. 21, With. 286) .

As well as main M. species existed intermediate - transitional from one main M. view to another (e.g. M. of the Ancient East; M. of the Renaissance; M. Russian revolutionary Democrats 19 v. and other forms of M., immediately preceding dialectical M.).

M. how Philos. teaching throughout history has been, as a rule, the worldview of the advanced, revolutionary classes. For the disclosure of the class foundations and origins of M. as a whole, the general orientation of M. is essential as Philos. teachings reflecting the most progressive trends in societies. development - communication through natural science with progress produces, forces and the struggle against religion and idealism.

Periods and lines of development of materialism. There are the following main routes or lines of development of Moscow:

The main lines of development of M. of the Ancient East and of ancient M. (up to grossly anthropomorphic) ideas about the world, nature, matter to generalized and abstract ideas about the properties and structure of matter, which were developed by the ancient atomists, who expressed the highest stage of the initial M: antique the world. V antique M. in embryo contained all the later currents of M.: mechanistic. M., vulgar M., metaphysical. M., dialectic. M. In the universal system of Aristotle, the lines of M., coming from the rudiments of the dialectical, were synthetically combined. M. (Heraclitus), from the doctrine of the four unchanging roots of the universe (Empedocles) and from the idea of aleurone (Anaximander)... The most vivid and clear-cut struggle between M. and idealism in antique philosophy acted as a struggle of opposite tendencies, or lines, Democritus and Plato (cm. V. I. Lenin, PSS, T. 18, With. 131) .

Lines of conservation and accumulation of elements and sprouts of M. in the middle of the century. philosophy. Under domination religion ideology M. was supplanted by idealism in cf. century. In addition to social factors, this was also facilitated by the causes of epistemological. character: the inability of M. of antiquity to clarify the relationship of thinking to matter, to reveal the genesis of consciousness. In Zap. Europe in the teachings of Aristotle official church. ideology retained everything reactionary and discarded everything progressive. On the contrary, in countries Arab. East, Wed. Asia and Transcaucasia, elements of M. were preserved and M.'s line of that time was presented in the works of the commentators Aristotle and dr. thinkers, ex. Ibn Sina. Within the framework of Wed-century. scholasticism, the struggle between M. and idealism took the form of a struggle between nominalism and realism. In various scholastic. schools, the shoots of materialistic were making their way. views (the first approximation to the concept of feelings. experience in R. Bacon; the question posed by John Duns Scott: "is not matter capable of thinking?" dr.) ... However, all this was not yet a formed line of M.

The main lines of the revival and development of M. at the beginning of modern times in Europe. At 15-16 centuries in the center of attention of representatives of M. and the emerging natural science was the question of experience as a unity. source of knowledge and criteria for their correctness. English. M. 17 v. appeared on the basis of empiricism, which then grew into sensationalism. V end 16-17 centuries materialistic. ideas of natural science (Galileo, F. Bacon, Descartes) were directed against hidden (or absolute) qualities Wed-century. scholastics, on the study of real (primarily mechanical) properties and relationships of things of nature. The early systems of M. in different countries carry the meaning. elements of naive M. and naive dialectics, in which some features are clearly reborn antique M. Takov M. ital. Renaissance 15-16 centuries (Leonardo da Vinci, G. Bruno and dr.) , M. 17 v. (F. Bacon, who represented matter as qualitatively diverse)... Later, these views were replaced by mechanistic ones. teachings, in kryh matter is interpreted abstractly mechanically (Galileo) or abstract geometric (Hobbes)... However, in dep. In some cases, a naive but basically correct view of nature lasted longer: ex., the concept of warmth as motion (F. Bacon) and how about molecular motion (Boyle, Newton) at 17 v. replaced at 18 v. comes the metaphysician. caloric concept. T 18 v. parallel to the deepening of the metaphysical, mechanistic. the idea of the rupture of matter and motion; in a number of systems of mathematics, the desire to overcome this gap is intensified: materialists try to consider the bodies of nature as endowed int. activity, movement, although this movement itself is interpreted as mechanical, and therefore, by its very essence, as external in relation to matter (in Cartesianism, some representatives French M., in atomic-kinetic. concepts of Lomonosov, in Toland's idea of the inseparability of matter and motion, in dynamic. the atomism of Boschkovich and his follower Priestley)... Dialectics as a whole doctrine was developed only on the basis of German idealism, in the systems of M. prevailed and, as a rule, prevailed metaphysics and mechanicism, but there were also elements of dialectics (Descartes, Diderot, Lomonosov, Priestley, Toland, Boschkovich and dr.) ... Atomistic ideas were revived and developed by almost all schools of M .: as a mechanic. their atomistics were developed by Galileo, F. Bacon, Boyle, Newton, Gassendi, Spinoza, French materialists 18 v., Lomonosov.

M.'s fight against idealism unfolded first (during the Renaissance) as a fight against the dominant religion ideology. Later, the most consistent

M. (Hobbes, French M. 18 v.- La Mettrie, Helvetius, Diderot, Holbach and dr.) acted as an atheist. teachings. English. M. end 17 v. turned out to be half-hearted in his attitude to religion (attempts to reconcile science and religion by Boyle and Newton)... At 17-18 centuries a struggle unfolds between the newly emerging systems of M. and idealism: Hobbes versus Descartes idealism, Berkeley versus M. in general, French M. 18th century - against Berkeley, Hegel - against French M. 18 v. and T. etc.

The main lines of development of pre-Marxist Moscow in the 19th century. in Russia and For n. Europe. Ch. main line of development of M. in "19 v. proceeded in the direction of enriching it with dialectics, which reached the highest development in Hegel's philosophy on the basis of idealism. Objectively, the problem arose of merging dialectics with mathematics by means of its materialistic. processing. This process was started but not completed by representatives of Russian M. 19 v.; continuing materialistic. tradition (materialistic ideas of Lomonosov and Radishchev), Herzen, Belinsky, Dobrolyubov, Chernyshevsky made an attempt to combine Hegel's dialectics with M .; in Germany, Feuerbach took a major step forward when he discarded abs. the idea of Hegel, which played the role of the creator of all things in the Hegelian system, and made the statement of M .; however together with abs. with idealism, he also threw away dialectics. All pre-Marxist M. is characterized by a lack of understanding or an inability to achieve the unity of dialectics, logic, and the theory of knowledge. Have Russian revolutionary democrats (up to Chernyshevsky) the unity of M. and dialectics was not achieved precisely in the field of logic and the theory of knowledge, and they were getting closer to this. The problem of combining dialectics with dialectics was first solved by K. Marx and F. Engels. Theoretical sources were Hegelian dialectics and Feuerbach's materialism, and through him and French M. 18 v. The interpenetration of M. and dialectics in Marxist philosophy 19 v. produced revolutionary a revolution in the history of the whole human. thoughts, t. to. a truly scientific unified view of nature, society and thinking, theory and method of knowledge and revolutionary transformation of reality. The most important side of this revolutionary coup was the spread of M. on the understanding of societies. life, creation is materialistic. understanding history (historical materialism)... Further development of dialectic. and historical. M. in the new istorich. the situation is associated with the name of V.I. Lenin. Recognition was decisive (Marx, Engels, Lenin) or non-recognition (inconsistent materialists) organic unity (identities, matches) Dialectics, logic and the theory of knowledge, based on the principle of the unity of the laws of being and knowledge, thinking. With Hegel, such a unity was realized in an idealistic way. basis. It was impossible to completely unite M. with dialectics if the question of this unity was not resolved on the basis of M.

Dialectical M., being fundamentally opposite to idealism, also has epistemological elements diametrically opposed to it. sources: strict objectivity of consideration of any things and phenomena; versatility of consideration of the studied subject, flexibility and mobility of concepts in which it is reflected; inextricable bond of all scientific. views (theories, hypotheses, laws, concepts), all sides scientific. knowledge with the concept of matter, nature, ensuring their use as relative (relational) and preventing their transformation into absolute. One of main sources of dialectic. M. - an inextricable link between theory and practice revolutionary struggle, thanks to which the opportunity opens up not only to explain the MNR, but also to radically transform it. M. plays an important methodological. role in all areas scientific. knowledge, in relation to all problems of philosophy and theoretical. problems of nature. and societies. sciences. He points out to science the correct path to knowledge is valid. the world. When science collides with Ph.D. difficult, still unresolved issue, then materialistic. worldview in advance excludes his idealistic. explanation and orients to the search for real laws of development, valid yet unknown connections. Only when scientists, at least sometimes unconsciously, are materialistic. paths in search of answers to the unsolved questions of science, they come to major discoveries, to a constructive way out of the seeming impasse. Rejecting the idea of creation "out of nothing", M. puts forward the requirement to seek natures. the reasons for the studied phenomena. But M. can consistently fulfill this requirement only by relying on the idea of development and universal communication, i.e. to dialectics. The whole course of development of science and society, international. re-volyuts. movement of the working class fully confirms the creative. character and truth of the highest form Philos. M. - dialectical. and historical. M.

see articles Dialectical materialism, Historical materialism, Matter and lit. to these articles.

B. M. Kedrov.

Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary. - M .: Soviet encyclopedia.Ch. edition: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov.1983 .

(from lat.materialis real)
a view that sees the basis and substance of all action - not only material, but mental and spiritual - in matter. Naturalism must be attributed to materialism, since it does not give man a special place in nature; empiricism, which regards as real only that which can be perceived by means of natural scientific methods; then - neo-positivism, which from the very beginning rejects the explanation of the spiritual and mental essence of affairs. The philosophy of B. Russell and his schools. Materialism is characterized by respect for the natural sciences and technology and the glorification of the human mind. The development of materialism can be traced throughout the history of Western thought from its very inception and found throughout the history of philosophy. Materialism reaches its heyday in the era of the French. Enlightenment (J. Lametrie, P. Holbach, D. Diderot), but he acquired a decisive influence on European philosophy only in the 19th century. (K. Marx, F. Engels, L. A. Feuerbach, D. F. Strauss, J. Moleschott, K. Vogt, L. Buchner, E. Heckel, E. Dühring). It is a counterbalance to the delusions of idealism, but in its one-sidedness it completely yields to all decisive ones, i.e. human, problems (consciousness, existence, meaning and purpose of life, values, etc.), which he rejects as imaginary. Main its provisions are a series of dogmas and a primitive ontology, long surpassed by Western thought. Materialism is the way of thinking preferred by the masses, since they hope to achieve their goals primarily due to their "weight", their large number and feel themselves as something more or less corporeal. It is necessary to distinguish between the following types of materialism: Physical and materialism, which saw the ultimate physical reality in matter (classical mechanics); its principles are shaken by the data of the latest physics. 2) Biologically and, or physiological, materialism puts forward the same considerations regarding the soul and spirit, and it neglects the qualitative difference between material and immaterial (J.Lametri, V.M. Bekhterev). 4) Something completely different is ethical materialism. He recognizes only useful achievements or goods that can be used as worthy and denies the recognition of the realm of autonomous intangible value. 5) Dialectical materialism ("diamat") - was actually the Soviet state philosophy and at the same time served as the methodological basis of Soviet science. It arose from the transfer of Hegelian dialectics into the materialist-monistic worldview of the late. 19th century; the name "materialism" was often used in this sense in the sense of realism (reality, independent of thinking and existing outside of consciousness). 6) Historical materialism (see. Historical materialism).

Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary.2010 .

(from Lat. materialis - material) - scientific. direction in philosophy, a cut decides the main question of philosophy in favor of the primacy of matter, nature, being, physical, objective and considers consciousness, thinking as a property of matter in contrast to idealism, which takes the spirit, idea, consciousness, thinking, mental, subjective as the initial.

Common defining feature of materialism

The word "M." began to be used in the 17th century. not so much in the sense of gnoseological. teachings, how much in the sense of physical. concepts of matter (for example, Boyle), Later they use it in a more philosophical. sense (for example, Leibniz) to oppose M. to idealism. Elucidation of scientific. the meaning of M. and the precise definition of M. was first carried out by Marx and Engels. "Philosophers were divided into two big camps," wrote Engels, "according to how they answered this question (about the relation of thinking to being - Ed.). Those who argued that spirit existed before nature ... formed an idealist camp. Those who considered nature to be the main principle joined various schools of materialism.

Nothing else is originally meant by the expression of idealism and materialism ... Below we will see what confusion arises in those cases when they are given any other meaning "(K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch., 2nd ed., Vol. 21, p. 283) Lenin also adhered to this understanding of M. those who in a different sense use the expressions idealism and materialism "(Soch., vol. 14, p. 87).

