"Marxism without Marx ...?" - A controversial title was preceded by the editorship to become a teacher Alekseeva, published in the "Arguments" on February 2. The conversation continued to readers, pupils, students, teachers / "replaced by" "April 13, May 14, June 29. He was interested and serious. This is confirmed by the publication of newspapers, and brainstorming sessions that took place in some universities of Sverdlovsk, and letters received by the editors.
Can you live without philosophy, would head on his shoulders and a diploma in his pocket? So was formulated by one of the questions addressed to the editorial board of the student audience. Is it possible without serious ideological training to understand the present, understand the challenges of the future? - Sounded a counter-question. The path of light weight, the formal study of Marxist theory - for it is nothing but a manifestation of class and moral immaturity of young professionals. Most of our readers actively supported this particular point of view.
- "Author" ... Marxism without Marx? "Consistently and accurately made this criticism of negative phenomena in our student life. And he's right ", - said Umarov, Kh. Some participants call disagreed with him: "First of all, it is necessary to identify the causes that led to such a strange situation where Marxism is beginning to explore" without Marx. " And this is the important point was missed Alekseev in his paper "- a student objects to the Faculty of Philosophy USU Nikolayev.
Others agree with the author only partly true. "It seems to me highly controversial author's interpretation of the origins of formalism in the study of students of the Marxist-Leninist theory - the teacher wrote the Sverdlovsk Oblast kultprosvetuchilischa S. Deviatkov. - According to the author, these origins are rooted only in the specific situation of students in our society, in which he is far from the problems of real life or is relevant to them is very indirect, and therefore indifferent to the scientific and theoretical expression of such problems - the theory of Marxism. " But, first, full-time students are exempt us from direct productive labor, and not from labor as such. Secondly, for example, part-time students and part-are in direct connection with the work productive. Meanwhile, the formalism in the study of socio-political disciplines inherent in them, no less than full-time students. Finally, the third, at the same position, not all students and full-time exhibit a similar formalism, but only part of them "- concludes C. nine.
Reasons for the study of Marxism without Marx ... "... Reflecting on them, a number of readers come to this conclusion. "The interest in studying the origins lost in high school", - considers the student UPI Love Toreeva. After all, coming to university, the student continues to "pull strap" the school continues to study lightly, scattered, never to see first hand, and therefore do not understand the essence at the root "- emphasizes B. Karabanko. And for the high school is characterized by "even more .. just learn from textbooks are not Marx and Lenin, as Dostoevsky and Tolstoy," - writes O. doctors.
Well, argue that anything here is difficult. Guys - themselves yesterday's schoolchildren - know what they say. They have focused attention on another aspect of the problem. And the side is very important.
Reminiscing about his meetings with Lenin, Inessa Armand told me that Vladimir Ilyich always keenly interested in the fact, knows whether the young classical Russian literature. When it became clear that they know it is bad enough, and many even indiscriminately rejected as "old regime legacy, Lenin and persistent interest was talking about what we need to know and appreciate the best representatives of Russian pre-revolutionary culture. "After all, Nekrasov whole generation has learned", - said Vladimir Ilyich.
Inner inextricable link native literature and Marxist ideology is clearly expressed in this here thought of Lenin: "Russia suffered Marxism" - he wrote.
This means that in the Marxist world outlook, we find clear and precise answers to those problems and "accursed questions" of human existence that are raised, which is firmly linked his fate and fought over which the noblest and the best representatives of the Russian people: Pushkin and Nekrasov, Gogol and Belinsky, Herzen and Dostoevsky, Radishchev and Tolstoy, Leskov and Pomyalovsky, Kuprin and Chekhov ... And if it is true that the fruits of their searches - in the mighty rise of Lenin's thought and revolutionary acts of the Russian working class, it is also true: without knowledge of their ( Russian classics!) works, therefore, all the drama of their thoughts and hearts, Marxism can be learned only as a set of formulas lifeless, naked scheme. And nothing else!
That's because a lightweight, formal "dating" with Lenin or Dostoevsky, Marx and Herzen, Engels and Tolstoy - the two sides of same coin malopochtennoy. If we speak more precisely, the formal relationship to Marxism, among other things, evidence of lack of patriotism, ie, the indifference not only to the cause of the working class, but also for his people.
