Materialismo dialettico di lenin biography

Kant ha elencato le seguenti quattro antinomie: 1. Lo status controverso del materialismo dialettico [ modifica modifica wikitesto ]. La freccia del tempo [ modifica modifica wikitesto ]. Lo stesso argomento in dettaglio: La freccia del tempo. Note [ modifica modifica wikitesto ]. La scienza, le proveSonda,pp. Bibliografia [ modifica modifica wikitesto ].

Voci correlate [ modifica modifica wikitesto ]. Altri progetti [ modifica modifica wikitesto ]. Altri progetti Wikiquote. Collegamenti esterni [ modifica modifica wikitesto ]. Portale Comunismo. Portale Filosofia. Portale Socialismo. Categorie : Posizioni e teorie filosofiche Socialismo Comunismo Storia contemporanea. Se invece pensiamo che la natura sia del tutto indipendente dall'essere umano, nulla c'impedisce di credere che un giorno magari col pretesto di tutelare la stessa natura la materia voglia sbarazzarsi del suo prodotto migliore, l'essere umano, magari con la stessa misteriosa motivazione con cui l'ha creato.

Eppure anche l'odierna tecnoscienza ha la pretesa di poter costruire su altri pianeti degli ambienti artificiali in grado di ospitare la presenza umana. Noi dovremmo limitarci ad apprezzare la natura come un prodotto acquisito della materianon suscettibile di ulteriore perfezionamento tecnologico da parte nostra. Lenin traspose in filosofia la sua concezione della politica, che era prevalentemente basata sul conflitto di classe.

Ma per noi resta anche vero che se l'esistenza viene vissuta in maniera esclusivamente politicala concessione ontologica che si fa al momento dell'opposizione, rispetto a quello dell'unificazione, diventa prevalente. I menscevichi e i socialisti-rivoluzionari volevano cercare un impossibile punto di equilibrio tra sfruttati e sfruttatori. I bolscevichi invece hanno creato nuovi punti di rottura tra le classi che avevano rovesciato gli sfruttatori.

Nella lotta sociale non ha senso emanciparsi per iniziare a schiavizzare gli sconfitti. La lotta di elementi opposti non va vista come un qualcosa di implacabile, che comporta sempre la distruzione di un elemento e la costruzione di un altro. Non si garantisce l'automovimento della materia considerando assoluta la lotta degli opposti che si escludono a vicenda.

Bisogna trovare una via di mezzo che salvaguardi le esigenze della lotta politica e della pacificazione sociale. Umano e politico sono due binari che devono marciare paralleli. Almeno su qualcosa si deve essere intransigenti. In tal modo possono offrire l'impressione d'essere democratici, come i sofisti nella Grecia classica. Noi possiamo sentirci mentalmente liberi anche in condizioni in cui l'animale impazzirebbe.

La materia ha caratteristiche umane che possiamo cogliere indipendentemente dalla conoscenza strettamente scientifica delle sue componenti naturali fisiche, chimiche ecc. Noi abbiamo bisogno di vivere un rapporto di dipendenza nei confronti della natura, per poter essere davvero umani. Noi ci diamo delle ragioni che gli animali non hanno. Non diventiamo come gli animali, ma peggio: siamo sub-umani.

Se nessuno mettesse in discussione il riflesso, non si farebbe mai alcuna rivoluzione. In natura sembra che la coscienza si sia sviluppata in forma progressiva, in quanto gli animali, basati sull'istinto, hanno preceduto la nostra comparsa sul pianeta. In noi tutte queste cose sono esorbitanti, talmente ampie e profonde da risultare indicibili o non esattamente definibili.

Un atteggiamento del genere lo riteneva soggettivistico, tendente al solipsismo. Dapprima si formano le sensazioni, poi le percezioni, le impressioni, i concetti Ciascuno degli enti materiali interagenti a un tempo riflette e viene riflesso. Il materialismo dialettico si ferma qui. Naturalmente il materialismo non esclude che la coscienza, una volta sviluppatasi, non possa acquisire una certa autonomia e influire sullo sviluppo del mondo materiale.

La dialettica non viene usata sino in fondo. Da questa precedenza temporale non possiamo certo arguire che la formazione dell'essere umano sia stata meno significativa. Possiamo solo pensare che l'istinto era predisposto a trasformarsi in coscienza, per cui solo con una certa forzatura potremmo considerare l'essenza umana successiva a quella animale.

