The paradox:
It's called genre. Such ideas, whether in china, europe or elsewhere, were part of the mind-oriented view of the universe over a long period of history and dominated the minds of people. In europe, early bourgeois materialism also goes to school。
As the socio-economic situation in many european countries has reached a stage of high capitalist development, productivity, class struggles and science have reached unprecedented levels, and the industrial proletariat has become the greatest engine of historical development, giving rise to the cosmology of marxistism。
In business, i'm li wenjun. What we are talking about today is: what do you think about this? We invite all our friends to share their messages, knowing that only the collision of ideas can inspire more thinking and more imagination
This paragraph describes at least two issues:
There is a sense of decision: the word “generation” in this paragraph is important, precisely because of the rapid development of capitalism, which has brought productivity, class struggles, and science to unprecedented levels in history, so that the industrial proletarian class can grow and develop, and so that the conditions are in place to create the conditions of the marxist-territoristic cosmology. The continuity of the development of things: it is clear that no thought or anything else emerges in vain and evolves over time. The existence of a sense of decision-making and its counterproductive effects on the evolution and development of the existence are thus mutually reinforcing。
The existence of a sense of decision-making: “generation” is the fundamental division between historical materialism and all heartism. Line
The vast majority of people who read the text would slip over it in such a light that it was a common sense. But it's precisely the word “generation”, which draws the line between marxism and all previous philosophy:
That is the true meaning of the word “generation”: ideas are not the cause of history, but the result of history; they are not the creation of times, but the birth of ideas。
We can tear down the material conditions of marxism, and you'll find that every condition is impossible:
The emergence of large-scale industrial production: for the first time, human beings have seen the universal connection and eternal development of things. In the era of small-scale farmers' economies, what one sees is a four-season cycle of dynasty change, resulting in a physical “cycle theory” of schooling; and large-scale industrial production, which unites the entire world into a whole, creating new technologies, new classes, new contradictions on a daily basis, a rapidly evolving change that for the first time gives people a visual sense of “everything is movement, change, development”, which is the basis of the practice of the law of material proof. The industrial proletariat grew: for the first time, humans saw the irreconcilability of class conflicts. Before capitalism, class conflicts were covered up by various guises, such as hierarchies, religion, blood; capitalism turned everything into a naked monetary relationship, and the rivalry between the bourgeois and the proletariats became apparent. The struggle of the proletariat, in its practice, urgently requires a theory that explains class contradictions and points the way to liberation, which is the basis of a class based on material evidence. Three major findings of the natural sciences: the cytology, the law of energy persistence, the theory of evolution, proved scientifically for the first time that “natural life is a dialectic of development”, not god's creation, eternal. This provides a solid scientific basis for material-based evidence。
All these conditions are the product of a high level of capitalist development. None of these conditions exist in slavery and feudal societies, so that no genius thinker, however talented, will be able to create a material defence. That is the inevitability of history, which does not divert from the will of anyone。
Ii. Contemporary development of things: no initiatives responsibility, only new things between old things
According to scholars, things have evolved “either one or the other” and new and old things have nothing to do with each other; and the dialectic suggests that new things are not created in vain, that they are born from within old things, that they both negate the decaying and obsolete elements of old things and that they inherit reasonable and valuable elements of old。
The birth of marxism is the perfect expression of this rule. It didn't come out of a stone, but it was critical of all the good things in the history of human thought:
That's what lenin said: “marxism is the natural heir to the great achievements made by mankind in the nineteenth century”. The greatness of marxism lies not in its rejection of all previous ideas, but in the fact that it stands on the shoulders of all its predecessors and, on the basis of new material, has brought human awareness to a new level。
That's the rule
None of these ideas is born out of empty space, nor is any of them eternal. All of these ideas are constantly evolving, evolving and metabolisming in the dialectic campaign “there is a sense of decision-making, there is a sense of counteraction”。
Iii. The two points of view stand together: this is the creation of the material basis for the general development of human thought: when the material foundations of society have evolved to a new stage, new ideas are bound to emerge when old ideas are no longer able to explain new phenomena or resolve new contradictions. This is inevitable and cannot be diverted by human will. The development of ideas has its own continuity and relative independence: new ideas do not emerge in vain; they must absorb nutrients from old ones and must be created on the basis of the former generations. At the same time, once an idea emerges, it is counterproductive to the material basis and promotes or hinders the development of society。
That is why it is also the stage of the highly advanced development of capitalism, where marxism was born in germany, not in england or france. Because germany has the deepest philosophies, and has the intellectual fruits of hegel and ferbaha, this has provided the best intellectual basis for the birth of marxism. The united kingdom has the most developed capitalist economy, and france has the strongest class struggle, but they have no german philosophical tradition, so they only produce classical political economics and imaginary socialism, not material evidence。
This is the dialectic unity of necessity and accident: marxism was born in europe in the middle of the 19th century, which is a necessity of history; but it was created by marx and engles, born in germany, by accident. It is inevitable that by accident it will open the way for itself。
So
Time breeds ideas and changes
There is no truth out of the void, except the discovery on the shoulders of the former
All great theories are the perfect unity of historical necessity and individual creativity。