We have in our mail, however, and "angry" letters, indicating that this idea was obviously not for everyone.
"After all, without a thorough study of Marxism, the people were great fighters for freedom of the people" - we wrote one student. "And that is not outlining, we do not agree with the lifestyle and way of thinking of the working class - is not true." "After all, no first-hand, on the other literature we have the most basic idea, the result of the works of Marx and Engels, know, understand," - continues the second. "The author is not right that students sit on the neck of the workers. After arriving on the production, you will not philosophize, and going to work, and you will be asked, what have you done in the workplace, and not just a story to read Marx's "- says a third. "Lifestyles, a way of thinking - nice word! Write that, without studying the theory of the working class, we do not support their lifestyle and way of thinking. But they themselves, the workers know whether the theoretical foundations of their society? I am sure that many, even of advanced workers, did not read neither Marx nor Engels nor Lenin, and repeat their well-known phrases and sayings. How can you demand from students, if the workers do not know that? "- Concludes the fourth, signed with the initials" D. TR.
Well, what is known adage states that if geometrical axioms touched the interests of the people, then they probably would have been refuted. A key principle of Marxist theory: to measure their personal interests to those workers - a thing, of course, a difficult and sometimes painful. Anyway, this yardstick to measure other much more easily than myself ...
... We see how in one tight knot tied here and disbelief in the creative potential of the working class, and basic ignorance of the facts, and reverence for a textbook-canon, and now as a consequence, the cartoon representation of the life and faith in himself.
Take the facts. Philosophical work of Lenin's Materialism and Empiric-read work. But when Lenin knew that because of this they are able to successfully argue with the revisionists on the philosophy, contentedly remarked: "That's proof that workers are able to understand such a complicated question! They instinctively understand the proletarian slave ideas prepodnosimye under the guise of "pure science". That was then. And today we have tens of millions of people are studying Marxist theory in the network of political education in the factories and mines, factories and fishing vessels, and not just in higher education.
In case this is, of course, difficulties. Who would disagree. And it is that today few know is the formula of Marxism. Today we need to hold it by the method. Scientist-Bolshevik Vladimir Adoratsky about it says: "Bebel and Bernstein, - said Vladimir Ilich, - buried in a rich legacy of Marx and Engels in four thick volumes, which will be read only by scholars fools like you and me. Necessary to sample the most important, make it accessible to wide circles of workers, to make truly authentic reading of Marx. "
As for the textbook and other compilations ... Here is the opinion of guys: "A rare textbook, full of quotations from the works of Marx, Engels, Lenin, does not distort the meaning of words spoken by the classics at least because of the way of citation," - writes a student UPI Elena Rychin. "Yes, of their work has already been written many books available to the average mind, and they are sufficient to mark a student's record-book. Yes, these books - the product of a human head .. but not your "- notes a student of the philosophical faculty of USU H. Umarov.
And it is profoundly true! He lived in ancient times, a great scholar, whose name was Euclid. He gave lessons in the king, and when he wished to quickly and easily master the science, the scientist said: "There is no royal road to geometry!". Like all science, we will add. With a hint of this historical fact, nearly two thousand years later the great German philosopher Hegel observed: contrary to the Prevention of Euclid is still a lot of fans of an easy life. Their "royal road to science" is to read reviews of philosophical works, and perhaps the preface and the first paragraphs of these works. However, you can not think of another! - We have thought it.
But a lesson well learned that many of our readers. "You ask:" Marxism without Marx? "And I answer -" No! "- Wrote in his letter to the student UPI I. Vadim. - Those who have studied philosophy at the tops, by comments in the textbook. can only be pitied. Any source of the classics of Marxism-Leninism - is an interesting thing. Conversation with an intelligent man is always helpful. And here goes the conversation is with you, and at the highest level of confidence and focus. "
But what exactly is it, this confidential talk?