Dobbiamo uscire da una condizione spazio-temporale ed entrare in un'altra. Creata da chi? Da Dio? Possiamo attribuire a un oggetto un'intelligenza matematica, come facciamo coi robot o coi computer, ma la coscienza resta tutt'altra cosa. Retrieved 15 December — via Marxists Internet Archive. Honderich, Ted ed. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy.

Oxford: Oxford University Press. Accessed 18 April The Revolutionary Philosophy of Marxism. Wellred Books. Times of India Blog. Retrieved 23 August Marx and F. Philosophy of the Social Sciences. S2CID Political Studies. Dialectics of nature Translator, Clements Dutt. New York: International Publishers. Original work published Science of Logic.

The sudden conversion into a change of quality of a change which was apparently merely quantitative had already attracted the attention of the ancients who illustrated in popular examples the contradiction arising from ignorance of this fact; they are familiar under the names of 'the bald' and 'the heap'. These elenchi are, according to Aristotle's explanation, the ways in which one is compelled to say the opposite of what one had previously asserted Guthrie, W.

A History of Greek Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. PMC PMID Retrieved 9 August Retrieved 9 August — via Marxists Internet Archive. Trotsky's Views On Dialectical Materialism. Archived from the original on 30 June — via Marxists Internet Archive. In Defence of Marxism.

Wellred Publications. Banyan House Punlishing. New York: Columbia University Press. In Ruse, Michael; Travis, Joseph eds. Harvard University Press. London: Penguin Books. Bibcode : Pbio Archived from the original PDF on 24 June Retrieved 4 October In Brockman, J. The Third Culture. The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. In his account of one ad hominem absurdity, Gould states on p.

William Princeton University Press. Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences. JSTOR Main Currents of Marxism. New York: W. Norton and Company. The Illusion of the Epoch. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund Inc. Dialectical Materialism. Chicago: Demos Press. Moulds of Understanding. Less Than Nothing. New York: Verso Books. Further reading [ edit ].

This " Further reading " section may need cleanup. Please read the editing guide and help improve the section. September Learn how and when to remove this message. Afanasyev, V. Dialectical Materialism rev. Marxist Philosophy: A Popular Outline 3rd rev. Moscow: Progress Publishers. OCLC Althusser, Louis []. For Marx. ISBN X. Bitsakis, Eftichios Charbonnat, Pascal Cornforth, Maurice Materialism and the Dialectical Method.

Friedrich Engels []. Moscow: Foreign Language Publishing House. Friedrich Engels Dialectics of Nature. Translated by Clemens Dutt. Ghosh, Shibdas. Science of Marxism is the Scientific dialectical methodology. Gollobin, Ira New York: Petras Press. Grant, Ted ; Woods, Alan London: Wellred. Grant, Ted; Woods, Alan Dialectical Philosophy and Modern Science.

Reason in Revolt. The materialismo dialettico di lenin biography of the relations of production under the feudal system is that the feudal lord owns the means of production and does not fully own the worker in production — the serf, whom the feudal lord can no longer kill, but whom he can buy and sell. Alongside of feudal ownership there exists individual ownership by the peasant and the handicraftsman of his implements of production and his private enterprise based on his personal labor.

Further improvements in the smelting and working of iron; the spread of the iron plow and the loom; the further development of agriculture, horticulture, viniculture and dairying; the appearance of manufactories alongside of the handicraft workshops — such are the characteristic features of the state of the productive forces. The new productive forces demand that the laborer shall display some kind of initiative in production and an inclination for work, an interest in work.

The feudal lord therefore discards the slave, as a laborer who has no interest in work and is entirely without initiative, and prefers to deal with the serf, who has his own husbandry, implements of production, and a certain interest in work essential for the cultivation of the land and for the payment in kind of a part of his harvest to the feudal lord.

Here private ownership is further developed. Exploitation is nearly as severe as it was under slavery — it is only slightly mitigated. A class struggle between exploiters and exploited is the principal feature of the feudal system. The basis of the relations of production under the capitalist system is that the capitalist owns the means of production, but not the workers in production — the wage laborers, whom the capitalist can neither kill nor sell because they are personally free, but who are deprived of means of production and in order not to die of hunger, are obliged to sell their labor power to the capitalist and to bear the yoke of exploitation.

