In accordance with the classical Marxist understanding, the dialectic as a philosophical science is the doctrine of the most general laws of all and any development, namely: in nature, society and thought. However, the "universality" of the laws of dialectics is not in "vsyakosti", and universality. This means that any special form of manifestation of the dialectic, whether "objective" or "subjective", "social" or "natural", "conscious" or "spontaneous" - all they are only partial, transient, fleeting it (dialectical) forms education.
In other words, the dialectic, as a philosophy of science, has as its subject not so much a "dialectic of existence" and not so much a "dialectic of knowledge" as "universal laws" which are common and thinking and being. Priority of the same forms of dialectics, in relation to each other, as part of its universality, can be expressed as follows:
1) the dialectic of society versatile dialectics of nature, because the former can not exist without the second, but not vice versa;
2) subjective dialectics dialectics versatile objective, because the former can not exist without the second, but not vice versa;
3) conscious objective dialectics of objective spontaneous versatile, because the second may be without one, but not vice versa;
4) the subjective conscious dialectics versatile subjective spontaneous, as the former can not exist without the second, but not vice versa;
5) Finally, the subjective conscious dialectics universal than the conscious objective, because without the dialectical method can not be dialectical, ie, Specifically, the theoretical reproduction of the subject.
Philosophical ethics as follows: "the public as a universal" is acquired, not where the identity and "similar", but rather, where unlike and even different, able to reach the opposite position.
Note here that if the totality to understand (as it very often happens!), Not in terms of "universality", and from a position of "vsyakosti, considering the relation of form-formation on the principle of dialectics" wider-is ", then the picture would have been a different . In particular, the "dialectic of existence, the objective dialectic would be wider than the" dialectics of knowledge, subjective dialectics, which means the loss from the last ... the universal laws of being itself. But subjective dialectics without dialectics of objective - this is not the dialectic as such, but ... sophistry, that is, anti-dialectic!
In turn, the objective dialectic, without subjective and conscious of its shape, would be a kind of flawed, impotent dialectic, ie, "Blind" and "spontaneous." This - the dialectic of blind element that eludes man and expressed either in the elements of nature (earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes) or elements of society (epidemics, economic crises of capitalism, elements of the social division of labor, world wars, etc.) or elemental consciousness (madness and madness, the collective psychosis).
This dialectic does not progress and regress without human liberty, and the dialectics of human dependence and self-destruction.
Our problem is to find an antidote against every philosophical reductionism, namely: universal is universal. But here's the "universal" something universal can "be" and maybe "not-to-be!
Thus, the subjective conscious dialectics is synonymous with the cultural dialectic. Universal laws of nature, society and thinking are expressed here in everyone's the same, universal form, namely: in the form of universal cultural abilities of the person as a person to move along the immanent forms of Universuuma.
This - the ability (obrazovannogo!) mind, which are equally well manifest itself in feelings, in thoughts and deeds. Education, as times and is unconditional recognition of the fact that in the universe - all are transcendental and immanent, on the contrary, all at once transcendent - immanent. After all, "Universuum" because really is that, by definition, the original, "out" him and "beyond" it-is simply nothing there!
"General form of the universal" or "universal form of the universal" - it is nothing, as a category. Precisely because of its "universal" categories are the forms and the very "being" and most "thinking". But they may be manifested in the existence (in cases), and in thought and in words (in speech) a reasonable, therefore, cultural, and human beings.
Culture of ownership categories and have the ability to own them deliberately, and not "spontaneously" (cl-but as "vzbredet" in the head, that is, anyhow-as ...) This ability - no more than a dialectical method. Ability to apply it ("... the ability to be able to!") Characterizes only a person who is a holistic personality.
It is such a person and can avoid the temptation to "tear" apart "immanent - the transcendent" and (as a result!) To "verbal", verbal expression categories - for the essence of the categories of "per se", hence the semantics - of dialectical logic!
In turn, prevent the identification of astronomical, physical, chemical, agronomic, biological "forms of things" - with forms of categorical that sometimes occurs when the categories of dialectics are identified with ... the so-called "general scientific concepts."
Another IG Fichte tightly-tightly connected consciously categorical, ie, creative, reasonably-dialectical thinking with the integrity of the person, his all-round development as well. After all, "philosophy must be to exhaust the whole person," but because she can be mastered "only the fullness of all his faculties" / IG Fichte Fav. cit., t.I, M., 1916, s.264 / Until then, until the formation of so many murders in a spiritual force for another, the force of imagination for the sake of sanity, reason, for the sake of power of imagination or both, for the sake of memory " the philosophy is alien to the individual. Philosophy, therefore, the dialectics of this flawed personality will be something "one" - and in being completely "other" - in mind, something in the text and a very "other" - a thought ...