Certificate Georgiy V. Chicherin: "Modifying the end of his own thought - that's what everyone learned in dealing with Vladimir Ilyich. Lenin always make fun of his inimitable humor, all vague, ambiguous and nedodumannuyu thought. His companion learned from him that every human thought must be diligent work, and not irresponsibly samouslazhdeniem or bluff. Let everyone learns from Lenin that thought is far more than the mood and instinct. It must be logically carried through. " (Emphasis mine - VM)
Who faithfully THOUGHT - THAT GOOD WORK! And vice versa. - Here is the lesson we Euclid, Hegel and Lenin.
A "think in good faith" - it means to always see the real contradictions of life, resolve and not be afraid of them. Could this be the answer, and is that of "angry" participants in our debate, who believed that the production of asked you what you did to "workplace" and not that "of Marx's" read ...
The ability to do their job competently, creatively, and not a pattern people have long called the "mind". Mind - the ability or the ability to resolve conflicts. The science of this ability and acts of materialist dialectics. "Living soul of Marxism," calling her by Lenin.
In search of reasons why sometimes absorbed only the "anatomy" of Marxist science, its skeleton, skeleton, but not mastered her "living soul", our readers have come quite naturally to the problems of teaching. The result of their thoughts can be expressed as follows: if a student is studying Marxism in isolation from Marx, in fact a lecturer in isolation from his life and teaching.
Characteristically, if so few hesitant and timid students say, teachers - in a loud voice, perseverance and self-criticism. "If you look a little closer, it is easy to see that other teachers of social sciences ... err different caliber craftsmanship" - says student of the Institute of Advanced Studies at USU N. Sannikov. "If the teacher ... the day does not do hard, sometimes painful mental work .., it will not be able to captivate audiences and student", - said PhD I. Manuilov. "If you is immoral to formally adopt the Marxist philosophy, it is even more immoral to formally teach it" - sums up A. Trachtenberg.
The problem is, of course, is not easy. And to understand it, at least to keep in mind the following: the ratio of teacher to student - this is an objective social relations that develops between them regarding the development of Marxist science and its relationship to real life. Remember it should be to clearly define that here depends on the individual characteristics of a particular teacher or student, and that, on the other hand, does not depend on them.
Here's an example. Final examination on scientific communism crowned ideological Marxist-Leninist training of students. Already many years on it I hear fairly comprehensive and lively answers about communism. But here is what is usually wary and depressing. As a rule, even the most mature graduate, brilliantly explaining what you need to build communism, quite often ceases before the question: "And what communism need you most?" Sometimes, though, that is not silent. One of the graduates heard this unconventional question, at first worried, then rushed about, and when re-issue burst into tears, taking it ... for the provocation by the examiners.
To know what communism is needed myself, equally clear and clearer understanding of "what is communism and how to create it? Otherwise, deletes all the criteria that distinguish the Marxist-Leninist ideology from all imitations of it, from the very ordinary middle class. Necessary to hear and reply: "Communism, we need to live well." To a request to clarify what it means to "live well", a graduate with a sense of absolute self-righteousness replied: "It's when you get to his needs."
But the main result of centuries of reflection, struggle and labor (not just the five-year course in high school!) Generations and generations of people is that for a person by the highest and most interesting object in the universe is all the same person. With all its "imperfections." This is the essence of Marxist social ideal. Under the "man" here refers to the mass of people, most of the people, which consists of workers as in the field of physical and mental work in the field. Free development of each as a condition for the free development of all - this is the main conclusion of scientific communism, the main pathos of this science. Who does not understand this, he does not understand Marxism nothing, because doomed to be confused in life, and science goals of Communism - with its means.
As so happens that brilliantly learned what it consists of Marxist science (= ideal communism), at the finish studying the student forgets the most important: what is it? To explain this is only the individual teacher or a weak methodological training would be very naive. Still, that does not explain social phenomena in sociology, and psychology.
Explanation seen what it is. Turning to the teacher, the student enters into the spiritual social relations - with the working class as a whole. Therefore, from the very first year student should not have to deal with someone, and a teacher of Marxist science as such, with whose help he turned to the real problems of real life.
But, alas! He has a deal with the teacher, "one piece" that the debt service for each subsequent year, sends his ward not to the working class and the class teacher ... "another subject" (the party's history, philosophy, political economy, ethics, aesthetics, scientific atheism and scientific communism). Each of them cultivates his plot, is responsible for his Marxism in good faith by sharing with the student. And it turns out that the knowledge of Marxism as such with the student "share" to no one. Paradoxically, the fact!
In fact, our first student studying philosophy. He firmly in mind that this is treated in the science of the "most general laws of nature, society and thinking." Becoming older, he starts studying political economy, a well-learned that this science of the production, distribution, exchange and consumption of material goods in society. And finally, completing his education, he is well to remember that scientific communism is studying the "socio-political patterns of movement of humanity towards Communism" ... he gets the estimate and a diploma, having survived the first joyful emotions, our students eventually can not help but wonder question: well, I knew the laws that are subject to all matter in motion. I know economic laws, which moves the material life of people, their socio-political life. But the thing: if I knew, but how do I live?
What is puzzling occurs often left without a qualified answer, suggests that the answer to the question of human nature, his sense of being and purpose in this world of yesterday (and today), students often do not seek to Marx and Freud, or at the hip or in philosophy or literature of existentialism, or, who are now fashionable, Eastern religions, at the worst in the Gospel or in the "atheistic" philistinism of every kind. "Holy place" is never empty. There must be something to fill the vacuum that inevitably arises from the division of labor in the ideological preparation of the student. It's - the payment for the "quiet revolution" taking place in front of everyone, namely: when the young soul learns not to "parts" look and see them from the position of the whole, but on the contrary, the whole thing to know and see only, and only from the standpoint "parts" ...
Is it legitimate to split? .. And if you imagine it like this: remove what hinders match the internal logic of the Marxist-Leninist ideology and the external form of organization of the pedagogical process?
Yes, I am exactly that. The fact that the entire multi-ladder Marxist science student must be completed together with one teacher. And therefore estimate its unique ideological work should be only on the final result: in fact, whether the young people today see our world from the perspective of the working class, showing the outlook is not so much in words but in the feelings, thoughts and deeds.
If it is true that the student does not have royal road to science, then even more so not for his teacher. Yes, and can not be!
B. SILENT
Scientific Secretary of the Ural
Branch Philosophical Society USSR Academy of Sciences.
"In place!", 10 July 1985, circulation 155,000.
Can you live without philosophy, would head on his shoulders and a diploma in his pocket? So was formulated by one of the questions addressed to the editorial board of the student audience. Is it possible without serious ideological training to understand the present, understand the challenges of the future? - Sounded a counter-question. The path of light weight, the formal study of Marxist theory - for it is nothing but a manifestation of class and moral immaturity of young professionals. Most of our readers actively supported this particular point of view.
- "Author" ... Marxism without Marx? "Consistently and accurately made this criticism of negative phenomena in our student life. And he's right ", - said Umarov, Kh. Some participants call disagreed with him: "First of all, it is necessary to identify the causes that led to such a strange situation where Marxism is beginning to explore" without Marx. " And this is the important point was missed Alekseev in his paper "- a student objects to the Faculty of Philosophy USU Nikolayev.
Others agree with the author only partly true. "It seems to me highly controversial author's interpretation of the origins of formalism in the study of students of the Marxist-Leninist theory - the teacher wrote the Sverdlovsk Oblast kultprosvetuchilischa S. Deviatkov. - According to the author, these origins are rooted only in the specific situation of students in our society, in which he is far from the problems of real life or is relevant to them is very indirect, and therefore indifferent to the scientific and theoretical expression of such problems - the theory of Marxism. " But, first, full-time students are exempt us from direct productive labor, and not from labor as such. Secondly, for example, part-time students and part-are in direct connection with the work productive. Meanwhile, the formalism in the study of socio-political disciplines inherent in them, no less than full-time students. Finally, the third, at the same position, not all students and full-time exhibit a similar formalism, but only part of them "- concludes C. nine.
Reasons for the study of Marxism without Marx ... "... Reflecting on them, a number of readers come to this conclusion. "The interest in studying the origins lost in high school", - considers the student UPI Love Toreeva. After all, coming to university, the student continues to "pull strap" the school continues to study lightly, scattered, never to see first hand, and therefore do not understand the essence at the root "- emphasizes B. Karabanko. And for the high school is characterized by "even more .. just learn from textbooks are not Marx and Lenin, as Dostoevsky and Tolstoy," - writes O. doctors.