However, despite the fact that science has clarified this issue, the opponents of M. use the wrong terminology to designate M. 1) Those who deny or question the existence of something outside of sensations, call M. "metaphysics" (since M. the existence of the outside world). "Metaphysicians, I must say, are called materialists by many idealists and all agnostics (Kantians and Humists as well), because it seems to them that the recognition of the existence of an external world, independent of human consciousness, is a way out of experience" (ibid., P. 51). But on the same basis, "metaphysics" refers to objective idealism and fideism, which recognize the existence of an absolute spirit or God outside the experience of individual ideas; then. here M. is mixed with idealism. 2) M. is called "realism" because M. recognizes the reality of the external world. Noting that the term "realism" is sometimes used in the sense of the opposite of idealism, Lenin wrote: "I, following Engels, use in this sense only the word: materialism, and I consider this terminology to be the only correct one, especially since the word" realism "has been captured by positivists and other confusionists who vacillate between materialism and idealism" (ibid., p. 48). Positivists call themselves "realists" because they recognize the reality of our "I" and our sensations. Then realists can be called the supporters of the immanent school and fideism, since they recognize the reality of spirit and God, as a result of which M. here, too, is mixed with directions that are directly opposite to him. 3) Trying to belittle M. to the level of an ordinary, philosophically unformed conviction of people in the reality of the external world and its things, M.'s enemies call him "naive realism." 4) Mixing M. as a direction with mechanistic. M., some critics of M. call it "mechanism". Engels noted that the erroneous equating "materialistic" and "mechanical" comes from Hegel, who wanted to humiliate M. with the epithet "mechanical". 5) Often the word "M." is used arbitrarily, in a base sense. "By materialism, a philistine understands gluttony, drunkenness, lust and carnal pleasures and vanity, greed, avarice, greed, the pursuit of profits and stock market swindlers, in short - all those dirty vices to which he himself indulges in secret" (K. Marx and F. Engels , Works, 2nd ed., V. 21, p. 290).

The line of M., as the opposite of the line of idealism, is carried out in all areas of scientific. knowledge, in relation to any problems and categories of philosophy and private sciences. For example, on the question of causality and regularities, M. and idealism differ not in the fact whether the existence of regularities, the causal connection of phenomena is recognized or denied, and not by what type of this connection is recognized or denied, but by what is taken here as the initial - nature or spirit: either the causal connection of phenomena objectively existing outside and independently of the subject is recognized (M.'s position), or it is denied altogether, or its objective nature, its primacy in relation to the will and consciousness of man (the position of idealism) is denied. Hence "... two philosophical trends in the question of causality" (Lenin V. I., Soch., Vol. 14, p. 19). Although the recognition of causality is essential for M., there are also thinkers among idealists who do not deny it. With gnoseological. t. sp. According to Lenin, the materialist solution to the question of causality consists in the recognition that "... the necessity of nature is primary, and the will and consciousness of man is secondary" (ibid., p. 176). Hence the main. the point of view on this issue is "... recognition of the objective reality of the external world and the laws of external nature ..." (ibid., p. 177).

The question of the cognizability of the world, which is the other side of the main. the question of philosophy also has great importance to characterize certain philosophies. schools and currents. However, its positive or negative decision provides a basis for the division of philosophers not into two fundamentals. camps - idealists and materialists, and those who admit that the world is knowable, and agnostics, who deny it. Lenin emphasized that among the philosophers who affirmatively decided the question of the knowability of the world, Engels attributed "... not only all materialists, but also the most consistent idealists ..." (ibid., P. 88), contrasting them with agnostics.

Particular characteristics of materialism

In the literature, M. is characterized from the most varied sides, in its very diverse connections and relations with other phenomena of societal-historical, especially spiritual, order. As a result of this, there are particular definitions of M., to-rye and serve as the basis for various classifications of materialistic. teachings.

1) Two historians stand out. epochs in the progressive development of M., which correspond to: pre-Marxist M. and Marxist, or dialectical., M. Pre-Marxist M. encompasses all forms of M., to-rye historically preceded the emergence of dialectical. M. Those schools of M., to-rye appeared after the emergence of Marxism, strictly speaking, cannot relate to pre-Marxist M., tk. they do not represent the further development of M. and occupy a special place in the history of M. There are two views on chronological. the border dividing the era of pre-Marxist and Marxist Moscow: according to the first, this border is common for all countries and peoples - mid. 40s 19th century, when Marxism arose. But in this case, for those countries where the labor movement developed later (for example, Russia, the countries of the East), the process of development of pre-Marxist M., taking place within these countries, would have to be artificially broken into two completely separate stages.

According to the second so. Sp., M. is pre-Marxist, widespread in a given country before the penetration of Marxism into it.

Two different terms could be adopted: pre-Marxist M. (denoting M. up to the mid-40s of the 19th century) and pre-Marxist M. (denoting M. before the spread of Marxism in a given country). Then the period of pre-Marxist M. will be chronologically determined differently in different countries; for example, for Russia it will be the period up to the 80s. 19th century

The only success in all respects is the Marxist M. Lenin called Marx "... the founder of modern materialism, immeasurably richer in content and incomparably more consistent than all previous forms of materialism. .. "(ibid., p. 322). All schools of non-Marxist M. belong to inconsistent M. The inconsistency of M. manifests itself in various ways:

a) When the line of M. is carried out only in one area of knowledge (for example, "below", in the understanding of nature), and in other areas, idealistic. interpretation of the phenomena under consideration (for example, social ones, whence idealism is "at the top"). So it was, for example, with the French. materialists of the 18th century. and Russian. revolutionary Democrats of the 19th century. An inconsistent materialist scientist can consistently pursue the line of M. in his special area, and in philosophy. issues to defend idealism. Since such a scientist is a man of science, Engels wrote, "... insofar as he knows something, insofar as he is a materialist; but outside of his science, in those areas in which he knows nothing, he translates his ignorance into Greek, calling his agnosticism "(K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch., 2nd ed., vol. 22, p. 305). Such a scientist was, for example, Butlerov.

b) When one group or side is epistemological. questions are solved from the standpoint of M. (for example, the first side of the fundamental question of philosophy), and the other - from the standpoint of idealism and agnosticism. So, Helmholtz was basically a materialist, but in the theory of knowledge he moved away from M. in the direction of agnosticism, and hence - inevitably - and in the direction of idealism (see V.I. Lenin, Soch., Vol. 14, p. 222) ... Plekhanov made a similar mistake (see ibid., P. 220). Thus, agnostic. the solution of the problem logically leads to idealism, undermining the initial premise of M. - the recognition of the objective reality of the external world, and hence the primacy of matter in relation to spirit. This constitutes a special manifestation of inconsistent M., the so-called. symbolic., or hieroglyphic., M. means half-hearted M. A consistent materialist, on the contrary, decides from the position of M. not only the first, but also the second side of the main. the question of philosophy.

An example of inconsistent M. is also mechanistic. M., since he recognizes objectively existing only primary qualities, but not secondary qualities. With such a t. Sp. our sensations are not images of things, because the qualities they contain are supposedly purely subjective. This is a direct departure from M., leading to agnosticism.

c) When the general connection of phenomena and the development of nature are denied or ignored. In particular, metaphysical. M., unable to explain the origin of things and phenomena in the world, often comes to idealistic. the concept of "first impulse", through which the body of nature was allegedly created, and matter seemed to acquire the ability to move. The ability to produce such a "push" can only be attributed to some extra-natural principle, i.e. god. This inconsistency was characteristic of the metaphysical. M. of the 17-18th centuries, especially those of its directions, to-rye took the form of deism. The same inconsistency was characteristic of the philosophers. ideas of Dühring. “The whole struggle against Dühring,” wrote Lenin, “Engels spent on a whole under the slogan of consistently pursuing materialism, blaming the materialist Dühring ... for methods of reasoning expressing a concession to idealism, a transition to the position of idealism. materialism, or the lies and confusion of philosophical idealism - this is the formulation of the question that is given in each section of Anti-Dühring "(ibid., p. 323).

2) In relation to the socio-historical. practice, differ between contemplative M. and practically effective M. The first is one of the characteristics of pre-Marxist M. "The main disadvantage of all previous materialism - including Feuerbach's - is that the reality, sensuality is taken only in the form of an object, or in the form of contemplation, and not as a human sensible activity, as a rule, not subjectively "(K. Marx, see K. Marx and Engels F., Soch., 2nd ed., Vol. 3, p. 1). Therefore, such M. could not rise to the understanding of the laws of societies. development: "The most that contemplative materialism achieves, that is, materialism that understands sensibility not as a practical activity, it is the contemplation of individual individuals in a" civil society " (ibid., p. 3). M., who sets the task not only to explain the world, but to change it, is the Marxist M.

3) From t. Sp. method of thinking, which materialists use, stand out: dialectical. M. and metaphysics. M. For dialectic. M. are characteristic vnutr. unity, indivisible fusion of dialectics and materialistic. theory of knowledge. Metaphysical. M. has many varieties, depending on which side of reality or the process of cognition turns into an absolute: for example, a) M., based on the metaphysics of absolute qualities, denying development; b) M., denying qualities. differences and reducing them to quantities. differences, and development - towards flat evolution, towards pure gradualness. This second kind of metaphysics. M. is mechanical if it reduces all higher forms of movement to mechanical, as was typical of M. in the 17th and 18th centuries; however, mechanism is associated not only with M., but also with idealism, especially in modern times. reaction. philosophy.

4) From t. Sp. understanding the essence of consciousness and its role in relation to matter, being, scientific and vulgar materialism are opposed. Sci. M. sees qualities. the difference between the mental and the physical. On the contrary, vulgar M. (Büchner, Focht, Moleschott, etc.) identifies consciousness with matter. In the understanding of societies. phenomena manifestation of vulgar M. is economical. M., the opposite historian. M. Historic. M. is opposed by various schools of simplified M., which give an incorrect explanation of societies. phenomena: a) Anthropological. M. (Feuerbach, partly Chernyshevsky) (see Anthropological school, Anthropological principle), b) Geographic. M. (see Geographic environment, Geographic school). c) Naturalistic. M. (naturalism), to-ry considers nature to be the determining factor in the development of society. All these schools in Moscow are antihistorical and ultimately lead to idealism in the understanding of history; they distort relationships between societies. being and societies. consciousness, the reasons for their development. "Both the anthropological principle and naturalism are only imprecise, weak descriptions of materialism" (VI Lenin, Soch., Vol. 38, p. 72).

5) From t. Sp. attitudes towards the various stages, or sides of the process of cognition, differed between the schools of rationalistic and sensualistic M. (see Rationalism and Sensualism).

6) Differentiate between conscious M. and s t and x and y, or naive, philosophically unformed M. Naive M. of antiquity Engels called the original spontaneous M. (see "Dialectics of Nature", 1955, p. 147), adopted as something self-evident (see also, p. 157). Lenin characterized the usual, non-philosophical, “naive” view of all people on the world as “a spontaneously, unconsciously materialistic point of view on which mankind stands, accepting the existence of the external world independently of our consciousness” (Soch., Vol. 14, p. 49) ... "The 'naive' conviction of mankind is consciously placed by materialism at the basis of its theory of knowledge" (ibid., Pp. 57–58; cf. p. 331).

Spontaneous M. naturalists Lenin called natural-historical materialism. There is an inextricable connection between spontaneous M. natural scientists with philosophy. M. as a direction. Haeckel, for example, defended M.'s point of view, “... I don’t think that he is on the point of view of a materialist ...” (ibid., P. 337). Consequently, natural-historical. M. is M. "... half unconscious and spontaneously faithful to the spirit of natural science ..." (ibid., P. 218).

7) Various schools of M. are characterized by national-geographic. and chronological. featured. Usually, both of these signs are combined together, as a result of which the characteristics of certain schools of Moscow are formed: for example, ancient Greek. M., rus. M. 19th century etc. Sometimes a similar characteristic is given separately, taking into account only one of these features, for example: antique M. or M. of the 17th century. (uniting English, French, Dutch and other materialists of this time).

8) M. is characterized by the name of the thinker who developed it; for example, the materialism of Bacon, Feuerbach, Lomonosov, etc. is highlighted. This emphasizes the individual traits and characteristics of the philosophical doctrine of this particular materialist, especially those that are preserved in the history of philosophical thought thanks to his students and successors.

The listed particular characteristics of M. do not relate to all M. as a direction, but only to its individual schools. M. cannot be identified with any one of his schools, or with any natural science. theories. Even Feuerbach mixed M. as a general worldview with that special form in which it was expressed among the "itinerant preachers" of vulgar M. in the 50s. 19th century Rejecting this particular form of M., Feuerbach inevitably came to the conclusion that M. as a general worldview should be rejected. "Feuerbach was absolutely right in rejecting responsibility for this (ie, vulgar. - Ed.) Materialism; he just had no right to mix the teaching of itinerant preachers with materialism in general" (F. Engels, Dialectics of Nature, p. . 154).

This is logical. the mistake of the thinkers of the 19th century. Machians and other "physical" idealists turned at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. in the main. argument against M. They called materialism not M. as a direction, but his obsolete metaphysical. or mechanical a form, which just at that time was crumbling under the influence of the "newest revolution in natural science", primarily under the influence of the latest discoveries of physics. "... the fundamental" property "of matter, with the recognition of which philosophical materialism is associated, - stressed Lenin, - is the property of being objective reality, to exist outside of our consciousness "(Soch., vol. 14, p. 247). Lenin showed that the confusion of M. as a direction with its obsolete form led some physicists to idealism: they fought against metaphysics. M., against his one-sided "mechanism" and "at the same time, they threw out the child along with the water," that is, they threw out M. itself, together with the metaphysics and mechanism they rejected. Likewise, the neo-Kantians, eg. Rikkert, declared M. archaic. doctrine and attributed to him the admission of "primary matter" as the primary source of all that exists.

The criterion of truth and partisanship of materialism

The criterion for the truth of M., like all human achievements. knowledge, serves as a socio-historical. practice. It is in practice that the false constructions of idealists and agnostics are refuted and the truth of all fundamental principles is indisputably proved. M.'s premises and the consequences that follow from them (see Truth, Practice). Society-Historical practice includes the experience of the revolutionary. the struggle of the proletariat, the experience of the class struggle in the field of ideology, by means of which the correctness is verified in practice, i.e. conformity to objective reality, M.'s party line. To successfully wage an active struggle against idealism, M. must be philosophically conscious; M.'s active orientation against idealism expresses his partisanship. Lenin wrote that "... materialism includes, so to speak, partisanship, obliging, in any assessment of an event, to directly and openly take the point of view of a certain social group" (ibid., Vol. 1, pp. 380–81).

In this regard, a distinction is made between the main M. and the "primeval" M., who does not actively fight against idealism. For militant materialists, Lenin considered it necessary to have contact not only with atheist philosophers, but also with natural scientists, without which their M. could not be militant. "He will remain, using the Shchedrin expression, not so much fighting as fighting" (ibid., Vol. 33, p. 208).

Depending on how the materialists themselves express their views, one can find direct, open M. and shy, veiled M. The latter can even disguise himself as agnosticism for the sake of the so-called. societies. opinion in the bourgeois. countries. "Indeed, what is agnosticism if not 'bashful' ... materialism?" a higher being outside the world known to us "(Marx K. and Engels F., Soch., 2nd ed., v. 22, p. 302-03). The role of the bashful M. is often played by natural history. M. naturalists in capitalist countries.

Noting that Helmholtz's agnosticism is similar to the "bashful" M., Lenin wrote: "Against direct, clear, open materialism, Helmholtz harbors an irresistible prejudice" (Soch., Vol. 14, p. 222). The same applies to Boltzmann, to-ry, "... of course, he is afraid to call himself a materialist and even makes a special reservation that he is not at all against the existence of God" (ibid., P. 274), and Haeckel, to-ry ".. .. he himself renounces materialism, renouncing this nickname. Moreover, he not only does not reject all religions, but invents his own religion ... "(ibid., p. 335).

In modern conditions, militant Moscow, carrying out the principle of partisanship, is atheistic Moscow. However, before the 19th century. advanced philosophical trends were often forced to adapt to the dominant religious ideology (pantheism, deism).

The creative nature of materialism

In the course of the struggle against idealism, M. identifies vulnerable points in the views of philosophers. the enemy and for striking them, develops the corresponding provisions of his teachings. For their part, idealists look for weak points in a given specific type of M., acting as their specific adversary, and strike at these points at M.; in response to this, M. strove to strengthen his position precisely in these vulnerable points and thus further develop his principles and their justification.

M.'s attitude to science is directly opposite to that which is characteristic of idealism. The latter is fundamentally hostile to science: it substitutes fictitious, fictitious ideas for the real task of cognizing the laws of reality, leads science astray and leads it to a dead end. On the contrary, M., rejecting the inventions of idealism, points out to science the correct path to knowledge of the real world and its laws. When science is faced with some complex, difficult, still unresolved issue, M. in advance excludes his idealistic. explanation as something supernatural, intangible. M. always believes that all things and phenomena arose from nature. path from matter according to the laws inherent in it. If, however, between two K.-L. phenomena turns out to be a rupture, the absence of a regular connection, then M. explains this by the fact that the actual connection of the phenomena at a given point of them has not yet been discovered. By this M. directs the attention of researchers to the search for unknown connections and reveals his creative character. Thus, for example, the Machians declared the question of the origin of consciousness and sensation to be fundamentally false, since the Machians took the psychic for the primary. Based on the main. materialistic. premises, Lenin showed that in a clearly expressed form sensation is associated only with the higher forms (organic) of matter, but that in the foundation of the building of matter itself, one can only assume the existence of an ability similar to sensation, from which, in the course of the successive complication and development of matter there was a feeling. “... in fact,” stated Lenin, “it remains to investigate and investigate how matter, supposedly not sensing at all, is connected with matter, made of the same atoms (or electrons) composed and at the same time possessing a clearly expressed ability of sensation Materialism clearly raises the still unresolved question and thus pushes towards its solution, pushes towards further experimental research. Machism, that is, a kind of confused idealism, clogs the question and takes it aside from the right path ... "(ibid., P. 34 ). Modern natural science follows the path to-ry pointed out by Lenin, and this confirms the creative character of M. In the 30's. 20th century creative M.'s role was revealed with renewed vigor and evidence. When analyzing radioactive beta decay (in this case, electrons are emitted from the atomic nucleus), it turned out that, on average, the escaping electrons take with them only half of all the energy that the decaying nucleus loses. The second half of it, at first glance, disappears, it would seem, without a trace. "Phys." idealists hastened to declare about the "destruction" of energy, therefore, about the violation of the principle of its conservation. If so idealistic. “explanation” has become established in science, then there would be no point in looking for an answer to the question - where does the other half of the energy go. On the contrary, M., rejecting the idea of the destruction or creation of energy (movement), demanded an experimental and theoretical. clarifying the question of what became of the other half of the energy. The advanced physicists represented by W. Pauli actually followed this path, although Pauli himself did not speak out in favor of M., belonging by his philosophies. views on the school "physical." idealism. Proceeding from the fact that the second half of the energy released by the nucleus has not yet been detected, Pauli put forward the assumption that it is carried away by special particles of matter, the properties of which, and therefore their presence, cannot be directly detected by the physicists known to us so far. ways.

From this it follows that such particles must be electrically neutral and very light (or do not have their own mass at all), otherwise our physicists. instruments could detect them, and with them - and the energy carried away by them. This is how the neutrino hypothesis arose, which gave materialistic. the answer to the question posed by science. The subsequent development of nuclear physics turned the neutrino hypothesis into a proven fact, demonstrating creativity. character M. Perhaps the neutrino would still not have been discovered if the hypothesis of the destruction of energy had triumphed in physics, which means that there would not have been those successes of physics, which are associated with the concept of neutrinos (for example, in calculating the values total spin). Only when scientists, at least unconsciously, are materialistic. paths in search of answers to the unsolved questions of science, they come to major discoveries, to a constructive way out of the seeming impasse.

Thus, rejecting the idea of deities. creation, M. puts forward the requirement to seek natures. the reasons for the studied phenomena. But M. can consistently fulfill this requirement only on the basis of the idea of development and universal connection, i.e. to dialectics. Therefore, creative. M.'s character is fully revealed only in dialectical. M., but not in the metaphysical.

For example, metaphysical. M. considered space and time absolute in the sense of their complete independence from matter (its structure) and from motion (its speed), as well as in the sense of their absolute independence from each other. On the contrary, dialectical. M. argued that space and time, being the basis. forms of all being, cannot be external in relation to moving matter, independent of it, since it is she who constitutes their content. Being outside of time and space is from t. Sp. dialectical M. nonsense. But since the world is one, and this unity is contained in its materiality, then the main. the forms of his being - space and time, being different among themselves, should be organically connected not only with the moving matter, but also among themselves. This conclusion logically followed from the position that two different forms of the same single content cannot be torn off and independent of each other. This proved the theory of relativity as a physical. theories of space and time in their connection with matter and motion. Metaphysical. M. ruptured and isolated from each other qualitatively different types of matter, believing that there is no connection and transition between them. So, between matter and light, he drew an absolutely impassable line. In contrast, dialectical. M., considering the world to be the movement of matter, argued that all things and phenomena (hence, matter and light, too) are capable of mutually transforming into each other under certain conditions. Indeed, nuclear physics has proved the interconvertibility of matter and light ( electromagnetic field), discovering the creation of a pair (an electron and a positron from photons of light) and annihilation of a pair (i.e., their reverse transformation into photons). Simplified (naive, metaphysical, mechanistic) M. also argued that matter consists of primary, absolutely simple elements. In the 19th century. this idea was embodied in the doctrine of chemists. elements and atoms. In contrast, dialectical. M. believed that there are no "last" particles of matter in the sense of absolutely simple and indivisible bricks of the universe, from which all bodies are supposedly built. Therefore, atoms should be considered as complex formations composed of simpler particles of matter. This view was joined by many. natural scientists of the 19th century, who spontaneously took the positions of dialectics (for example, Mendeleev, who spoke of "ultimates"). "The newest revolution in natural science" fully confirmed this position of the dialectical. M. However, metaphysically thinking scientists made an attempt to extend to electrons the old ideas about atoms as the "last" particles of matter. Lenin warned against such attempts, emphasizing that the electron is just as inexhaustible as the atom, and that nature is infinite in all its manifestations and forms. Nevertheless, some physicists up to the 50s. 20th century tried to consider electrons and other elementary particles as point formations, devoid of internal. structures. Only in the 50s. 20th century were obtained experimental evidence of the existence of internal. structure of elementary particles, therefore, their complexity and inexhaustibility. The inconsistency of the idea of "primal matter" or "forematter" in its metaphysics was again proved. understanding, and the idea of the infinity of matter in depth and the inexhaustibility of any, even the simplest and most elementary of its types and particles, was approved.

M., being fundamentally opposite to idealism, also has epistemological elements diametrically opposed to it. sources. These are: a) strict objectivity in the consideration of any things and phenomena; b) versatility of consideration of the studied subject, flexibility and mobility of concepts, in which it is reflected; c) the inextricable connection of all scientific. representations (theories, hypotheses, laws, concepts), all aspects of scientific. knowledge with the concept of matter, nature, ensuring their use as relative (relational) and preventing their transformation into an absolute. Revealing the epistemological. roots M., Engels wrote: "... a materialistic worldview means simply understanding nature as it is, without any extraneous additions ..." (Dialectics of Nature, p. 157), and this "corresponds to the facts taken in their own, and not in some fantastic connection "(Marks K. and Engels Φ., Soch., 2nd ed., vol. 21, p. 301). Lenin, speaking about the elements of dialectics and at the same time about the epistemological. roots M., emphasized: "... 1) about the subject matter of consideration ... (the thing itself in its relations and in its development must be considered. - Ed.) ... 2) the totality of the many different attitudes of this thing to others "(Soch., Vol. 38, p. 213). "Comprehensive, universal flexibility of concepts, flexibility, reaching the identity of opposites - this is the essence. This flexibility, applied subjectively, = eclecticism and sophistry. Flexibility applied about the whole, that is, reflecting the all-roundness of the material process and its unity, is dialectics, is a correct reflection of the eternal development of the world "(ibid., pp. 98–99).

M.'s content is understood as the totality of its initial premises, its principles. M.'s form is understood as its general structure, which is determined primarily by the method of thinking, in connection with which and by means of which the given current of M.T. is developed and substantiated, in the content of M. it is primarily that ee, which is inherent in all schools and currents of M., in their opposition to idealism and agnosticism, and the form of M. is associated with something special, in particular, that characterizes individual schools and tendencies of M.. form and content of M. are in connection with each other and mutually influence each other, then their differentiation is relative, conditional. M.'s form, influencing its content, brings creatures into it. adjustments, due to which, for example, dialectical. M., not only in form, but also in content, is qualitatively different from vulgar M., from metaphysics. M. and all other types of M., although it has in common with them, inherent in every M. in general.

If we are talking about the different schools existing within a given type of M., then these latter are referred to as different ones and M. If we are talking about successive stages of development of one and the same doctrine (or species) M., then these stages are considered as stages of development of M. When a radical change in the form of M. occurs, the change of its old form to a new one, they say that the type of M. is changing; if certain changes are made to an already existing form of M. without its radical breaking, without replacing it with a new form of M., then it is said that within a given type of M. a new variety of M. arises, or a new stage of development of a given species of it.

With regard to dialectic. M. as the highest most developed type of M., stages (or steps) of its historical are distinguished. development: a) the stage of Marx and Engels (the creation of dialectical M.) and b) the Leninist stage (its further development in relation to the new historical situation). Inside the dialectic. M. existed and less consistent views, which somehow simplified it, allowed a certain inconsistency in the presentation of its principles and even some deviations from its basic provisions (Dietzgen, Stalin, etc.). A change in the form of M., both radical (change in the type of M.) and non-indigenous (change in the varieties of M. or separate teachings within the same type of M.), occurs primarily under the influence of scientific progress. knowledge and the whole history of society. Through natural science, practice exerts a powerful influence on M., acting as one of the driving forces of its development. In the continuation of "... a long period, from Descartes to Hegel and from Hobbes to Feuerbach, philosophers were pushed forward not only by the force of pure thinking, as they expressed. On the contrary. the development of natural science and industry. The materialists saw this directly "(F. Engels, see K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch., 2nd ed., vol. 21, p. 285).

The change in the form of M. is precisely the basis of those stages that M has gone through: "But materialism, like idealism, has gone through a number of stages of development. With each discovery constituting an epoch, even in the natural-historical field, materialism must inevitably change its form" (ibid. , pp. 353–354). This applies to both pre-Marxist and Marxist M., as well as individual materialistic. systems and exercises. Lenin pointed out, for example, the need to revise the "form" of materialism of Engels, his natural science. provisions. But this does not mean that Lenin had in mind the change of dialectic. M., as Engels formulated it, is some other kind of M., different from the dialectical one. Lenin is talking about such a revision, which leads to the emergence of a new stage in the development of the dialectical itself. M.

Each creating an era in natural science of the 20th century. discovery - in physics (theory of relativity; quantum mechanics; the use of atomic energy released both during the fission of atomic nuclei and during thermonuclear fusion; penetration deep into elementary particles, etc.), in molecular biology(disclosure of the "mechanism" of biosynthesis, physicochemical foundations of heredity, etc.), in cybernetics, astronomy and other sciences - required a constant change and development of the form and content of dialectical. M. by enriching it with generalizations of new natural sciences. discoveries. At the same time, all dialectical principles are fully preserved. M., receiving only new confirmation and concretization, and thus - developing further. Therefore, Lenin explained that the revision of the "form" of Engels' materialism ... not only does not contain anything "revisionist" in the established sense of the word, but, on the contrary, is necessarily required by Marxism. a purely revolutionary method - to change the essence of materialism under the guise of criticism of the form ... "(Soch., vol. 14, p. 238 –39).