For this same reason, incidentally, and there is the phenomenon of "scholastic theorizing, for example, when the same dialectic of two or more" philosophers "is expressed in two completely different texts, but" both dialectic "is equally subjective in the sense that it is equally ... do not apply to reality, and (even more so!) - to being.
Consequently, the classical philosophical diagnosis regarding the fate of the dialectic in the hands of the dismembered (anti-holistic, alienated, "reified") personality - a gap of Good and Being!
Each of us are familiar with this phenomenon on the example of so-called careerism, which insists on transcendence (ie, the opposition and break) "Good and reality," reality and Being ", continuously and persistently giving rise to life-worldly regime of the Law instead of ... grace." He characterized and its "popular" philosophy, down bullied now "outdated" de classic "old" philosophy of science. Officially-scientific same maxim of his "dialectical" law-usually sounds like this: The money - a thing is theoretically fine! The meaning of life - too "thin" thing ... So? Hence, money - the meaning of life is!
So there are endless APPOLOGII for "reality" and "reality", but aimed against the Good and Being! And especially against their unity ...
But "the individual - writes (after Socrates, Spinoza, Fichte, and" spiritual "Yaroslav the Wise of Kiev, Metropolitan Hilarion!) Karl Marx - ... whose life encompasses a vast range of diverse and different kinds of reality, a practical attitude to the world and is thus , multilateral life - in such individual's thinking is the same character of universality, as well as any other manifestation of his life. It does not harden so as abstract thinking and does not require a complex focus of reflection, when an individual moves from thinking to any other manifestation of life. It is from the very beginning is a moment in the whole individual's life - a moment that, according to need, then disappears, then played ". / K. Marx and F. Engels, Collected Works, Vol., V.3, s.253. /
There is a great temptation for the "public philosophy" and its "philosophy" of the authorities, these words from the famous "German Ideology" Marx to distort so that the de "occasionally" disappear ... the very thought!
But why? - Yes, because in life there are things "more important than logic!" - Should be a response from a "public".
... With the positions of developing our understanding of the categorical, as well as education, "thinking like life," the life of the mind "and (or) the" manifestation of the very same life - things are phenomenally different, but substantial uniform. Contrast, the discrepancy or mutually exclusive "collision of" thinking and life comes only when the self-thinking that is ... "abstract."
What it means to be "abstract?" In life - it is easy to clear, for example, from a famous article G.V.F. Hegel, in which, for any truly educated person, a great thinker, a long time ago and everything is very clearly explained. / See: "Who thinks abstractly?". Work in different years in 2 volumes, Vol I, Moscow, 1970, s.389-394. / She wrote between April and July 1807. Published after the author's death in 1835. At the same Russian language published in the journal Problems of Philosophy », № 6, 1956, translated EVIlyenkov.
Today's education system itself its spirit and method are meant to literally "nourish" thinking "abstract", Health and multiply it as a supposedly "theoretical" virtues. Finally, turn the "abstract" in a cult of worship, but a system of secular education - in a widely developed, totally inclusive, institution of the cult. System capable of a reliable self-reproduction.
If the classical dialectic, as always, the one 'space' personal education of man and mankind, always insisted (and insists!) On a sharp and merciless opposition to disengagement and "abstract" and "theoretical" thinking - on one side and "verbalizovanogo" " discursive "thoughtlessness on the part of another, the current education literally does all the opposite!
Theoretical thinking, as a vital expression of an educated person sees himself as an action Substances and why we will never allow himself to leave the position of monism. In semantic terms, this position is as follows:
A) Thinking - Life - Thinking;
B) Life - Thinking - Life;
Bottom line: Thinking is life and life is thinking and they both - with a capital letter!
Value of paragraph "a" and paragraph "b" here - this is the only real problem dialectics as a philosophical science to the subject of the dialectical method. Unless, of course, to understand it not as, for example, "Demiurge" Plato, "God of the Mind" by Aristotle, "Transtsendenntalnogo subject" Kant, etc., (which by itself - no "good" or "bad "), but simply as a man seeking life through education, to get rid of the cult of" abstraction "in order to gain personal" integrity "and vital subjectivity.
1979-80 year.