Well, argue that anything here is difficult. Guys - themselves yesterday's schoolchildren - know what they say. They have focused attention on another aspect of the problem. And the side is very important.
Reminiscing about his meetings with Lenin, Inessa Armand told me that Vladimir Ilyich always keenly interested in the fact, knows whether the young classical Russian literature. When it became clear that they know it is bad enough, and many even indiscriminately rejected as "old regime legacy, Lenin and persistent interest was talking about what we need to know and appreciate the best representatives of Russian pre-revolutionary culture. "After all, Nekrasov whole generation has learned", - said Vladimir Ilyich.
Inner inextricable link native literature and Marxist ideology is clearly expressed in this here thought of Lenin: "Russia suffered Marxism" - he wrote.
This means that in the Marxist world outlook, we find clear and precise answers to those problems and "accursed questions" of human existence that are raised, which is firmly linked his fate and fought over which the noblest and the best representatives of the Russian people: Pushkin and Nekrasov, Gogol and Belinsky, Herzen and Dostoevsky, Radishchev and Tolstoy, Leskov and Pomyalovsky, Kuprin and Chekhov ... And if it is true that the fruits of their searches - in the mighty rise of Lenin's thought and revolutionary acts of the Russian working class, it is also true: without knowledge of their ( Russian classics!) works, therefore, all the drama of their thoughts and hearts, Marxism can be learned only as a set of formulas lifeless, naked scheme. And nothing else!
That's because a lightweight, formal "dating" with Lenin or Dostoevsky, Marx and Herzen, Engels and Tolstoy - the two sides of same coin malopochtennoy. If we speak more precisely, the formal relationship to Marxism, among other things, evidence of lack of patriotism, ie, the indifference not only to the cause of the working class, but also for his people.
We have in our mail, however, and "angry" letters, indicating that this idea was obviously not for everyone.
"After all, without a thorough study of Marxism, the people were great fighters for freedom of the people" - we wrote one student. "And that is not outlining, we do not agree with the lifestyle and way of thinking of the working class - is not true." "After all, no first-hand, on the other literature we have the most basic idea, the result of the works of Marx and Engels, know, understand," - continues the second. "The author is not right that students sit on the neck of the workers. After arriving on the production, you will not philosophize, and going to work, and you will be asked, what have you done in the workplace, and not just a story to read Marx's "- says a third. "Lifestyles, a way of thinking - nice word! Write that, without studying the theory of the working class, we do not support their lifestyle and way of thinking. But they themselves, the workers know whether the theoretical foundations of their society? I am sure that many, even of advanced workers, did not read neither Marx nor Engels nor Lenin, and repeat their well-known phrases and sayings. How can you demand from students, if the workers do not know that? "- Concludes the fourth, signed with the initials" D. TR.
Well, what is known adage states that if geometrical axioms touched the interests of the people, then they probably would have been refuted. A key principle of Marxist theory: to measure their personal interests to those workers - a thing, of course, a difficult and sometimes painful. Anyway, this yardstick to measure other much more easily than myself ...
... We see how in one tight knot tied here and disbelief in the creative potential of the working class, and basic ignorance of the facts, and reverence for a textbook-canon, and now as a consequence, the cartoon representation of the life and faith in himself.
Take the facts. Philosophical work of Lenin's Materialism and Empiric-read work. But when Lenin knew that because of this they are able to successfully argue with the revisionists on the philosophy, contentedly remarked: "That's proof that workers are able to understand such a complicated question! They instinctively understand the proletarian slave ideas prepodnosimye under the guise of "pure science". That was then. And today we have tens of millions of people are studying Marxist theory in the network of political education in the factories and mines, factories and fishing vessels, and not just in higher education.
In case this is, of course, difficulties. Who would disagree. And it is that today few know is the formula of Marxism. Today we need to hold it by the method. Scientist-Bolshevik Vladimir Adoratsky about it says: "Bebel and Bernstein, - said Vladimir Ilich, - buried in a rich legacy of Marx and Engels in four thick volumes, which will be read only by scholars fools like you and me. Necessary to sample the most important, make it accessible to wide circles of workers, to make truly authentic reading of Marx. "
As for the textbook and other compilations ... Here is the opinion of guys: "A rare textbook, full of quotations from the works of Marx, Engels, Lenin, does not distort the meaning of words spoken by the classics at least because of the way of citation," - writes a student UPI Elena Rychin. "Yes, of their work has already been written many books available to the average mind, and they are sufficient to mark a student's record-book. Yes, these books - the product of a human head .. but not your "- notes a student of the philosophical faculty of USU H. Umarov.
And it is profoundly true! He lived in ancient times, a great scholar, whose name was Euclid. He gave lessons in the king, and when he wished to quickly and easily master the science, the scientist said: "There is no royal road to geometry!". Like all science, we will add. With a hint of this historical fact, nearly two thousand years later the great German philosopher Hegel observed: contrary to the Prevention of Euclid is still a lot of fans of an easy life. Their "royal road to science" is to read reviews of philosophical works, and perhaps the preface and the first paragraphs of these works. However, you can not think of another! - We have thought it.
But a lesson well learned that many of our readers. "You ask:" Marxism without Marx? "And I answer -" No! "- Wrote in his letter to the student UPI I. Vadim. - Those who have studied philosophy at the tops, by comments in the textbook. can only be pitied. Any source of the classics of Marxism-Leninism - is an interesting thing. Conversation with an intelligent man is always helpful. And here goes the conversation is with you, and at the highest level of confidence and focus. "
But what exactly is it, this confidential talk?
Certificate Georgiy V. Chicherin: "Modifying the end of his own thought - that's what everyone learned in dealing with Vladimir Ilyich. Lenin always make fun of his inimitable humor, all vague, ambiguous and nedodumannuyu thought. His companion learned from him that every human thought must be diligent work, and not irresponsibly samouslazhdeniem or bluff. Let everyone learns from Lenin that thought is far more than the mood and instinct. It must be logically carried through. " (Emphasis mine - VM)
Who faithfully THOUGHT - THAT GOOD WORK! And vice versa. - Here is the lesson we Euclid, Hegel and Lenin.
A "think in good faith" - it means to always see the real contradictions of life, resolve and not be afraid of them. Could this be the answer, and is that of "angry" participants in our debate, who believed that the production of asked you what you did to "workplace" and not that "of Marx's" read ...
The ability to do their job competently, creatively, and not a pattern people have long called the "mind". Mind - the ability or the ability to resolve conflicts. The science of this ability and acts of materialist dialectics. "Living soul of Marxism," calling her by Lenin.
In search of reasons why sometimes absorbed only the "anatomy" of Marxist science, its skeleton, skeleton, but not mastered her "living soul", our readers have come quite naturally to the problems of teaching. The result of their thoughts can be expressed as follows: if a student is studying Marxism in isolation from Marx, in fact a lecturer in isolation from his life and teaching.
Characteristically, if so few hesitant and timid students say, teachers - in a loud voice, perseverance and self-criticism. "If you look a little closer, it is easy to see that other teachers of social sciences ... err different caliber craftsmanship" - says student of the Institute of Advanced Studies at USU N. Sannikov. "If the teacher ... the day does not do hard, sometimes painful mental work .., it will not be able to captivate audiences and student", - said PhD I. Manuilov. "If you is immoral to formally adopt the Marxist philosophy, it is even more immoral to formally teach it" - sums up A. Trachtenberg.
The problem is, of course, is not easy. And to understand it, at least to keep in mind the following: the ratio of teacher to student - this is an objective social relations that develops between them regarding the development of Marxist science and its relationship to real life. Remember it should be to clearly define that here depends on the individual characteristics of a particular teacher or student, and that, on the other hand, does not depend on them.