To determine the types of M., it is necessary to analyze the general course of man. knowledge, a cut goes through three chap. steps that give it a peculiar three-phase rhythm:

1) Immediate. contemplation of the world, when the world appears as a single whole, undivided into parts. This view corresponds to the picture of the world as changing, where everything is interconnected, turns from one to another.

2) Analytic. dismemberment of the world: a single object of knowledge (the world) is anatomized, decomposed - mentally or physically - into separate. their parts or sides. In order to cognize processes (movements, changes, interactions, etc.), one must first cognize objects that change. Ch. attention is paid to stopping the movement, isolating the bound, and deadening the living. This led to a view of the world, which was based on the habit of taking things and phenomena as unchanging, isolated and dead. When elevated to the absolute, such a view became metaphysics.

3) Synthetic reconstruction of a picture of the world, when on the basis of particulars, cognized with the help of analytic. approach, a general idea of the world is drawn up again as a single and integral one, but already studied in detail. This is achieved when, from the study of individual objects, cognition proceeds to the disclosure of processes, i.e. changes and movements, to-rye are performed with these objects.

Accordingly, the triplets. the rhythm of the development of cognition are allocated DOS. types of M .:

a) Naive (or spontaneous) M. of the ancient Greeks and Romans, combined with naive dialectics. Ancient science is not divided into separate branches; she has a single philosophy. character: all branches of knowledge are under the auspices of philosophy and are subordinate to it.

b) Metaphysics and h. (or mechanics) M. 17th - early 19th centuries. The science of modern times is rapidly differentiating itself into separate divisions. separate branches from each other, to-rye completely out of the tutelage of philosophy. There is a gap between M. and dialectics, there are only elements of dialectics, with the dominance of the general metaphysics. view of the world.

c) Dialectic M., in which M. and dialectics are organically combined, so that a complete unity of dialectics (the doctrine of development), logic (the doctrine of thinking), the theory of knowledge (the doctrine of source of knowledge). The great idea of the universal connection and development of nature penetrates into science. Separated until then, dep. branches of science are brought into mutual connection not only with each other, but also with philosophy. Further differentiation of sciences takes place in dialectic. unity with their integration.

In a sequential change of three mains. types of M., the action of the law of negation of negation is reflected: the initial combination of naive M. with naive dialectics is replaced ("denied") by the gap between M. and dialectics, characteristic of the second type of M.; this gap is replaced ("denied" = "denial of negation") by the newly restored unity of dialectics and dialectics at a higher stage of development, which is, as it were, a return to the starting point of the entire process.

Along with the main. M. species existed intermediate - transitional from one basic. M.'s kind to another. In the development of M., sudden upheavals are always prepared by gradual transitions. Like all transitional phenomena, transitional types of M. combine the signs of both adjacent DOS. species M. The trace is distinguished as transitional. types of M .:

a) M. of the Ancient East, which preceded the ancient M. For the most part, it was pre-materialism, since the first elements of M. in philosophy. teachings of the Ancient East have not yet completely separated from the mythological. ideas, did not isolate themselves from anthropomorphism and hylozoism.

b) M. of the Renaissance, immediately preceding M. of the 17th and 18th centuries. He combined the features of naive M. and naive dialectics with the first elements of metaphysics. view of the world. Thus, it was, strictly speaking, a transitional between the ancient, naive M. and the yet unformed metaphysical. M. In a sense, certain early systems of M. of the 17th century also had such a character. (for example, F. Bacon) and even the 18th century. (partly Lomonosov).

c) M., who immediately preceded the dialectic. M. and partially developed in parallel to him. He already went beyond the boundaries of metaphysics. M., containing elements of dialectics, but has not yet risen to dialectical. M. and did not extend M. to societies. phenomena. This type of M. was born in the 18th century. (for example, Toland, partly Lomonosov) and early. 19th century (for example, Saint-Simon and especially the Russian revolutionary democrats).

d) A special place among the intermediate types of M. is occupied by those of its types, to-rye originated within the framework of dominance. religious-idealistic. ideology, and therefore could not wear openly materialistic. character. This includes materialistic. tendencies in philo phi and middle ages. Accordingly, it could be called a transitional step from scholasticism and theology to M. Historically, this form preceded M. of the Renaissance and prepared its formation in the depths of the previous era.

Class basis different types and schools of materialism

It would be oversimplification to associate the views of this or that materialist directly with his class affiliation or his societies. beliefs. M.'s history testifies that this connection is of an indirect nature. Moreover, by virtue of the dialectical. inconsistencies is historical. development it may happen that the defender of philosophically progressive ideas of M. in this historical. the situation is located in the reaction camp. social forces, while the idealist philosopher acts as the herald of the progressive forces of society. However, for the disclosure of the class foundations and origins of M. as a whole, it is not these internally contradictory situations that are essential, but the general orientation of M. as a philosophy. teachings reflecting the most progressive trends in social development - communication through natural science with the progress of productive forces and the struggle against religion, superstition and all kinds of obscurantism.

In various historians. conditions, the class basis of M. can be different:

a) As a rule, M. was the worldview of advanced revolutionaries. classes as opposed to idealism, religion, to-rye were and are the ideological weapon of the reactionaries. classes. But in history there have been cases when M. for a certain period of time found himself on the ideological. armament reaction. forces of society, especially if the revolutionary. classes at a given time in a given country appear under the banner of idealism and religion. Such a situation developed, for example, in England during the time of the bourges. revolution ser. 17th century, edges were prepared and performed under the flag of Calvinism. This was explained by the fact that in the conditions of the long domination of the religious church. ideology as an official. feudal outlook. society, the struggle against feudalism and its ideology inevitably had to accept religion. coloring; in the conditions of Zap. Europe, it was directed primarily against the Catholic. church and its ideology. Since it rose to the revolution. Since the struggle of the bourgeoisie turned out to be religious, M. could not at that time appear for her as a suitable ideological. banner. On the contrary, it could be used in the given conditions as an ideological weapon in the struggle against religions. worldview in general, and therefore against the ideology of the revolution. by that time of the bourgeoisie. Indeed, in the 17th century, in the conditions of the preparation and conduct of the English. bourgeois. revolution, M. and the atheism associated with it were adopted by certain circles of the English. aristocracy (royalists). Likewise in France in the 17th century. he was aristocratic. teaching.

b) Under the conditions of reaching a social compromise, M. can acquire a half-hearted, compromise character. Reflecting the nature of his class source, he can combine and try to reconcile directly opposite elements, so that the further evolution of M. can be accomplished when determined. conditions in two diametrically opposite directions. So, English. bourgeois. the revolution ends with a class compromise (the so-called "glorious revolution" of the late 17th century). The product and expression of this compromise is not only Locke's M., but also M. of those naturalists (Boyle and Newton), M. to-rykh gets along with the theological. trends, with attempts to reconcile science and faith. This was facilitated by the reasons for the epistemological. order, because metaphysical, mechanistic M.'s character with its inevitable logical. consequences (the concept of the first impulse) easily led to idealistic. and religion. conclusions. Engels pointed out that the science of that time was still deeply rooted in theology, and this circumstance was directly reflected in M.

c) The inconsistency of metaphysical M., including the French M. of the 18th century, was in full harmony with the inconsistency of the bourgeoisie as a revolutionary. class; when def. conditions, the bourgeoisie is ready to compromise and even to conspiracy with the overthrown feudal lords, if this turns out to be beneficial for it and helps it to strengthen its political. domination. The inconsistency of the bourgeoisie as a revolutionary. class is manifested in the fact that, being an exploiting class, it is interested not in eliminating all exploitation in general, but only in replacing the previous form of exploitation that existed under feudalism with its new form - capitalist. exploitation. Preparing for the third battle against feudalism (the French revolution of the late 18th century), the bourgeoisie stood under the banner of M. and atheism. Thus, in one species of M., the class basis changed.

d) Attempts to overcome the most dramatic manifestations of metaphysics (the rupture of matter and motion, the recognition of the absolute immutability of nature) and, accordingly, the inclusion of elements of dialectics in M., had different class backgrounds in different countries. In 18th century England. (Toland, Priestley) the social inspirers of these attempts were the most radical circles of society, opposing the permeated religion. hypocrisy officers. ideology of the bourgeoisie, which has become dominant. class. At the end of the 18th century. the influence of the ideas of the French. revolution (Priestley). In France, such attempts were observed among the most followers. representatives of M. as a philosophy of revolution. bourgeoisie (Diderot). In Germany, the "German theory of the French revolution" (as defined by Marx) arose in the form of idealistic. dialectics, edges in a number of cases combined with M.'s elements, especially in natural sciences. concepts (in the doctrinal Kant, stronger in Goethe). In Russia, elements of dialectics burst into the materialism of Lomonosov, who objectively reflected the aspirations of progressive circles in Russian. society, and later at Radishchev, the noble revolutionaries-Decembrists (N. Kryukov and others). The same elements are found in the views of the South Slavic scholar Boshkovich. At the same time, individual representatives of M. showed a different, and sometimes directly opposite attitude towards the French. M. and French. bourgeois. revolutions of the 18th century: Father Boskovich is their ardent opponent, Pastor Priestley is an ardent adherent. Thus, an extraordinary diversity of social prerequisites for various systems of M. 18 - early. 19th centuries The common feature of all systems of metaphysics, which sought to overcome the most crude features of metaphysics, was that their social sources were, as a rule, the radical strata of society.

e) The intermediate, transitional character of M. rus. revolutionary democrats ser. The 19th century, which took shape under the conditions of the peasant revolution that was maturing in Russia, reflected in a peculiar form the intermediate, contradictory nature of the peasantry as a class. As a class exploited under the conditions of feudalism (serfdom), Rus. the peasantry emerged as a more revolutionary class than the bourgeoisie had ever been. Limited metaphysics could not satisfy his ideologues. M., under the banner to-rogo revolution. the bourgeoisie rose to battle against feudalism. Hence, ultimately, the persistent attempts of representatives of the Russian. M. ser. 19th century rise above the metaphysical. French M. 18th century and Feuerbach M. But at the same time, the peasantry has never been consistently revolutionary. class of society. Ideologists rus. cross. revolution, going beyond the metaphysics. M., nevertheless could not rise to the level of dialectic. M., before the outlook of the revolutionary. the proletariat.

Herzen, Lenin noted, "... came close to dialectical materialism and stopped before - historical materialism" (Soch., Vol. 18, p. 10); Chernyshevsky "... could not, due to the backwardness of Russian life, rise to the dialectical materialism of Marx and Engels" (ibid., Vol. 14, p. 346). Ascent rus. M. ser. 19th century contributed to the successes of natural science, a cut made great discoveries that destroyed the old, metaphysical. picture of the world, and opened the door to a new, dialectical. view of nature.

f) The consistent character of Marxist M. directly and directly expresses to the end the consistent revolutionary spirit of the proletariat, whose world outlook is Marxism. The proletariat was that class, the historian. mission to-rogo - a radical transformation of the human. society with the aim of eliminating classes based on the exploitation of man by man. Unlike all the systems of pre-Marxist M. in "... the philosophy of Marxism, poured out of one piece of steel," wrote Lenin, "it is impossible to take out not a single basic premise, not a single essential part, without departing from objective truth, without falling into the arms of the bourgeois -reactional lie "(ibid., p. 312).

g) Metaphysical, mechanistic. M. after the emergence of dialectic. M. becomes a carrier of reaction. trends. All R. 19th century in Germany bourgeois. ideology temporarily adopted the vulgar M. in order to combat the flight. worldview. From the standpoint of metaphysical, mechanistic. M. is against Marxism in the second half. 19th century the positivist Dühring, who tried to win over the workers to the side of the petty-bourgeois. socialism. In the 20s and 30s. 20th century in the USSR from the standpoint of the same mechanistic. M. versus dialectic. M. mechanists spoke.

h) Departures from the consistently Marxist M., attempts to simplify it, to free it from certain principles turned out to be a consequence of either the insufficient maturity of a given supporter of it (Dietzgen), or a politician. opportunism (certain leaders of the 2nd International), or gross violations of Marxist-Leninist principles in the practice of revolutionaries. struggle and construction of socialism (Stalin).

Thus, one and the same type of M. (for example, metaphysical, mechanistic), depending on the place and time, can have different class roots, acting in some conditions as a progressive trend in M., in others - as reactionary, in particular revisionist. One and the same society. class at approximately the same stage of development (for example, the revolutionary bourgeoisie, opposing feudalism and striving for political domination) in different countries and in different historical. conditions chooses for himself a different philosophy. vestment, and it is not necessary that he was always M. The inconsistency of M., acting in the role of the worldview of a class, is in the definition. in accordance with the inconsistency of this class itself, when it acts as a revolutionary. strength in societies. development; M.'s character, consistent to the end, is directly dependent on the sequence of the revolutionary spirit of the class whose worldview is a given type of M. Philos. deviations from dialectic. M. are in a natural connection with the deviations from the revolution. Marxism in practice, in politics. However, the class basis of M. does not have to be associated with social origin, class, and character of the politician. activities of the department. thinkers.

Periodization of the history of materialism

Allocation of DOS. and transitional types of M. allows to give a periodization of M.'s history on the basis of accounting vnutr. logic of its development and its connections with the historical. factors determining this development. First of all, the specifics are taken into account. signs of the process itself (history M.) in order not to be limited to a simple mechanic. attribution of this or that period to the corresponding socio-economic. formations.

The patterns of development of M. can be conditionally divided into two groups: a) those which constitute the driving forces or the source of M.'s development, expressing the decisive stimuli of its development, and which therefore relate to the practical field of social production. and ideological. - activities of classes; b) those to-rye express relate. independence of M.'s development as directions and are connected with logical. the sequence of origin and the succession of the change of certain stages, intrinsic to M.

Both groups of patterns of development of M. are in interaction with each other and form a unity, which is found in the periodization of M.'s history.

The periodization of the history of M. presupposes an elucidation of M.'s connections with natural science and with ideological scientists. the struggle of classes. In combination with int. logic of M.'s development, taking into account the noted connections makes it possible to single out the most important periods in M.'s history. backward movements.

The periodization of the history of M. is built in accordance with the allocation of its main. and transitional species. In accordance with what was said in the previous section about the types of M., the following epochs and stages of its development can be outlined:

The era of the pre-Marxian M.

1) The origin of M .; 2) naive M .; 3) the preservation and accumulation of M.'s elements within the framework of theology and scholasticism; 4) M. of the Renaissance in the countries of the West. Europe; 5) the formation and development of metaphysical, mechanistic. M. 17 - early. 19th centuries; 6) going beyond the limits of metaphysics. M. and the movement towards dialectic. M. - 1st floor. 19th century

The era of Marxist Moscow: 1) the stage of Marks and Engels. At first the vulgar materialists (Büchner, Focht, Moleschott), later the mechanistic, metaphysical, acted as trends hostile to Marxist M. materialist and positivist Dühring. 2) Leninsky stage (late 19th and 20th centuries).

For the periodization of the history of Moscow in its connection with general civil history as the history of class struggle, it is very important to take into account that major turns and new stages in the development of Moscow, starting with the inception of capitalism. societies, often turned out to be an integral part of the general ideological. preparation of a social revolution in the corresponding country: a) M. of the Renaissance in cf. Europe was a philosopher. prelude to the cross. wars early. The 16th century, which was the first great battle, which the nascent bourgeoisie gave to feudalism; b) English. M. early. 17th century, although he turned out to be ideological. arming the aristocracy, served as an objective philosopher. prologue to English. bourgeois. revolution ser. 17th century; c) Spinoza's materialism is associated with the Dutch bourgeois. revolution of the 17th century; d) French. M. 18th century there was a direct philosophy. preparation of French. bourgeois. revolutions of the late 18th century; e) Feuerbach's materialism followed him. idealistic. dialectics served as a similar philosophy. a prologue to the bourgeois. the revolution of 1848 in Germany; f) M. rus. revolutionary democrats ser. 19th century was an integral part of the ideological. preparation cross. revolution (brewing in the middle of the 19th century in Russia); g) the materialism of Marx and Engels, by its very essence, was a necessary element of the ideological-theoretical. preparation span. revolution, ideological. political weapon the movement of the proletariat, to-ry in the revolution of 1848 for the first time acted independently as a class that realized its goals; h) Lenin's stage dialectical. M. is an important point in ideological and theoretical. preparation and implementation of the revolution in Russia, which was the beginning, component and base of the world socialist. revolution.

The main lines of development of materialism in its struggle against idealism

In the history of M. strict succession is carried out. connection of subsequent teachings and systems of M. with the previous ones; new doctrines and systems of M. developed and arose from the earlier ones. There are 3 possible cases:

1) Direct connection going from one system to another (for example, from F. Bacon to Hobbes); in this case, the subsequent system is a development, possibly one-sided, of the previous one (just as Hobbes was the systematizer of the teachings of Bacon).

2) A kind of creation (divergence) of the line of development, when two different, and under certain conditions, directly opposite new systems originate from one system (for example, from Locke to subjective idealism, idealistic sensualism Berkeley and French M., materialistic sensationalism); in this case, a double criticism of the original system from both later ones, in particular "from the right", from the standpoint of more open idealism, and "from the left", from the standpoint of a more consistent M. (for example, criticism of the teachings of Kant) is possible. 3) Withdrawal and even the merger of the parties contained in the previously separately developed philosophies. systems (for example, the transition from Cartesian M. and from Locke's sensationalism to French M. of the 18th century, and even more sharply - from idealistic dialectics of Hegel and from Feuerbach's metaphysical M. to dialectical M.). Such a fusion of progressive sides in previously isolated and even opposing philosophies. flows occur as organic. processing of the content of previous trends with a new, unified and integral t. sp., but not at all as eclectic. addition and reconciliation of hitherto isolated and even hostile philosophies. directions.

Given the succession. connections and transitions, bifurcation and convergence of lines of development of philosophy. thoughts, you can schematically outline the following main paths or lines of development of M.

On diagrams I, II and III, the lines connecting the names of philosophers express only certain creatures. communication, influence and genetic. the relationship between the various teachings of M., and in dep. cases - idealism. Vertical columns express the lines of M.'s development within the department. countries; the later systems of M. are located under the earlier ones, so that in one horizontal row there are philos. systems that arose at about the same time. Solid lines connect the teachings of M., dotted lines - connections with the idealistic are expressed. systems. The names of ancient books are put in quotation marks, ideas and principles of the corresponding philosophies are indicated in brackets. teachings.

1. Main lines of development of M. of the Ancient East and ancient M. (see diagram I).

M. acted as a teaching about the material principles of the universe. Several such principles were allowed, or one in the form of primary matter. M. also acted as a doctrine of naturalness (Tao - among the Chinese) or law (logos - among the ancient Greeks). The process of development of the doctrine of the material basis of the universe went either from the idea of concrete principles - substances (water, air) to something abstract, infinite (qi - for the Chinese, prakriti - for the Hindus, apeiron or ether, quintessence - for the Greeks), or from qualities. discreteness of matter (homeomerism) to non-qualities. atomistics. In ancient India, the ("Upanishads") figured as the beginnings (primary elements): water, fire, air, space and light. Along with this, water was taken as their common basis (primary matter), and later - prakriti. In ancient China (in the "I Ching"), the principles were taken as: water, fire, earth, wood and metal, and later the primary matter - qi - was taken as their common basis. In ancient Greece, the elements, or roots, were considered: water, fire, air, earth; later the quintessence, ether, was added to them. In addition, qualities were taken as elements: cold, warm, dry, wet. It can be assumed that the idea of principles, abstract primary matter and atomism penetrated into Ancient Greece from the East, as shown in the diagram will connect. lines (question marks indicate this is a guess). From Aristotle, lines are shown leading to the teachings cf. centuries.

Ch. in the development of naive M. of antiquity and the views that preceded it, there is a process of ascent from very visual (up to roughly anthropomorphic) ideas about the world, about nature, about matter to generalized and abstract ideas about the properties and structure of matter, which were developed by ancient atomists , expressing the highest stage of the initial M. The tendency of the ascent from the concrete to the abstract in the development of M. is found everywhere: both in the countries of the Ancient East and in the ancient world.

In ancient Moscow (as well as in all ancient Greek philosophy), all the later trends of Moscow were contained in the embryo: mechanistic. M., metaphysician. M., dialectic. M., vulgar M. In the universal system of Aristotle, completing the development of classical. Greek philosophy, synthetically combined lines of M., coming from the rudiments of dialectical. M. (Heraclitus), from the doctrine of the four unchanging roots of the universe (Empedocles), to-rye acquired the ability to interconversion, and from the idea of an infinite material beginning, devoid of feelings., Substances. concreteness (Anaximander).

Along with this, elements of idealism are strong in Aristotle's system, although Aristotle criticized the foundations of the idealism of his predecessor Plato. In general, he oscillated between M. and idealism, inclining towards M. ch. arr. in his "Physics" (the doctrine of nature).

The most vivid and clear struggle between M. and idealism in antiquity. philosophy acted as a struggle of opposite tendencies, or lines, of Democritus and Plato (see V. I. Lenin, Soch., vol. 14, p. 117).

2. Lines of conservation and accumulation of elements and sprouts of M. in the middle of the century. philosophy.

In addition to the impact of socio-economic. factors, in addition to the almost complete absence of the stimulating influence of natural science, there were also reasons for epistemological. character, to-rye caused the displacement of M. idealism in cf. century. The inability of M. in antiquity to clarify the relation of thought to matter, to reveal the genesis of consciousness, led to the replacement of M. by idealism (see F. Engels, Anti-Dühring, 1957, p. 130); of course, idealism gave, in principle, incorrect answers to the basic. epistemological. questions, however, he did not deny consciousness, did not reduce it to matter, like naive M., but allowed him to study it, albeit from false, idealistic. positions. After Wang Chun, the school of late Taoism developed in China, in which the elements of mathematics are increasingly being superseded by religious idealistic tendencies. character. In Zap. Europe in the teachings of Aristotle, to-ry hesitated between M. and idealism, the official church. ideology has retained everything reactionary and discarded everything progressive. On the contrary, in the countries of the Arab. East, in the countries of Wed. Asia and Transcaucasia, elements of M. were preserved and M.'s line of that time was presented in the works of commentators Aristotle and other thinkers, for example. Ibn Sina, Ibn Roshda and others. Within the framework of the middle century. scholasticism, the struggle between M. and idealism took the form of a struggle between nominalism and realism. In various scholastic. schools, the shoots of materialistic were making their way. view (the first approximation to the concept of sensory experience in R. Bacon; the question posed by John Duns Scott: "is not matter capable of thinking?", etc.). However, all this was not yet a formed line of M. As the direction of M. again acted when the main line clearly rose. the question of philosophy, but "... it could be posed with all sharpness, could acquire all its significance only after the population of Europe awakened from the long winter sleep of the Christian Middle Ages" (F. Engels, see K. Marx and F. Engels, Soch., 2nd ed., V. 21, p. 283).

3. Main lines of revival and development of M. at the beginning of a new era in Europe (see diagram II).

Some general features of these lines are as follows. 1) In the 15-16 centuries. in the center of attention of representatives of M. and the emerging natural science was the question of experience as a unity. source of knowledge and criteria for their correctness. This question was posed in opposition to scholasticism and the Church. dogmatism, who saw the source of knowledge in the study of Op. ancient authorities and sacred books , and the criterion of truth is in the comparison of texts. English. M. 17th century arose on the basis of empiricism, which later grew into sensationalism. Induction was associated with empiricism as a general method for the experimental study of natural phenomena. This method was developed by F. Bacon, Galileo, Boyle, Newton. 2) At the end of the 16th and 17th centuries. materialistic. the ideas of natural science (Galileo, Bacon, Descartes) were directed against the hidden (or absolute) qualities of the Middle Ages. scholastics, on the study of real (in this case - mechanical) properties and relationships of things of nature. 3) The early systems of M. in different countries contain significant elements of naive M. and naive dialectics, in which certain features of ancient M. are clearly reviving. Such is M. Ital. Renaissance 15-16 centuries. (Leonardo da Vinci, Bruno, etc.), M. 17th century. (F. Bacon), who represented matter as qualitatively diverse. Later, elements of naive M. and naive dialectics were supplanted by mechanistic. teachings in which matter is treated abstractly mechanically (Galileo) or abstractly geometrically (Hobbes). However, in the department. cases, a naive, but basically correct idea of nature was retained longer: for example, the idea of heat as motion (Bacon) and as molecular motion (Boyle, Newton) in the 17th century, to be replaced in the 18th century. comes the metaphysician. caloric concept. In the 18th century. parallel to the deepening of the metaphysical, mechanistic. the idea of a rupture of matter and motion, the desire to overcome this gap is intensified in a number of systems of M. and idealism: materialists try to consider the bodies of nature as endowed with internal. activity, movement, although this movement itself is interpreted as mechanical, and therefore by its very essence as external to matter (in the Cartesian school, among some representatives of the French M., and in the atomic-kinetic concept of Lomonosov, in the idea of Toland on the inseparability of matter and motion, in the dynamic atomism of Boshkovich and his follower Priestley). At him. idealists (from Leibniz to Hegel), an attempt to overcome the gap between matter and motion is based on monadology (Leibniz) or pure dynamism (Kant, Schelling, Hegel); first subcritical. Kant tried to endow matter with opposite forces of attraction and repulsion, and later he reduced it to them in the Metaphysical Principles of Natural Science. 5) Dialectics as an integral teaching was developed only on the basis of it. idealism, in the systems of M., metaphysics and mechanicism prevailed and, as a rule, prevailed, but there were also elements of dialectics (Descartes, Diderot, Lomonosov, Priestley, Toland, especially Boschkovich, who directly approached dialectics in his natural philosophy). 6) Atomistic. ideas were revived and developed by almost all schools of M .: as a mechanic. their atomistics was developed by Galileo, Bacon, Boyle, Newton, Gassendi, Spinoza, French. materialists of the 18th century, Lomonosov, to-ry tried to find qualities. gradation in microparticles. On the basis of dynamism, the idea of discreteness of matter and of atoms as centers of application of forces possessing inertia (hence the mass) was developed by Boskovich, and after him Priestley. Descartes stood apart because his atomism allowed for the infinite divisibility of matter.

From separate lines of development of M. stood out:

a) The line coming from the heliocentric. the teachings of Copernicus, a cut dealt the first tangible blow to the church. ideology, and from active fighters against this ideology (Bruno, Galileo); this line led to Newton, who went to reconciliation with religion and introduced the concept of deities. first impulse. Even further, this line led to the doctrines. Kant, in cosmogonic. hypothesis to-rogo tendency of M.

b) Line of English. M., starting with its founder F. Bacon, to-ry was influenced by the Spanish. the philosopher Huarte. At the mechanic. materialists Hobbes, Boyle and Locke strengthened elements of subjectivity in connection with the approval of the concept of reducibility of qualities. differences to purely quantitative (the doctrine of primary and secondary qualities). There are two paths from Locke's sensationalism: to M. and to idealism. The first way is not possible in English. soil, since the bourgeoisie after its political. victories consolidates its religious-idealistic. worldview; therefore, the idealistic is developing here. sensationalism (in Hume's skepticism, especially in Berkeley's subjective idealism). In France, the way is opening up for the materialistic. sensationalism.

c) Ch. succession. communication in the teachings of M. 17-18 centuries, forming, as it were, basic. the node of development of all M. at that time, was formed as a result of the merger of two lines - sensationalism, coming from Locke, and M. proper, coming from the Cartesian school (from the physics of Descartes through Leroy, from M. and Gassendi's atomism, from the Spinozist one). The merger of M. with sensationalism determined all the further progress of M. in the 18th century. (French M. 18th century, Russian M. 18th century).

d) With gnoseological. t. sp. two lines are important - first within M., and then passed from M. to the field of idealism: the line of empiricism, later of sensationalism (English M. of the 17th century up to Locke) and the line of rationalism, which originates in Descartes' dualism (in his theory knowledge), which then passed into the Spinozist M. Like empiricism, rationalism was a reaction of the progressive philosopher. thoughts against the Wed-century. scholasticism with its belittling of not only feelings. knowledge, but also human. mind. The formula "I think, therefore, I am" had a progressive meaning for its time and was combined with M. Subsequently, just as sensationalism (after Locke) switched to idealistic in England. soil, and rationalism (after Spinoza) continued its development on the basis of it. idealism (Leibniz, Kant, Hegel).

e) Special nodes in M.'s development were formed in Eastern Europe: Lomonosov creatively developed M. and continued the Cartesian line (in the understanding of the movement) and atomistic. Boyle's line. It is from Lomonosov that that "solid materialistic tradition" in Russian originated. societies. and philosophy. thoughts about a cut Lenin wrote. This tradition was continued by Radishchev. In the teachings of Boskovich, a line coming from Newton (dynamics of forces) was connected with a line coming from Leibniz (the idea of a monad, interpreted as a point in space); from here was born DOS. the concept of his philosophy is "dynamida" (geometric center of forces inseparable from matter itself).

M.'s struggle with idealism first unfolded (during the Renaissance) as a struggle against the dominant religion. ideology. Later, the most consistent teachings of M. (Hobbes, French M. of the 18th century) acted at the same time as atheistic. teachings. English. M. at the end of the 17th century. turned out to be half-hearted in his attitude to religion (attempts to reconcile science and religion in Boyle and Newton). In the 17-18 centuries. struggle of the main Philos. directions goes between the newly emerging systems of M. and idealism: Hobbes - against the idealism of Descartes, Berkeley - against M. in general, French. M. 18th century - against Berkeley, Hegel - against the French. M. 18th century etc. The struggle is becoming multilateral, multidimensional and gradually acquires an international character.

4. Main lines of development of pre-Marxist M. of the 19th century. in R about s and and Z and p. E in rope (see diagram III).

Ch. the main line of M.'s development in the 19th century. took place in the direction of enriching it with dialectics, edges reached the highest development on the basis of idealism in Hegel's philosophy. The problem arose of merging Hegel's dialectics with M. through its materialistic. processing. This process was started, but not completed by the representatives of the Russian. M. 19th century; continuing materialistic. the tradition of Lomonosov and Radishchev, Herzen, Belinsky, Dobrolyubov, Chernyshevsky, made an attempt to combine Hegel's dialectics with M .; In Germany, Feuerbach made a revolution when he rejected Hegel's absolute idea, which played the role of the creator of all things in the Hegelian system, and returned again to M. But together with absolute idealism he rejected dialectics, and therefore could not at all combine M. with dialectics. For all pre-Marxist M., a general lack of understanding or inability to achieve the unity of dialectics, logic, and the theory of knowledge is characteristic. Feuerbach's misunderstanding of this unity was as strong as that of the French. materialists of the 18th century. and their direct successor Saint-Simon (this line in France in the 19th century passed over to the soil of idealism and positivism in Comte). Russian. revolutionary materialist democrats (up to Chernyshevsky and his school), the unity of M. and dialectics was not achieved precisely in the field of logic and the theory of knowledge, although they approached it. This characteristic feature noted Lenin, saying that DOS. the trouble with the old (pre-Marxian) M. is the inability to apply dialectics to the theory of reflection, to the process of cognition. “All subsequent deviations from dialectical Moscow also followed the same direction (mechanists, Stalin). In relation to Russian Moscow in the 19th century, under the influence of the personality cult of Stalin, serious deviations from historical truth were allowed. it was argued that the recognition of the successive connection of Chernyshevsky's views with Feuerbach's materialism and Hegel's dialectics meant a cosmopolitan denial of the originality of progressive materialistic thought in 19th-century Russia and low worship before the philosophers of Western Europe. there was a directly opposite tendency - to underestimate, let alone belittle the historical significance and materialistic role of the teachings of the 19th century Russian revolutionary democrats.

M. naturalists of the 19th and 20th centuries. not reflected in scheme III.

5. The line of development of Mark-s and with t with about M. (see diagram III).

The problem of combining dialectics with dialectics was first solved by Marx and Engels. Theoretical sources served them Hegelian dialectics and materialism of Feuerbach, and through him and French. M. 18th century The interpenetration of M. and dialectics in 19th-century Marxist philosophy caused a revolution. a revolution in the history of the whole human. thoughts. Further development of dialectic. M. in the new istorich. the situation is associated with the name of Lenin. The development of Marxist M. from the moment of its inception to the present time is shown in diagram III by a bold line, in contrast to the thinner lines representing its predecessors. This denotes qualities. the difference between Marxist M. from all pre-Marxist and generally non-Marxist currents in M. and at the same time the international character of the entire Marxist-Leninist doctrine (including its philosophical part). The dotted lines show attempts to restore old types of M. in order to fight against dialectic. M. (see the lines going from the French M. of the 18th century to the vulgar M. of the middle of the 19th century and further to the positivist Dühring and to the mechanists of the 20th century).

In all these cases, the watershed was the recognition (Marx, Engels, Lenin) or non-recognition (inconsistent materialists) organic. unity (identity, coincidence) of dialectics, logic and the theory of knowledge. With Hegel, such a unity was realized in an idealistic way. basis. It was impossible to completely unite M. with dialectics, if the question of this unity was not resolved on the basis of M. All deviations from the consistent (dialectical, Marxist) M. are connected primarily with the fact that M. and dialectics turned out to be insufficiently organically fused between himself (as was the case, for example, with Stalin, who sharply divided the dialectical method and materialistic theory).

With regard to the history of the emergence and development of dialectical. M. put forward the wrong concepts. About the genesis of the dialectical. M. stated the following:

1) As if Marx and Engels created their teaching by simply adding Hegel's dialectics with Feuerbach's M. In reality, Marx characterized his method as directly opposite to Hegel's, from which the founders of Marxism singled out only a rational kernel. In the same way, from Feuerbach M., they distinguished DOS. grain, discarding all its metaphysics. limitation. As a result, Marx and Engels radically revised the views of their philosophies. predecessors, creating a qualitatively new teaching - dialectical. M., in which dialectics and M. permeate each other. 2) As if Marx and Engels did not proceed from Hegelian dialectics at all: Hegel's philosophy was declared by Stalin to be an aristocratic. reaction to French. M. and in French. bourgeois. revolution of the 18th century. This denied the fact of theoretical. preparation of dialectic. M., the succession ended abruptly. connection in historical. development of world philosophy. thoughts, and Marxism itself was portrayed as having appeared suddenly, aside from the main. ways of development of world civilization.

With regard to the further development of dialectic. M. stated the following:

1) As if Plekhanov stands between Marx and Lenin as a necessary connecting link, so that, in addition to the Leninist stage, in the development of dialectical. M. should single out a special Plekhanov stage. In fact, Lenin, highly appreciating the philosopher. of Plekhanov's work, however, proceeded directly from the teachings of Marx and Engels, bypassing all kinds of "intermediate links". It would be especially unacceptable to consider all kinds of revisionists and opportunists, including those who continue to be Marx's successors. leaders of the 2nd International. 2) As if the Leninist stage in Marxist philosophy had two equal theoretical sources: the teachings of Marx and M. of the Russian revolutionary democrats of the 19th century. But it is obvious that M. of the latter lagged sharply behind the Marxist M. in the most important thing - in the question of the unity of dialectics, logic and the theory of knowledge, not to mention the historical. M., and therefore cannot be placed in the same row of unities. theoretical the source of Leninism - the teachings of Marx - and K.-L. other teachings. This does not exclude the fact that the further development of Marxist mathematics not only allows, but also requires its constant enrichment with the experience of the workers' movement and the achievements of science, culture, incl. and nat. culture (including philosophy) of the country where it develops. 3) As if the development of Leninism, and hence of Marxist M., after the death of Lenin was carried out by Stalin, who was incorrectly placed on a par with Marx, Engels and Lenin as a classic of Marxist doctrine. In reality, Stalin only popularized Marxist philosophy, accompanying it with gross distortions of the popularized doctrine, crossing out the dialectic. logic. Therefore, at present, representatives of Marxist M., eliminating the consequences of the personality cult, are correcting mistakes made by Stalin and deviations from dialectics. M. and entirely rely directly on philosophy. Lenin's legacy, the development of which is one of Ch. dialectical tasks. M. The tasks facing the Marxist-Leninists in the field of philosophy are detailed in Art. Dialectical materialism.

6. Main lines of M.'s development in natural science of the 19th and 20th centuries. In the 17-18 centuries. philosophy and natural science were in close contact with each other and many others. scientists were both philosophers and natural scientists (Galileo, Newton, Boyle, Descartes, Boschkovich, Lomonosov, Kant, Priestley, etc.). In the 19th century. philosophy and natural science are becoming separate specialties of scientists, and in natural science they are becoming independent. M.'s line of development (see Natural science materialism). Regardless of personal philosophies. views objectively, according to the content of the scientific. discoveries, naturalists contribute to the substantiation and further development of M. With this t. sp. two eras can be distinguished. 1) Until the end of the 19th century, when M. prevailed in natural science almost undividedly, and idealism penetrated only in the form of extravagant concepts, which concerned the still unknown essence of phenomena (Ignorabimus Dubois-Reymond), their causes and laws (physiological idealism "I. Müller and Helmholtz), etc. Among the major natural scientists, supporters of dialectical. M. were numbered in units (Schorlemmer). 2) Since the end of the 19th century, when, under the influence of the recent revolution in natural science and the crisis of physics, a certain part of natural scientists (especially physicists) slipped into idealism ("physical idealism"), trying to oust M. from natural science and replace it with idealism and agnosticism. Arguments for implementing this reaction. goals were drawn from the latest discoveries of natural science. In reality, all these discoveries did not undermine, but strengthened the position of M. in natural science, confirmed and enriched the dialectical. M.

Describing M.'s line in natural science, Lenin wrote that "... the picture of the world is a picture of how matter moves and how 'mothers and souls'" (Works, vol. 14, p. 338). But the question of the motion of matter presupposes the clarification of the question of physical. the structure of matter itself, as a carrier of motion, i.e. the question of "... the structure of matter, about atoms and electrons ..." (ibid., p. 246).

In the 19th century. due to the fact that dialectics had not yet penetrated sufficiently deeply into natural science, the study of the question of the structure of matter (its discrete structure, its forms and their mutual transitions). But in the same 19th century. with a question about int. the mechanism of mutual transformations different forms energy, the question of their discrete carriers (kinetic theory of heat and gases, electrochemical studies) was inextricably linked. However, the energy itself in the 19th century. was interpreted as continuous education (on this basis, in particular, classical, phenomenological thermodynamics was formed). In the 20th century. first, the idea of discreteness was extended to the concept of motion (action, energy), and then the idea of continuity (in particular, wave-like) - to the concept of substances of microparticles, as a result of which two isolated in the 19th century. lines of development of M. (associated - one with atomism, the other with the theory of energy) merged into one line of modern. atomism.

Along with both of the above lines of M. in natural science, one can single out a closely related M. line, concerning the study of the most general forms of the existence of matter (space and time), their mathematical. (geometry) and physical. (physical. fields) interpretation, quantity. sides of the most general relations, material objects (objects and processes), their common structures, connections and patterns that make up the subject of mathematics and theoretical physics.

The question of how matter thinks suggests another question: how does matter live? This latter is usually included in general question about how matter moves (since life is only one of the forms of movement of matter). However, in mind it will be excluded. importance with t. sp. philosophy, below it is highlighted, especially since it is idealistic. tendencies appear here in a peculiar way (vitalism, teleologism, psycholamarkism, holism, and other varieties of "biological" idealism).

Thus, as the most important lines of M. in natural science of the 19th and 20th centuries. or its varieties are: a) atomistic. M. 19th century; b) M. of the 19th century, associated with the doctrine of energy and the forms of being; c) modern atomistic M. 20th century; d) biological. M. and e) M., associated with the doctrine of the psyche. (in particular, mental) activity. This division is conditional (for example, the question of the essence and origin of life is associated with the development of atomistic chemistry, the question of the basic forms of being is associated with the doctrine of the structure and movement of matter, the question of thinking is associated with the general doctrine of life, etc.) ).

Atomistic M. early. 19th century opposed in natural science dynamism as specific. a kind of idealism; the line of M. in the doctrine of energy was opposed by energetism, which continued the line of dynamism; all sovr. atomistic M. opposes "physical." idealism; all M. in the doctrine of living nature is opposed by vitalism, psycholamarkism, "physiological". idealism, and in the 20th century. - holism, neovitalism and other trends of idealism.

Naturalists by their philosophy. views are divided by us into five groups: 1) standing on the positions of the dialectical. M .; 2) standing on the positions of natural science. M. and consider themselves materialists or openly oppose idealism and religion, but bashfully refusing to call themselves materialists;

3) standing on the positions of spontaneous M., not speaking openly on philosophy. issues and not leading an active struggle against idealism;

4) making dep. concessions to idealism in the field of philosophy, although in general standing on the positions of M .; 5) who openly oppose M., although in fact those who stand on the positions of spontaneous M. The index next to the scientist's name indicates to which group this scientist belongs to us.

a) At about m and s t and h. M. 19th century. originates from Dalton 2 (England), who laid the foundations for chemistry. atomistics with the concept of atomic weight and opposed dynamism; this line M. continued Berzelius 4 (Sweden) - the author of electrochemistry. ideas about atoms and at the same time the defender of the vitalistic. teachings about "life force". Against the atomistic. materialism of Berzelius was fought by Hegel in his "Natural Philosophy". Dialectical the idea of the existence of two qualitatively different stages in the complication of matter (i.e. a molecule) was developed first by Avogadro 3 (Italy) and Ampere 4 (France), later by Gerard 4 (France) and Cannizzaro 3 ( Italy). The idea of having electric charges at fragments of atoms and molecules (ions) were developed by Faraday 2 (England) and Arrhenius 3 (Sweden), who continued electrochemistry. the line of materialism of Berzelius. The Dalton - Gerard line was continued by Mendeleev 2 (Russia), who opened the periodical. law chem. elements, according to which the properties of the elements depend on their atomic weights, and Mendeleev's associate Brauner 3 (Czech Republic), who was engaged in undeveloped parties periodically. law.

This line of M. adjoins M. schools associated with organic. chemistry: Gerard (homologous and genetic series, in which the law of the transition from quantity to quality is reflected); Kekule 4 (Germany) and others, who developed the concept of the bond between atoms (valence); Butlerov 5 (Russia), who created the materialistic. the theory of chemical. buildings, but defended idealism and spiritualism against M. in philosophy; Schorlemmer 1 (Germany), who created scientific. organic system chemistry and revealed its dialectics; Van't Hoff 2 (Holland), who put forward the idea of spaces. tetrahedral. models of the carbon atom and opposed Ostwald's energetism. If atomistic. M. in chemistry was based on finding out how molecules are formed from atoms, and in physical. chemistry - as electrolyte molecules decompose into ions, then in physics the same M. relied on the study of how physical molecules are formed from molecules. bodies (aggregates), starting with rarefied gases (kinetic theory of gases and heat). This line of M. was developed by Clausius 4 (Germany), who at the same time put forward the idealistic. hypothesis of "thermal death of the Universe", Boltzmann 2 (Austria), who proved the inconsistency of this hypothesis on the basis of his H-theorem, and others. Thus, atomistic. M. in natural science of the 19th century. was built and developed, proceeding from taking into account the interrelation of three discrete types of matter: atom - and about n - molecule.

b) M. of the 19th century, associated with the doctrine of motion (energy) and about with n. form and i. Centre. the point here was the discovery of the law of conservation and transformation of energy. Faraday participated in the preparation of this discovery, who put forward the idea of the unity of the "forces" of nature (that is, the forms of motion of matter) and the concept of electric. fields. Opening title the law is associated with the names of R. Mayer 4 (Germany), Helmholtz 4 - mechanical. materialist in physics, "physiological." idealist in the physiology of the senses, and other scientists. Many people took part in the further development of this law. scientists: 1) in the field of kinetic. theory of gases and in general statistical. physicists - Thomson (Kelvin 3, England), who developed the theory of the world "ether", Clausius, Boltzmann, Gibbs 3 (USA), who developed the chemistry. thermodynamics along with van't Hoff; 2) in the field of the doctrine of electromagnetism and physical. fields - Maxwell 3 (England), who created the electromagnetic theory of light, Hertz 3 (Germany), who discovered special electromagnetic waves, Lebedev 3 (Russia), who was the first to measure the pressure of light; 3) in the field of physical. chemistry - Nernst 2 (Germany), opposing the idealistic. the concept of "clean energy" as the basis of physical. (theoretical) chemistry materialistic. the idea of the unity of the theory of energy (thermodynamics) and the theory of the molecular structure of matter; Beketov 2 (Russia), who opposed energetism, and others; 4) in the field of communication of radiant and electric. phenomena - Stoletov 2, who studied photoelectric. effect and also fought against energetism; 5) in the field of studying the laws of motion of energy - Umov 4.

In the field of mechanics and geometry, M.'s line was drawn by: Lobachevsky 2 (Russia), who created non-Euclidean geometry, opposed the Kantian views on space, Kirchhoff 3 (Germany), which, together with Bunsen 4 (Germany), struck a blow at agnosticism and Comte positivism , having opened the spectral analysis, with the help of which it is possible to determine the chemical. composition of celestial bodies; physical geometry (crystallography and crystal chemistry) was developed by Fedorov 2 (Russia).

As a result of all these studies, a classic was formed. physical a picture of the world with the concepts of an indivisible atom and unchanging mass, a continuous world environment - "ether" - and continuous energy, as well as with concepts external to matter and motion and in relation to each other - space and time. Philos. the basis of this picture of the world was mechanistic. M., although in their content all the discoveries summarized in this picture were already in the 19th century. did not fit into the tight framework of mechanistic. M. and objectively meant the disclosure of the dialectics of nature.

c) Modern atomistic M. 20th century At the turn of 19 and early. 20th centuries the "newest revolution in natural science" began, as a result of a cut there was a change in the form of atomistic. M. and a radical breakdown of the entire physical. pictures of the world. One of the most important lines in the development of this revolution, and at the same time, M. in natural science (primarily atomistic M.) was the expansion of an already known number of discrete types of matter towards smaller microparticles: the discovery of the electron by J.J. Thomson 2 (England) and the creation by him of the first (static) model of the atom, the discovery of radioactivity; then the discovery of radium by the spouses M. Sklodowska 3 (Poland) and P. Curie 4 (France), which led to the creation by Rutherford 3 and Soddy 3 (England) of the first theory of radioactivity as the decay of atoms and the transformation of elements. From here comes nuclear physics: the discovery of the atomic nucleus, the proton and the arts. transformation of chemical. elements by Rutherford, the Soddy isotopy and the "shift" law by Soddy and Faience 3 (Poland) and many others. other. The spreading of a number of discrete types of matter was carried out in the direction of larger microparticles: colloidal, as well as even larger ones participating in Brownian motion, the study of which proved the objective reality of molecules. Smoluchowski 3 (Poland), Svedberg 3 (Sweden), and others participated in this progress of physics. section of the category of randomness, which plays here Ch. role, developed by A. Markov 2 (Russia). Summarizing the successes of atomistics and atomistic. M., Perrin 2 (France) showed that, following the most different paths, physics and chemistry come to the same value of "Avogadro's number" (that is, the number of molecules in a gram-mole of a substance). The reality of molecules has become undeniable. Philosophers and natural scientists (especially Ostwald and Mach), who denied the reality of atoms and molecules, admitted defeat. It was greatest victory M. in general and primarily atomistic. M.

Theoretical knot, in which at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. agreed DOS. lines of development of M. in natural science of the 19th century, was organic. synthesis of the idea of discreteness of matter with the idea of the movement of matter (its energy), and at the same time - the synthesis of the principles of conservation of matter and energy, the discovery of the dependence of mass on motion. Two discoveries were of decisive importance here: 1) the creation by Planck 2 (Germany) of the theory of quanta, which showed the intermittent nature of the action, from which the intermittent nature of the radiation followed; From the position of M., Planck waged a struggle against Machism; thanks to the theory of quanta, the motion of matter was brought under the general atomistic. the concept underlying all physical. the doctrine of matter; 2) the creation of the theory of relativity by Einstein 4 (Germany), which revealed a new view of space and time, showing their relativity, their relationship and dependence on motion; before that such a discovery was approached by Langevin 1, who later rose to the position of a dialectician. M. and openly fought against "physical. Idealism, Lorentz 2 (Holland), with whose name the so-called" Lorentz transformations "are associated, etc. From a particular principle of his theory, Einstein deduced a very important relationship (relationship) between mass and the energy of any body, which became a fundamental law of modern physics and combined the previously separated principles of conservation of mass and conservation of energy. This relationship (as applied to light) was actually already contained in the experimental measurement of light pressure by Lebedev. Einstein continued Planck's ideas by introducing the concept about the photon as a "particle" (quantum) of light; he participated in the development of the theory of Brownian motion. general principle his theory, he connected the basic forms of being (space and time) not only with movement, but also with their material content, developing the idea of physical. field (replacing the old, mechanical concept of the world "ether"). Einstein's discoveries strengthened the position of the present. atomistic M., and together with him - and dialectical. M., although Einstein himself inclined partially towards idealism in the field of philosophy. Later, M.'s tendencies in his views intensified.

The next knot, in which the main lines of development of atomistic converged. M., expressed in the 19th century. in period. Mendeleev's law, and in the 20th century. in the discoveries of the electron, X-rays, radioactivity, quanta (photons), the first model of the Bohr atom 4 (Denmark) appeared. This model was built entirely on the foundations of atomistic. M. and relied on the important materialistic. the position put forward by Bohr - the principle of correspondence, in which in relation to the development of physical. theories actually concretized a general view of the relationship between the absolute and the attributable. truth. Being a spontaneous (therefore, inconsistent) materialist, Bohr subsequently made concessions to idealism, adhered to neopositivism. Atomistic positions M. was strengthened by the discovery of Laue 2 (Germany) of the wave nature of X-rays and the study of the structure of crystals. The works of Bernal 1 (England), who also gave research on the history of the development of science as societies, are developing in this direction. phenomenon and its laws.

In the 20s. 20th century a new rise of the "newest revolution in natural science" began in connection with the emergence of quantum mechanics, which continued the theoretical. synthesis in physics, which began at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. This synthesis was extended to the concept of discontinuity (discreteness) and continuity of all physical. types of matter, more broadly - about matter and field (primarily light). The beginning of this progress of science was laid by Louis de Broglie 2, who put forward the idea that each microparticle (electron, photon, etc.) is assigned a definite. wave, each wave is defined. particle. At first, de Broglie joined the camp of neo-positivism, but then openly moved to the position of the present. atomistic M., broke with idealism, which was a major victory for M. in general, since testified to the beginning of a new defeat of subjective idealism in the field of physics. One of the moments of the creation and development of quantum mechanics was the establishment of Pauli 5 (Switzerland) of the so-called. the "exclusion principle" (Pauli's principle), which made it possible to further develop the atomic model; Pauli put forward the materialistic. hypothesis of neutrinos as opposed to idealistic. concepts of energy destructibility. Pauli actually strengthened the modern. atomistic M., although he himself belonged to neopositivism in the field of philosophy. Development of modern atomistic M. contributed to the discovery: spouses Irene Curie 3 and Frederic Joliot-Curie 1 (France) arts. radioactivity, the prediction by Yukawa 3 (Japan) and Blackett's 3 discovery of the "heavy electron" - the first meson, which was preceded by the discovery of the positron and neutron, and the latter discovery led to the discovery of nuclear fission, and then the ways of using atomic energy. Subsequent discoveries showed the existence of a whole world of elemental particles, ranging from light (leptons) and medium (mesons, especially p- and ka-mesons) and ending with heavy (nucleons) and superheavy (hyperons). As a result, a number of discrete types of matter have been far advanced towards smaller microparticles. At the same time, it was moving towards larger particles (macromolecules, polymer molecules), which has been achieved sovr. chemistry. Here chemistry leads directly to the transition to the field of life phenomena (biochemistry, bioorganic chemistry, molecular biology). Thus, initial. area of discrete types of matter that make up the basis of the atomistic. M. of the 19th century, appeared in the 20th century. moved apart in both directions: elementary particles - nucleus - atom - ion - molecule - macromolecules, polymers. Generalizing Philosophy. studies concerning modern atomistic M. and his stories, given by S. I. Vavilov 1 (USSR). In the field of the theory of the Earth and the Universe, the same line was drawn by the geochemist A.E. Fersman 1 (USSR), astronomer V.A.

d) Biological. M. 19-20 centuries. M. in the understanding of life developed in four chap. directions: understanding (1) the essence and origin of life, where vitalism opposed it, (2) the structure and functioning of living organisms, (3) the emergence and development of organic. types and (4) sensual and generally psychic. activity of living beings, up to the origin of them thinks. capabilities. 1st floor 19th century passes under the sign of M.'s struggle in biology against idealistic. and metaphysical. concepts " vitality"and against the concept of absolute eternity and immutability of organic species. Here, an important role was played by the first synthesis of organic compounds from inorganic substances, carried out by Wöhler 3 (Germany) and which laid the foundation for a long chain of organic syntheses up to the most complex. This strengthened the position of M. also from the other side, striking a blow at the agnostic concept of the unknowable Kantian “thing-in-itself.” The position of M. in biology was strengthened in the second third of the 19th century as a result of the creation of cell theory. the carrier of life (protein) and the most important general manifestation of life (spontaneous permanent organic metabolism.) The strengthening of M. in biology was facilitated by the refutation of Pasteur 4 (France) of the false concept of "spontaneous generation" of life, which was defended by the vulgar materialist Pouchet 3 (France) and the revolutionary democrat Pisarev 2 (Russia) At the end of the 19th century, attempts began to create squirrels by artificial means, and E. Fischer 3 (Germany) worked extensively in this direction. ako only at the beginning of the 60s. 20th century managed to come close to this most difficult task, the unresolved cut was always used by idealists and vitalists in their struggle against M. , indicating the "mechanism" of inclusion in the built protein particle is defined. amino acids (builds. links) in accordance with the links in the DNA and RNA molecules involved in the control of biosynthesis.

Evolution. ideas in biology were developed in the pre-Darwinian period by Lamarck 3 (France), who pointed to the decisive influence of the external environment on the vital activity of organisms, Roulier 3 (Russia) and many others. others. The decisive step was made in this respect by Darwin 3 (England), to-ry created the evolution. doctrine - Darwinism, the basis of which was the theory of development of organic. the world. This great discovery, stated in the book "The Origin of Species", constituted an epoch in the development of not only biology, but also the whole of natural science, and served Marx and Engels as a natural scientific basis for their teachings, in particular, the theory of class struggle. Darwinism's edge was directed against metaphysics (the concept of a constant species) and idealism, which appeared in biology in the form of teleologism. All further progress in biology and related sciences takes place under the sign of Darwinism, i.e. development ideas. Idealists, theologians and obscurantists of all stripes attack him for his materialistic. and atheistic. focus; on the contrary, representatives of M., primarily biological. M., defend Darwinism, strive not only to defend it, but also to move forward, to enrich it with new data. In this direction, the activity of K. A. Timiryazev 2 (Russia), who came close to Marxism, to dialectical. M., who opened the chemical. the essence of the process of photosynthesis; Haeckel 2 (Germany), who deepened Darwinism and tried to free it from certain shortcomings by revealing the deeper driving forces of the evolutionary process (the interaction of heredity and variability); brothers Kovalevsky 3 (Russia), one of which (Vl. O. Kovalevsky) laid the foundations of evolutionary paleontology, and many others. etc. IV Michurin 1 played a particularly important role in the development of Darwinism, 1 whose doctrine was one of the materialistic. directions in modern. biology.

e) M. 19–20 centuries, associated with the doctrine of the psyche. activities of a female In the field of the doctrine of the psyche. the activities of living beings were always especially strong positions of idealism, to-ry operated with the concept of a special psyche. substance ("soul"), supposedly independent of the material shell of the body. The blow to this is idealistic. the concept was inflicted by the founder of the materialistic. physiology and materialistic. psychology Sechenov 2 (Russia) with his doctrine of the reflexes of the brain. His line was continued by I.P. Pavlov 2 (Russia - USSR), who created the doctrine of conditioned reflexes, of two signal systems, which formed the basis of the entire theory of higher nervous activity humans and highly developed animals. The doctrine of the psychic, incl. mental, human activity was further developed thanks to the successes of cybernetics, which makes it possible to simulate the psyche. processes and find general laws for all governing processes occurring both in the field of living nature and in the sphere of societies. and mental. human life, as well as in the field of technology (artificially manufactured cybernetic devices or machines).

These are some of the lines of development of M. in natural science of the 19th and 20th centuries. in his struggle against idealism.

The entire course of development of the present. natural science and international. revolutionary movement of the working class fully confirms the truth of the highest form of philosophy. M. - dialectical. M.

Lit. see under articles Dialectical materialism and articles about materialistic. teachings and about individual materialists.

B. Kedrov. Moscow.

Philosophical Encyclopedia. In 5 volumes - M .: Soviet encyclopedia.Edited by F.V. Konstantinov.1960-1970 .

MATERIALISM (from Lat.Materialis - material) is a monistic philosophical trend that recognizes the existence of the world outside and independently of the consciousness of the cognizing subject and explains this world from itself, without resorting to the hypothesis of the world spirit that precedes it and generates it (God, the absolute idea and etc.). In this case, human consciousness is understood as a natural product of the evolution of the material world. Distinguish between vulgar and consistent materialism. The first one treats consciousness as a kind of matter (“the brain also allocates thought, like the liver - bile”), the second - as its property that arises at a certain stage of development of the material world from the property inherent in all matter - reflection. The proposition of the primacy of matter and the secondary nature of consciousness is the basis for answering the question whether the world is cognizable: being a natural product of the development of matter, human consciousness is able not only to cognize the world, but also to create it through practice.

The term “materialists” was coined by Leibniz to denote his opponents. Several years later, he already figured in the philosophical dictionary of I. Walch: “Materialism is called that when they deny spiritual substances and do not want to admit anything but bodily ... Materialism should also be called when all events and actions of natural bodies are derived only from properties matter, such as size, figure, weight, separation and connection, etc., do not want to recognize any other spiritual principle except the soul ”(Walch IG Philosophisches Lexicon, 1726). French materialists of the 18th century - La Mettrie, Diderot, Holbach and Helvetius - deliberately used the term "materialism" in relation to themselves. However, even in the 19th century. L. Feuerbach and E. Haeckel refused to call themselves materialists.

In Europe, materialism went through three stages in its development. The first stage was associated with the naive or spontaneous materialism of the ancient Greeks and Romans (Empedocles, Anaximander, Democritus, Epicurus). In the 16-18 centuries. F. Bacon, Hobbes, Diderot, Holbach, Helvetius and others formed metaphysical and mechanistic materialism. In the 1840s. K. Marx and F. Engels formulated the basic principles of dialectical materialism.

Materialism asserts that the qualitative diversity of the world is based on absolutely homogeneous primary matter. The search for the latter has been one of the main tasks of materialism since its inception. Thales believed that everything in the world consists of water, Anaximenes - air, Heraclitus - fire. In the 16-18 centuries. they tried to deduce all the phenomena of the world from mechanically moving matter, at the end of the 19th century. E. Haeckel proposed ether for the role of primary matter. However, each time these hypotheses were refuted. The result was the rejection of the substrate definition of matter and the transition to the phenomenological - through its relationship to consciousness. This definition was formulated in the most detailed way by V.I.Lenin. Matter is interpreted by him as a reality that exists outside consciousness, independently of it and reflected in it. The phenomenological definition of matter does not exclude the substrate, but complements it.

The first materialists, who discussed the question of what is matter as the substance of all things, proceeded from its primacy in relation to their own consciousness as something self-evident. And only in the 17th century, after Descartes formulated the principle of methodological doubt and Berkeley developed arguments in defense of subjective idealism, it was recognized that the justification of this initial position of materialism is a most difficult philosophical task. There is still no generally accepted solution to it. From the point of view of dialectical materialism, belief in the reality and knowability of the material world proves the success of practical activities based on this belief.

Consistent materialism is especially difficult to carry out in the study of human society. A materialist in his views on nature may well turn out to be an idealist in his views on society. Differences between historical materialism and historical idealism arise when answering the question why there are diametrically opposite points of view on the same social problem. Historical materialism claims that these differences in views are explained not only by the objective difficulties of cognizing social phenomena, but also by the material relations in which the carriers of these views are located and which are formed independently of their will. This is the meaning of the thesis “social being determines social consciousness”. A practical conclusion follows from it: in order to change the social consciousness of people, it is necessary to change their social being. Hence, the conclusion is drawn about the class nature of social consciousness in class society and about the class struggle as a means of changing it. At the same time, rejection of the materialistic view of history, an attempt to influence the views and actions of people, completely ignoring their conditionality by social existence, leads to social chaos.

Throughout the history of philosophy, the development of materialism was not an end in itself, but a means for solving the main question of any worldview - about the goal of human life. For materialism, such a goal is the happiness of both an individual and all mankind, achieved in real, earthly life, in the process of achieving rational and constructive goals.

The task of explaining the world as a whole from oneself, posed by materialism, is natural and therefore extremely difficult to realize. A consistent subjective idealist, a solipsist, declares existing only his own consciousness, thereby removing the question of its relation to the external world. The objective idealist, recognizing the objective world, preserves the problem, but solves it through a kind of circle: the consciousness of the subject deduces from the world external to him, and this latter from the “world idea”. The dualist, asserting the mutual independence of the material and the ideal, bypasses the problem by rejecting one of the fundamental scientific principles - monism. But materialism pays a heavy price for this “intellectual honesty”. It is precisely the global nature of the program of materialism, the unwillingness to simplify it, that explains the scarcity of outstanding scientific results obtained within its framework and, as a consequence, the scarcity of great materialists in the history of philosophy. Hence, the attempts to take wishful thinking for reality, to declare the program of materialism realized, so discredited dialectical materialism. See also the article Dialectical Materialism and Literature for this article.

G. D. Levin

New Encyclopedia of Philosophy: In 4 vols. M .: Thought.Edited by V.S.Stepin.2001 .

Synonyms:
antispiritualism, proverb, proverb, practicality
Antonyms:

Materialism is any doctrine or system of views that in one way or another gives priority to matter. Usually the word "materialism" is used in two meanings, broad and philosophical. But in both cases, he opposes idealism, also considered in two senses.

In the popular, common sense of the word, materialism is a certain type of behavior or state of mind, characterized by concerns of a "material" nature, that is, in this context, sensual or low. It is almost always used in a derogatory sense. , in this understanding, this is one who is devoid of ideals, who does not care about morality or spiritual life; one who seeks exclusively satisfaction of his needs and is focused, so to speak, on the calls of his body, not soul. V the best option it is bon vivant, at worst - zhuir, selfish and rude.

Materialism and philosophy

The word "materialism" belongs to the philosophical dictionary, in which it denotes one of two antagonistic currents. Their opposition, starting from the time of Plato and Democritus, runs through the entire history of philosophy, defining its structure. Here materialism is a worldview and a concept of being, affirming the dominant, if not exclusive, role of matter. To be a materialist in a philosophical sense means to assert that everything that exists is matter or a product of matter, therefore, there is no spiritual or spiritually autonomous reality - neither a creator God, nor an immaterial soul, nor absolute values or values as such. Thus, materialism is opposed to spiritualism or idealism. It is incompatible not only with religion (Epicurus was not an atheist, but the Stoics professed pantheism), but with faith in an immaterial or transcendental God. It is a physical, absolute philosophy of immanence and radical naturalism. "Materialism," writes Engels, "regards nature as the only real"; there is nothing but the simple rationality of nature in the form in which it appears before us without alien additions ("Ludwig Feuerbach and the end of classical German philosophy", I).

Related materials:
Machiavellianism
It can be argued that the very rationality of nature is already an alien addition: if nature does not think, how is thinking within its framework possible? This question was answered long ago by Lucretius. We can laugh, although we are not made up of atoms of laughter at all; in the same way, we can philosophize, although we are not composed of the atoms of philosophy. Thus, the materialistic understanding of nature, like any thought, no matter whether true or false, is a product of unthinking matter. This separates the materialists and Spinoza: for the former, matter is not a “thinking thing” (contrary to what the first theorem of Part II of Ethics (147) implies), and that is why it is not God. There is no thinking, for example human, apart from nature, which itself does not think.
Related materials:
Fraud
Therefore, to be a materialist does not mean to deny the existence of thinking, since in this case materialism would have to deny itself. Materialism is a denial of absolute character, ontological independence or substantial reality of thinking and the recognition that mental, moral or spiritual (assumed to be such) phenomena as an existing reality are secondary and determined. At this point, modern materialism merges with biology, in particular with neurobiology. For modern thinkers, to be a materialist means to admit that the brain thinks, and the "soul" or "spirit" is nothing more than metaphors or illusions, and finally, that the existence of thinking (as Hobbes showed in refuting Descartes) obviously presupposes the existence of a thinking being. from which, however, it does not follow in any way that this being itself must be a thought or a spirit, because that would be like saying: I am walking, so I am a walk (Hobbes, Second Objection to Descartes' Reflections). "I think, therefore I am"? Maybe. But what am I? "Thinking thing"? So be it. But what is the thing? The materialists answer: body. Where the idealist says, "I have a body," which means that he himself is something different from the body, the materialist says, "I am my body." There is a grain of humility in this statement, but there is also a challenge and exactingness. Materialists do not pretend to be anything more than a living and thinking organism. That is why they place such a high value on life and thinking - they see exclusivity in this phenomenon, especially valuable due to its rarity and due to the fact that thanks to it we are what we are. In this way, they manage, as Auguste Comte noted, quite successfully explain the higher (life, consciousness, spirit) through the lower (through inorganic matter, organized biologically and then culturally), without renouncing the superiority (in the normative sense) of the second over first. They defend the primacy of matter, as Marx said. The fact that our brain thinks is not a reason to give up thinking; on the contrary, it is an unnecessary reason, and very convincing, to think as best as possible (since every thought depends on it). Likewise, the fact that consciousness is governed by unconscious processes (Freud) or that ideology is always largely determined by economics (Marx) is not a reason to abandon consciousness or ideas; on the contrary, this is an extra reason to protect them (because they exist only under this condition) and try (through reason and consciousness) to make them clearer and more free.