Reality And Logic--on Marx's Reversion Of Hegelian Dialectics And Its Significence

Hegel was a western metaphysics comprehensive synthesist, while Marxism philosophy reversed the traditon of western metaphysics. In a certain sense, Marx was Hegel's direct successor and critic. Then, what's the relation among western metaphysics, Hegelianism and Marxism philosophy? From this perspective, we have found that one of the problems that Marxism philosophy needed to solve is how to understand our world. The understanding of the world formed logocentrism tradition of western metaphysics. Hegel set the reconciliation of philosophy and reality as its highest goal, and give it the lot by using logics as its core. In essence, Marxism philosophy began with the rebellion of Hegel's relation of logic and reality and criticized the logocentrism tradition of western metaphysics. Marx established the status of reality independence by reversing the relation of logic and reality in Hegelianism. Marx founded new materialism and dialectics with its distinctive features. This article is to explore the contents of reversion, and the innovation of materialism and dialectics.This paper could be divided into four chapters.Chapter one is introduction. Among western scholars, Althusser played an important role in the study of reversion. He believed that the understanding of reversion had something to do with special differences of Marxism philosophy. As a result, he thought it was vital to Marxism philosophy, which reflectd that we paid great attention to this issue. But his conclusion was to cancel this problem. He had a set of theoretical arguments on cancellation of reversion. Althusser divided marxism theory into ideology stage and science stage by the year of 1845 as its limit. He also applied the concept of epistemological break for reference. He also put forward far determinism of contravention. Therefore, he drew a conclusion that it was the structure that differed Marxist dialectics from Hegelian dialectics. Reversion was just a metaphorical statement.This article criticized Althusser. To begin with, it was still open to discussion that Althusser laid The Economic and Philosophy Manuscripts of 1844 as the ideology stage, which he claimed based on Marx's criticism on ideology. However, he misinterpreted Marx's ideology. Secondly, Althusser took his understanding of historical materialism as the measure of the maturity of Marx's whole thoughts which was false. Thirdly, communism was the the unification of purposiveness and regularity, and the unification of necessity and inevitability. He separated the purposiveness of the communism from the whole Marxism theory. Last but not the least, Marx's statement that mankind were in existence, reality was that people's nature played a part in the object-prodcut by practice, was the premise to understand the essence of Marx's materialism.The traditional textbook clearly stated that"Hegelian dialectics is one that is upside down, and its dialectics thought is likely to be stifled by its conservative idealism. But the traditional textbook interpreted reversion as reversion on material ontology. That did not meet Marx's intention.Domestic scholars provided us with fruitful studies on the statement of reversion, which generally could be divided into the following categories: the first category was to follow the undersanding of traditional textbook; the second category of reversion was interpreted as reversion on the basis of practice; in the third category, the reversion was put forward by Li Deshuan, it was reversed from Hegelian dialectics of self-consciousness to Marx's dialectics of human learning; the fourth category was based on Althusser, and its objective was confined in the Althusser's interpretation on reversion understanding; the fifth category contained author's independent thinking based on Althusser's understanding of reversion; the sixth category inquired into Marx's multiple reversion on Hegel from the angle of world view and from the essence of Marxism philosophy.Chapter two was the reversion of reality and logic. What's the relation between reality and logic? Western philosophers started from natural philosophy in ancient Greece. Plato had the basis of ontology. Derrida called the metaphysics as logocentrism, and Hegel was the typical representative of logocentrism. One of the philosophy goals was to find objective basis in the real life. Hegel once stated clearly that,"the highest goal of philosophy lies in the consistent of thought and experience, and reach the reconciliation of nationality and reality."In Hegel's view, the relation of logic and reality was the basis of logic and reality.Marx's critique on Hegel could be summarized in two aspects, one was to criticize premise of Hegel's philosophy, another one was to criticize the course caused by this premise, and to criticize the mystery of this philophy. Marx's critique on Hegel's philosophy premise underwent three satges, that is, specific criticism, criticism on general philosophy and ideology. Marx reversed western tradition by criticizing Hegel. In Marx's opinion, reality had its independence, and didn't need logic as its foundation and essence. On the contrary, Marx thought logic was no more than the logic reality itself.Marx's reversion on Hegelian dialectics had great significance. Marx became a materialist, and dialectics became materialistic dialectics. In that way, how to understand Marx's materialism? How to understand that materialistic dialectics differed from idealist dialectics? This was the main contents of chapter three and four.Chapter three delt with the achieved materialism connotaion on the basis of reversion. By Marx's critique on French materialism in the 18th century, Marx made critique on traditional materialism. Marx reversed the relation of reality and logic in Hegelian philosophy, confirmed the independence of reality, and completed the materialism diversion.This dissertation also stated the differences of reality and matter, reality and production. The material ontology in the traditional textbook could summarized in three aspects. Firstly, material ontology was the dogmatism on the level of pre-Kantian. Secondly, material ontology could not solve the initiative problem. These problems could be well solved if we transform matter into reality. Meanwhile, reality was in more accordance with the the essence of Marxism philosophy. There are many different understandings on the essence of Marxism philosophy. Material ontology was the way of understanding in the traditional textbook. Under the perspective of historical materialism, many scholars held that the essence of Marxism philosophy was the production process ontology. We were ascertain that making produciton process as Marxism philosophy ontology fit the need of the essence of Marxism philosophy. If so, what's the relation of reality and production process ontology? In Marxism philosophy, the mere reality was production reality; that is the relation of reality and production process. The reason why we brought forth the concept of reality was that there was no such one in the history of western philosophy. How could Marx put forward such a concept without any foundation? Because Marx reversed the relation of logic and reality in Hegelian philosophy, and founded the possibility of reality itself. Besides, the property of production process was achieved by defining the concept of reality. Only understand the property of reality can we understand the property of production process. Hence, we can discuss reality and production process separately.Hegel transformed the connotation of"entity"in traditional philosophy, transformed"entity"to"subject", which was also his famous proposition"entity is subject","entity"had independence,"subject"had initiative. In a sense, we might say Marx inherited Hegel's view of"entity is subject". In Marx's view, reality was subject. So practise had some essential connotation with reality. That would be reflected in two sides, one was that practice was the means of huamn nature, another one was practise realized reality.Chapter four mainly discussed the materialistic dialectics traits on the foundation of reversion. Hegelian dialectics was the self-movement of logic, while other movements were no more than the externalization, alienation and performance of self-movement logic. Marx reversed Hegelian dialectics, and changed the logical subject in Hegelian dialectics to the reality subject in Marx's dialectics. Marx believed that reality had its independence, his dialectics was the dialectical movement of the real things.Dialectics was called the movement of the real things by both Marx and Hegel. The differences were as the following. In Hegel's view, the self-movement of things were externalization or alienation of its logics. His logics was his system foundation. Logics was mental currency in Hegelian philosophy system, and everything served for his logics. So the self-movement of logics had its strict reference criterion. Marx figured that things had their own logic, it was the logic that was truly into the self-movement of things and had no external standard of logics. Eventually, Hegelian dialectics had the suspicion of using logic formula compared with Marx's dialectics.Hegelian dialectics was the common movement of all dialectics. Thus, self-movement of logic in Hegelian dialectics would became the self-movement of reality in Marx's dialectics. So the rational inner core in Hegelian dialectics that Marx inherited was common movement in dialectics. The differences of applying dialectics lied in the great number of data history, intuition and abstract force as Marx once had said.