Valery Molchanov, PhD.
Published: QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE MILLENNIUM. "Anthropological Readings - 2005" (Ekaterinburg, 14-15 May 2005), p. 193-195. Circulation of 700 copies.
In other words, the dialectic, as a philosophy of science, has as its subject not so much a "dialectic of existence" and not so much a "dialectic of knowledge" as "universal laws" which are common and thinking and being. Priority of the same forms of dialectics, in relation to each other, as part of its universality, can be expressed as follows:
1) the dialectic of society versatile dialectics of nature, because the former can not exist without the second, but not vice versa;
2) subjective dialectics dialectics versatile objective, because the former can not exist without the second, but not vice versa;
3) conscious objective dialectics of objective spontaneous versatile, because the second may be without one, but not vice versa;
4) the subjective conscious dialectics versatile subjective spontaneous, as the former can not exist without the second, but not vice versa;
5) Finally, the subjective conscious dialectics universal than the conscious objective, because without the dialectical method can not be dialectical, ie, Specifically, the theoretical reproduction of the subject.
Philosophical ethics as follows: "the public as a universal" is acquired, not where the identity and "similar", but rather, where unlike and even different, able to reach the opposite position.
Note here that if the totality to understand (as it very often happens!), Not in terms of "universality", and from a position of "vsyakosti, considering the relation of form-formation on the principle of dialectics" wider-is ", then the picture would have been a different . In particular, the "dialectic of existence, the objective dialectic would be wider than the" dialectics of knowledge, subjective dialectics, which means the loss from the last ... the universal laws of being itself. But subjective dialectics without dialectics of objective - this is not the dialectic as such, but ... sophistry, that is, anti-dialectic!
In turn, the objective dialectic, without subjective and conscious of its shape, would be a kind of flawed, impotent dialectic, ie, "Blind" and "spontaneous." This - the dialectic of blind element that eludes man and expressed either in the elements of nature (earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes) or elements of society (epidemics, economic crises of capitalism, elements of the social division of labor, world wars, etc.) or elemental consciousness (madness and madness, the collective psychosis).
This dialectic does not progress and regress without human liberty, and the dialectics of human dependence and self-destruction.
Our problem is to find an antidote against every philosophical reductionism, namely: universal is universal. But here's the "universal" something universal can "be" and maybe "not-to-be!
Thus, the subjective conscious dialectics is synonymous with the cultural dialectic. Universal laws of nature, society and thinking are expressed here in everyone's the same, universal form, namely: in the form of universal cultural abilities of the person as a person to move along the immanent forms of Universuuma.
This - the ability (obrazovannogo!) mind, which are equally well manifest itself in feelings, in thoughts and deeds. Education, as times and is unconditional recognition of the fact that in the universe - all are transcendental and immanent, on the contrary, all at once transcendent - immanent. After all, "Universuum" because really is that, by definition, the original, "out" him and "beyond" it-is simply nothing there!
"General form of the universal" or "universal form of the universal" - it is nothing, as a category. Precisely because of its "universal" categories are the forms and the very "being" and most "thinking". But they may be manifested in the existence (in cases), and in thought and in words (in speech) a reasonable, therefore, cultural, and human beings.
Culture of ownership categories and have the ability to own them deliberately, and not "spontaneously" (cl-but as "vzbredet" in the head, that is, anyhow-as ...) This ability - no more than a dialectical method. Ability to apply it ("... the ability to be able to!") Characterizes only a person who is a holistic personality.
It is such a person and can avoid the temptation to "tear" apart "immanent - the transcendent" and (as a result!) To "verbal", verbal expression categories - for the essence of the categories of "per se", hence the semantics - of dialectical logic!
In turn, prevent the identification of astronomical, physical, chemical, agronomic, biological "forms of things" - with forms of categorical that sometimes occurs when the categories of dialectics are identified with ... the so-called "general scientific concepts."
Another IG Fichte tightly-tightly connected consciously categorical, ie, creative, reasonably-dialectical thinking with the integrity of the person, his all-round development as well. After all, "philosophy must be to exhaust the whole person," but because she can be mastered "only the fullness of all his faculties" / IG Fichte Fav. cit., t.I, M., 1916, s.264 / Until then, until the formation of so many murders in a spiritual force for another, the force of imagination for the sake of sanity, reason, for the sake of power of imagination or both, for the sake of memory " the philosophy is alien to the individual. Philosophy, therefore, the dialectics of this flawed personality will be something "one" - and in being completely "other" - in mind, something in the text and a very "other" - a thought ...