Alongside of capitalist property in the means of production, we find, at first on a wide scale, private property of the peasants and handicraftsmen in the means of production, these peasants and handicraftsmen no longer being serfs, and their private property being based on personal labor. In place of the handicraft workshops and manufactories there appear huge mills and factories equipped with machinery.

In place of the manorial estates tilled by the primitive implements of production of the peasant, there now appear large capitalist farms run on scientific lines and supplied with agricultural machinery. The new productive forces require that the workers in production shall be better educated and more intelligent than the downtrodden and ignorant serfs, that they be able to understand machinery and operate it properly.

Therefore, the capitalists prefer to deal with wage-workers, who are free from the bonds of serfdom and who are educated enough to be able properly to operate machinery. But having developed productive forces to a tremendous extent, capitalism has become enmeshed in contradictions which it is unable to solve. By producing larger and larger quantities of commodities, and reducing their prices, capitalism intensifies competition, ruins the mass of small and medium private owners, converts them into proletarians and reduces their purchasing power, with the result that it becomes impossible to dispose of the commodities produced.

On the other hand, by expanding production and concentrating millions of workers in huge mills and factories, capitalism lends the process of production a social character and thus undermines its own foundation, inasmuch as the social character of the process of production demands the social ownership of the means of production; yet the means of production remain private capitalist property, which is incompatible with the social character of the process of production.

These irreconcilable contradictions between the character of the productive forces and the relations of production make themselves felt in periodical crises of over-production, when the capitalists, finding no effective demand for their goods owing to the ruin of the mass of the population which they themselves have brought about, are compelled to burn products, destroy manufactured goods, suspend production, and destroy productive forces at a time when millions of people are forced to suffer unemployment and starvation, not because there are not enough goods, but because there is an overproduction of goods.

This means that the capitalist relations of production have ceased to correspond to the state of productive forces of society and have come into irreconcilable contradiction with them. This means that capitalism is pregnant with revolution, whose mission it is to replace the existing capitalist ownership of the means of production by socialist ownership.

This means that the main feature of the capitalist system is a most acute class struggle between the exploiters and the exploited. The basis of the relations of production under the socialist system, which so far has been established only in the U. Here there are no longer exploiters and exploited. The goods produced are distributed according to labor performed, on the principle: "He who does not work, neither shall he eat.

Here the relations of production fully correspond to the state of productive forces; for the social character of the process of production is reinforced by the social ownership of the means of production. For this reason socialist production in the U. For this reason, the productive forces here develop at an accelerated pace; for the relations of production that correspond to them offer full scope for such development.

Such is the picture of the development of men's relations of production in the course of human history. Such is the dependence of the development of the relations of production on the development of the productive forces of society, and primarily, on the development of the instruments of production, the dependence by virtue of which the materialismo dialettico dis lenin biography and development of the productive forces sooner or later lead to corresponding changes and development of the relations of production.

Relics of bygone instruments of labor possess the same importance for the investigation of extinct economical forms of society, as do fossil bones for the determination of extinct species of animals. It is not the articles made, but how they are made that enables us to distinguish different economical epochs. Instruments of labor not only supply a standard of the degree of development to which human labor has attained, but they are also indicators of the social conditions under which that labor is carried on.

I,p. In acquiring new productive forces men change their mode of production; and in changing their mode of production, in changing the way of earning their living, they change all their social relations. The hand-mill gives you society with the feudal lord; the steam-mill, society with the industrial capitalist. Speaking of historical materialism as formulated in The Communist Manifesto, Engels says:.

The third feature of production is that the rise of new productive forces and of the relations of production corresponding to them does not take place separately from the old system, after the disappearance of the old system, but within the old system; it takes place not as a result of the deliberate and conscious activity of man, but spontaneously, unconsciously, independently of the will of man It takes place spontaneously and independently of the will of man for two reasons.

Firstly, because men are not free to choose one mode of production or another, because as every new generation enters life it finds productive forces and relations of production already existing as the result of the work of former generations, owing to which it is obliged at first to accept and adapt itself to everything it finds ready-made in the sphere of production in order to be able to produce material values.

Secondly, because, when improving one instrument of production or another, one clement of the productive forces or another, men do not realize, do not understand or stop to reflect what social results these improvements will lead to, but only think of their everyday interests, of lightening their labor and of securing some direct and tangible advantage for themselves.

When, gradually and gropingly, certain members of primitive communal society passed from the use of stone tools to the use of iron tools, they, of course, did not know and did not stop to reflect what social results this innovation would lead to; they did not understand or realize that the change to metal tools meant a revolution in production, that it would in the long run lead to the slave system.

They simply wanted to lighten their labor and secure an immediate and tangible advantage; their conscious activity was confined within the narrow bounds of this everyday personal interest. When, in the period of the feudal system, the young bourgeoisie of Europe began to erect, alongside of the small guild workshops, large manufactories, and thus advanced the productive forces of society, it, of course, did not know and did not stop to reflect what social consequences this innovation would lead to; it did not realize or understand that this "small" innovation would lead to a regrouping of social forces which was to end in a revolution both against the power of materialismo dialettico dis lenin biography, whose favors it so highly valued, and against the nobility, to whose ranks its foremost representatives not infrequently aspired.

It simply wanted to lower the cost of producing goods, to throw larger quantities of goods on the markets of Asia and of recently discovered America, and to make bigger profits. Its conscious activity was confined within the narrow bounds of this commonplace practical aim. When the Russian capitalists, in conjunction with foreign capitalists, energetically implanted modern large-scale machine industry in Russia, while leaving tsardom intact and turning the peasants over to the tender mercies of the landlords, they, of course, did not know and did not stop to reflect what social consequences this extensive growth of productive forces would lead to; they did not realize or understand that this big leap in the realm of the productive forces of society would lead to a regrouping of social forces that would enable the proletariat to effect a union with the peasantry and to bring about a victorious socialist revolution.

They simply wanted to expand industrial production to the limit, to gain control of the huge home market, to become monopolists, and to squeeze as much profit as possible out of the national economy. Their conscious activity did not extend beyond their commonplace, strictly practical interests. I, p This, however, does not mean that changes in the relations of production, and the transition from old relations of production to new relations of production proceed smoothly, without conflicts, without upheavals.

On the contrary such a transition usually takes place by means of the revolutionary overthrow of the old relations of production and the establishment of new relations of production. Up to a certain period the development of the productive forces and the changes in the realm of the relations of production proceed spontaneously independently of the will of men.

Materialismo dialettico di lenin biography

But that is so only up to a certain moment, until the new and developing productive forces have reached a proper state of maturity After the new productive forces have matured, the existing relations of production and their upholders — the ruling classes — become that "insuperable" obstacle which can only be removed by the conscious action of the new classes, by the forcible acts of these classes, by revolution.

Here there stands out in bold relief the tremendous role of new social ideas, of new political institutions, of a new political power, whose mission it is to abolish by force the old relations of production. Out of the conflict between the new productive forces and the old relations of production, out of the new economic demands of society, there arise new social ideas; the new ideas organize and mobilize the masses; the masses become welded into a new political army, create a new revolutionary power, and make use of it to abolish by force the old system of relations of production, and to firmly establish the new system.

The spontaneous process of development yields place to the conscious actions of men, peaceful development to violent upheaval, evolution to revolution. Here is the formulation — a formulation of genius — of the essence of historical materialism given by Marx in in his historic Preface to his famous book, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy :.

The sum total of these relations of production constitutes the economic structure of society, the real foundation, on which rises a legal and political superstructure and to which correspond definite forms of social consciousness. The mode of production of material life conditions the social, political and intellectual life process in materialismo dialettico di lenin biography.

It is not the consciousness of men that determines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being that determines their consciousness. At a certain stage of their development, the material productive forces of society come in conflict with the existing relations of production, or — what is but a legal expression for the same thing — with the property relations within which they have been at work hitherto.

From forms of development of the productive forces these relations turn into their fetters. Then begins an epoch of social revolution. With the change of the economic foundation the entire immense superstructure is more or less rapidly transformed. In considering such transformations a distinction should always be made between the material transformation of the economic conditions of production, which can be determined with the precision of natural science, and the legal, political, religious, aesthetic or philosophic — in short, ideological forms in which men become conscious of this conflict and fight it out.

Just as our opinion of an individual is not based on what he thinks of himself, so can we not judge of such a period of transformation by its own consciousness; on the contrary this consciousness must be explained rather from the contradictions of material life, from the existing conflict between the social productive forces and the relations of production.

No social order ever perishes before all the productive forces for which there is room in it have developed; and new, higher relations of production never appear before the material conditions of their existence have matured in the womb of the old society itself.