Here's an example. Final examination on scientific communism crowned ideological Marxist-Leninist training of students. Already many years on it I hear fairly comprehensive and lively answers about communism. But here is what is usually wary and depressing. As a rule, even the most mature graduate, brilliantly explaining what you need to build communism, quite often ceases before the question: "And what communism need you most?" Sometimes, though, that is not silent. One of the graduates heard this unconventional question, at first worried, then rushed about, and when re-issue burst into tears, taking it ... for the provocation by the examiners.
To know what communism is needed myself, equally clear and clearer understanding of "what is communism and how to create it? Otherwise, deletes all the criteria that distinguish the Marxist-Leninist ideology from all imitations of it, from the very ordinary middle class. Necessary to hear and reply: "Communism, we need to live well." To a request to clarify what it means to "live well", a graduate with a sense of absolute self-righteousness replied: "It's when you get to his needs."
But the main result of centuries of reflection, struggle and labor (not just the five-year course in high school!) Generations and generations of people is that for a person by the highest and most interesting object in the universe is all the same person. With all its "imperfections." This is the essence of Marxist social ideal. Under the "man" here refers to the mass of people, most of the people, which consists of workers as in the field of physical and mental work in the field. Free development of each as a condition for the free development of all - this is the main conclusion of scientific communism, the main pathos of this science. Who does not understand this, he does not understand Marxism nothing, because doomed to be confused in life, and science goals of Communism - with its means.
As so happens that brilliantly learned what it consists of Marxist science (= ideal communism), at the finish studying the student forgets the most important: what is it? To explain this is only the individual teacher or a weak methodological training would be very naive. Still, that does not explain social phenomena in sociology, and psychology.
Explanation seen what it is. Turning to the teacher, the student enters into the spiritual social relations - with the working class as a whole. Therefore, from the very first year student should not have to deal with someone, and a teacher of Marxist science as such, with whose help he turned to the real problems of real life.
But, alas! He has a deal with the teacher, "one piece" that the debt service for each subsequent year, sends his ward not to the working class and the class teacher ... "another subject" (the party's history, philosophy, political economy, ethics, aesthetics, scientific atheism and scientific communism). Each of them cultivates his plot, is responsible for his Marxism in good faith by sharing with the student. And it turns out that the knowledge of Marxism as such with the student "share" to no one. Paradoxically, the fact!
In fact, our first student studying philosophy. He firmly in mind that this is treated in the science of the "most general laws of nature, society and thinking." Becoming older, he starts studying political economy, a well-learned that this science of the production, distribution, exchange and consumption of material goods in society. And finally, completing his education, he is well to remember that scientific communism is studying the "socio-political patterns of movement of humanity towards Communism" ... he gets the estimate and a diploma, having survived the first joyful emotions, our students eventually can not help but wonder question: well, I knew the laws that are subject to all matter in motion. I know economic laws, which moves the material life of people, their socio-political life. But the thing: if I knew, but how do I live?
What is puzzling occurs often left without a qualified answer, suggests that the answer to the question of human nature, his sense of being and purpose in this world of yesterday (and today), students often do not seek to Marx and Freud, or at the hip or in philosophy or literature of existentialism, or, who are now fashionable, Eastern religions, at the worst in the Gospel or in the "atheistic" philistinism of every kind. "Holy place" is never empty. There must be something to fill the vacuum that inevitably arises from the division of labor in the ideological preparation of the student. It's - the payment for the "quiet revolution" taking place in front of everyone, namely: when the young soul learns not to "parts" look and see them from the position of the whole, but on the contrary, the whole thing to know and see only, and only from the standpoint "parts" ...
Is it legitimate to split? .. And if you imagine it like this: remove what hinders match the internal logic of the Marxist-Leninist ideology and the external form of organization of the pedagogical process?
Yes, I am exactly that. The fact that the entire multi-ladder Marxist science student must be completed together with one teacher. And therefore estimate its unique ideological work should be only on the final result: in fact, whether the young people today see our world from the perspective of the working class, showing the outlook is not so much in words but in the feelings, thoughts and deeds.
If it is true that the student does not have royal road to science, then even more so not for his teacher. Yes, and can not be!
B. SILENT
Scientific Secretary of the Ural
Branch Philosophical Society USSR Academy of Sciences.
"In place!", 10 July 1985, circulation 155,000.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий