The Scientific Path of Philosophy - A Study on the Scientific System of Marxist Philosophy

Author: Huang Renshen
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2005-10-01
Features: This collection of essays revolves around a central theme: building philosophy as a science. I titled the book The Scientific Path of Philosophy—A Study of the Scientific System of Marxist Philosophy, intending to emphasize the scientific nature of Marxist philosophy. Since the reform and opening-up, I have written numerous articles, and in essence, they can all be summarized by this statement: building philosophy as a science. Therefore, I took the opportunity when the Beijing Normal University Press invited me to publish a specialized collection of essays to compile the relevant articles. Regarding the discipline construction of philosophy, I have some preliminary opinions that I would like to share. The discipline construction of philosophy is essentially the construction of the modern form of Marxist philosophy. In the 1980s, due to the implementation of the "Hundred Flowers Policy," the discipline construction of philosophy was already placed at the forefront of the philosophical community, but some prevailing views were not conducive to the construction of the new form. One view holds that studying the system of philosophy is a manifestation of dogmatism. Marxist philosophy is a guide for action and practice, not a disciplinary system in academic circles. Another view attaches great importance to the ideological system but completely denies the traditional system—dialectical materialism and historical materialism—and advocates replacing it with a completely new system. Many scholars also propose starting with the traditional system, absorbing its strengths while avoiding its weaknesses, and constructing a new scientific system of Marxist philosophy based on the development of the times and science. However, this force has not been well organized, and its organized strength has not been fully utilized. As a result, the effectiveness of philosophy discipline construction over the past two decades has been insignificant. This situation should attract the attention of the philosophical community. I would like to propose the following points:
1. The discipline construction of philosophy is urgent. Discipline construction is not merely the teaching need of college teachers but also a crucial part of the development of the history of human cognition and science. The history of human cognition is ultimately the history of expanding and deepening the understanding of the objective world to meet practical needs, as well as the history of the continuous emergence, birth, and development of various disciplines at different levels and fields. Disciplines are not scattered; by today, they have largely formed a pyramid-like scientific system, though it is not yet complete or rigorous. If we compare it to a pyramid built from massive stones, it is evident that many parts are empty, some stones are tilted and unstable, and the boundaries of some stones are vague. What is particularly concerning is that there is still no consensus on what it is. People may agree that it is philosophy, but the question is: what kind of philosophy is it? Worldview (ontology), epistemology, practice theory, human philosophy, or methodology? Which philosophical school does it belong to? Marxist philosophy, logical positivism, existentialism, pragmatism, or postmodernism? Academician Qian Xuesen believes it is dialectical materialism, and I fully agree with this view. However, his perspective is not recognized by Western philosophers, nor by many Chinese philosophers or Marxist philosophers in China. In summary, because philosophy has not yet developed into a science, the apex of the scientific system today remains obscure, shrouded in clouds and fog. With the development of science to this day, philosophy, as a discipline, has reached a stage where it can become a science, and this depends on the discipline construction of philosophy.
2. The academic community has already recognized the disciplinary nature of philosophy, which is a promising starting point for its discipline construction. Philosophy has existed for over two thousand years and can be considered one of the oldest disciplines. However, it is puzzling that to this day, there is no relatively agreed-upon definition, and the object of philosophy is also interpreted differently by different people. Nevertheless, it is a discipline, and people practically acknowledge this. In universities around the world, there are courses or disciplines related to philosophy, and teaching and research institutions named after the discipline of philosophy, such as departments or research institutes of philosophy. In China, the professional catalog of the national education department and the library classification catalog both list philosophy as the leading discipline. It seems that philosophy, as a discipline, is universally recognized. This is a starting point for the discipline construction of philosophy, because since it is recognized as a discipline, people have a certain common understanding of its object and scope, and its content is always correct or incorrect. If it continues to develop, it may become a science.
3. The time has come to build philosophy as a science. Disciplines will inevitably become sciences sooner or later. For Marxists, philosophy was once a science—Marxist philosophy. In the former Soviet Union and socialist countries like China, everyone recognized Marxist philosophy as a science, and its birth was a revolutionary transformation in the history of philosophy. However, this has not been recognized by the capitalist world. After the collapse of socialism in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, this view was also denied in these countries. Even today in China, although most people still hold this belief, many others, including some who previously did, no longer do. If one of the conditions for a discipline to become a science is the recognition of the majority of scholars worldwide, then Marxist philosophy has not yet met this condition. However, I believe that today is the right time to build philosophy as a science. Perhaps philosophy will only finally become a science when the world enters the communist era, but this does not prevent it from being built as a science in the meantime. Several conditions indicate that the time has come: first, Marxist philosophy has already attempted to transform philosophy into a science over the past 150 years. Regardless of the degree of success, this was a great experiment in the history of philosophy, and its lessons have provided valuable inspiration for future generations. Second, natural and social sciences have made significant progress, providing sufficient intellectual material for the scientificization of philosophy. Third, the philosophical community has conducted long-term research on discipline construction and reached some consensus, which offers beneficial guidance for constructing the scientific form of philosophy in the 21st century. In summary, although there is still disagreement and no consensus on the discipline construction of philosophy, a strong force that pushes philosophy to become a science is gradually emerging and is no longer just a distant ideal. In this context, as I advance with the progress of philosophy, I have inevitably adopted a systematic approach, writing several articles on the discipline construction of philosophy. This collection of essays is compiled from such articles. The collection is divided into two parts: the first part explores some fundamental issues of discipline construction from both theoretical and historical perspectives, while the second part discusses and elaborates on several philosophical principles as a science. This collection roughly reflects my efforts and contributions to the discipline construction of philosophy over the past two decades.
There is a popular view on the differences between Chinese and Western cultures, which holds that Western culture emphasizes analysis while Chinese culture emphasizes synthesis; Western culture emphasizes subject-object dualism, while Chinese culture emphasizes harmony between heaven and humanity; the characteristic of Western culture in scientific research is classified and categorized study, while the characteristic of Chinese culture is holistic grasping, which is an advantage of Chinese culture, and modern Western culture has also shifted from analytical research to comprehensive research. It cannot be said that this view is without reason, as both Chinese and Western cultures have their own characteristics. However, to believe that Chinese characteristics are strengths rather than weaknesses, while Western characteristics are weaknesses rather than strengths, is biased. Traditional Chinese culture excessively emphasizes holistic research while neglecting classified and categorized research, which is one of its major shortcomings. Since the mid-19th century, China has begun to learn from the West and has gradually developed disciplinary education, conducting classified and categorized research on the objective world, thereby making up for this shortcoming. Today, we have a splendid culture that increasingly approaches the level of world culture. Building philosophy as a science is precisely the inherent requirement of this historical trend. Only by building other disciplines well can we holistically understand and master the overall structure of the human scientific system. Moreover, philosophical research itself is a form of holistic and comprehensive research. In reality, any science is both a classified and microscopic study within its scope of objects, and at the same time, a macroscopic and comprehensive study within that scope. Division and integration, analysis and synthesis, microscopic and macroscopic research—these are never divisible at any time or in any context. Our research may focus on one aspect when necessary under certain conditions. Any approach thatly emphasizes one aspect while neglecting or denying the other is wrong and impractical. Philosophy, as a discipline, should particularly embody this spirit of combining division and integration.
I hope this collection of essays can play a certain role in promoting the discipline construction of philosophy.