For this same reason, incidentally, and there is the phenomenon of "scholastic theorizing, for example, when the same dialectic of two or more" philosophers "is expressed in two completely different texts, but" both dialectic "is equally subjective in the sense that it is equally ... do not apply to reality, and (even more so!) - to being.
Consequently, the classical philosophical diagnosis regarding the fate of the dialectic in the hands of the dismembered (anti-holistic, alienated, "reified") personality - a gap of Good and Being!
Each of us are familiar with this phenomenon on the example of so-called careerism, which insists on transcendence (ie, the opposition and break) "Good and reality," reality and Being ", continuously and persistently giving rise to life-worldly regime of the Law instead of ... grace." He characterized and its "popular" philosophy, down bullied now "outdated" de classic "old" philosophy of science. Officially-scientific same maxim of his "dialectical" law-usually sounds like this: The money - a thing is theoretically fine! The meaning of life - too "thin" thing ... So? Hence, money - the meaning of life is!
So there are endless APPOLOGII for "reality" and "reality", but aimed against the Good and Being! And especially against their unity ...
But "the individual - writes (after Socrates, Spinoza, Fichte, and" spiritual "Yaroslav the Wise of Kiev, Metropolitan Hilarion!) Karl Marx - ... whose life encompasses a vast range of diverse and different kinds of reality, a practical attitude to the world and is thus , multilateral life - in such individual's thinking is the same character of universality, as well as any other manifestation of his life. It does not harden so as abstract thinking and does not require a complex focus of reflection, when an individual moves from thinking to any other manifestation of life. It is from the very beginning is a moment in the whole individual's life - a moment that, according to need, then disappears, then played ". / K. Marx and F. Engels, Collected Works, Vol., V.3, s.253. /
There is a great temptation for the "public philosophy" and its "philosophy" of the authorities, these words from the famous "German Ideology" Marx to distort so that the de "occasionally" disappear ... the very thought!
But why? - Yes, because in life there are things "more important than logic!" - Should be a response from a "public".
... With the positions of developing our understanding of the categorical, as well as education, "thinking like life," the life of the mind "and (or) the" manifestation of the very same life - things are phenomenally different, but substantial uniform. Contrast, the discrepancy or mutually exclusive "collision of" thinking and life comes only when the self-thinking that is ... "abstract."
What it means to be "abstract?" In life - it is easy to clear, for example, from a famous article G.V.F. Hegel, in which, for any truly educated person, a great thinker, a long time ago and everything is very clearly explained. / See: "Who thinks abstractly?". Work in different years in 2 volumes, Vol I, Moscow, 1970, s.389-394. / She wrote between April and July 1807. Published after the author's death in 1835. At the same Russian language published in the journal Problems of Philosophy », № 6, 1956, translated EVIlyenkov.
Today's education system itself its spirit and method are meant to literally "nourish" thinking "abstract", Health and multiply it as a supposedly "theoretical" virtues. Finally, turn the "abstract" in a cult of worship, but a system of secular education - in a widely developed, totally inclusive, institution of the cult. System capable of a reliable self-reproduction.
If the classical dialectic, as always, the one 'space' personal education of man and mankind, always insisted (and insists!) On a sharp and merciless opposition to disengagement and "abstract" and "theoretical" thinking - on one side and "verbalizovanogo" " discursive "thoughtlessness on the part of another, the current education literally does all the opposite!
Theoretical thinking, as a vital expression of an educated person sees himself as an action Substances and why we will never allow himself to leave the position of monism. In semantic terms, this position is as follows:
A) Thinking - Life - Thinking;
B) Life - Thinking - Life;
Bottom line: Thinking is life and life is thinking and they both - with a capital letter!
Value of paragraph "a" and paragraph "b" here - this is the only real problem dialectics as a philosophical science to the subject of the dialectical method. Unless, of course, to understand it not as, for example, "Demiurge" Plato, "God of the Mind" by Aristotle, "Transtsendenntalnogo subject" Kant, etc., (which by itself - no "good" or "bad "), but simply as a man seeking life through education, to get rid of the cult of" abstraction "in order to gain personal" integrity "and vital subjectivity.
1979-80 year.
Valery Molchanov, PhD.
Published: QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE MILLENNIUM. "Anthropological Readings - 2005" (Ekaterinburg, 14-15 May 2005), p. 193-195. Circulation of 700 copies.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий