tags : [[philosophy]] [[Alexander Bogdanov]] [[materialism]]
type : literature
Bogdanov defines [[nature]] as the endlessly unfolding field of their labor-experience
[[labor]], as a whole, is the activity of all of humanity in the historical interconnectedness of all its generations
Human beings change the elements of nature by means of labor
Labor organizes the world for humanity
Labor requires conscious effort
Matter, which we consider real, is the object of collective labor
Bogdanov says that [[Marx]] used the term [[âmaterialismâ]] because he realized that matter is the object of production
Labor must systemically organize to overcome nature
Bogdanov uses the term â[[ideology]]â to refer to the realm of ideal thought
He says that things like human speech arose from labor
Bogdanov asserts that [[philosophy]] arose in an era when to organize meant to rule over, and that the natural product of this was [[idealism]]
Bogdanov characterizes [[materialism]] as the philosophy which arose out of seeing the world through laborious acts, whereas [[idealism]] sees the other half of the picture
[[Democrtius]] believed that the seemingly immaterial aspects of our lives; our wishes, desires, etc. were actually made of atoms
Bogdanov says that there is a method called substitution by which things become almost mystified. The example he gives is a book: the physical properties of a book do not contain knowledge, it is the interpretation of the letters in the book that articulate its knowledge
[[Democrtius]]âs theory of atoms speaks to immaterial phenomena being material, and therefore able to be studied
Bogdanov notes the distinction between symbol and meaning, and that this distinction itself is a form of substitution
He seems to be making a distinction between an explanation of a thing being confused for a thing itself
Bogdanov says that materialism unifies and explains the world of experience through âmatterâ, whereas idealism substitutes ideal elements (spirit, etc.) for material processes
Bogdanov says that âmatter is matter and that is all!â doesnât actually say anything
Bogdanov reiterates what Marx says in Capital regarding [[commodity fetishism]]; that distribution of labor among members of society (ârelationship between peopleâ) is conceived of as a relationship between things (commodities). Commodities are exchanged by virtue of something intrinsic to themselves, not something in society
Bogdanov felt that [[Ernst Mach]] revealed a fetishistic attitude towards matter, but was unable to uncover the source of that fetishism
Bogdanov describes matter as something thatâs socially valid upon which labor can act upon
Bogdanov says that matter that cannot be acted upon is âabsoluteâ and therefore becomes fetishized
Bogdanov mentions that Marx criticizes [[Feuerbach]] (in [[Theses on Feuerbach]]) that the main problem with materialism consisted of seeing the world as an object of contemplation, not as a form of concrete human activity
Bogdanov observes that [[Aristotle]] noticed a connection between activity and matter, but externalized it, i.e. clay becomes bricks for a house, that clay takes the âformâ of bricks with the intention of being a brick for a house. The materialist observes that clay only becomes bricks through labor, and that itâs through conscious human activity that clay becomes a brick for a house
Bogdanov says that Mach criticizes [[Isaac Newton]] for his definition of matter and mass, that it is meaningless, and that all that can be done is to measure the relationship of masses
Bogdanov criticizes people for believing that âtruthâ has anything besides a social meaning. Mathematics has no meaning if there are no people around to give it meaning!
Bogdanov gives a great definition of [[commodity fetishism]] (more like a generalization of fetishism) here:
The nature of fetishism is clear, and it is fetishism all the same, whether abstract or absolute. An idea which is objectively the result of past social activity and a tool for further activity is conceived of as something independent of and aloof from that activity, and this blocks the path to actual cognition of it. The correlation of an idea with the practice that it organizes turns out to be inaccessible to peopleâs thinking.
An idea is the product of abstraction to some degree
[[monism]]: a unified worldview
Bogdanov says that [[philosophy]] (presumably western philosophy) was born in Greek colonies in Asia minor
Philosophy began here as the embracing of non-religious knowledge (what we would today call [[science]])
Bogdanov says that philosophy arising in Asia Minor was no accident: it was a nexus of trade between Europe and Asia broadly speaking
Bogdanov says that the exchange of goods created the first âsecularâ knowledge. Things like geometry and astronomy were used for the purpose of guiding trade
[[Thales]] was an early materialist of sorts, and posited that everything is made of water. This, as Bogdanov says, is a form of substitution: he replaced matter in general with a specific type of matter
Water being significant was also no coincidence: the ancient world was surrounded by water
Up next was [[Anaximander]], who, as Bogdanov says, provided an important next step in abstract thinking: endlessness is what allows things to exist, therefore heat and cold arose from endlessness, and then in turn water
Next was [[Anaximenes]], who believed the basis of things was air, not water
Bogdanov would consider these three part of the tradition of materialism, as they first looked out into the world to understand it (i.e. understand it in terms of matter)
These ancient philosophers had stumbled upon a âprimordial dialecticâ, that the world was one of activity
Enter [[Democrtius]], who was also born in an Ionic trading colony, like the Miletus philosophers
Democritus sought to sum up the knowledge of natural science for his time. Bogdanov believes that he was an influence on [[Aristotle]]
Materialism arose from a study of nature
Two basic methods of human labor are division and combination
[[Anaxagoras]] was yet another ancient philosopher who thought of the world in terms of elements, but he thought that objects could be divided up into an indefinite number of elements. He also believed that all of space was filled with elements, and that empty space didnât exist
Bogdanov goes into a bit about how âatomâ in Greek was translated into Latin as âindividualâ, and that exchange society (i.e. capitalism) is atomistic
Bogdanov tries to show that capitalist society attempts to atomize workers lives, but fails because these individuals have to inherently come together in the market to make society work
[[Leibniz]] saw the world as a series of monads, or a completely self-isolated element. He believed that each monad-individual was, at the end of the day, a completely self-contained entity that didnât exist under the influence of others. Each of these monads operate under a sort of supreme will and only approach something that appears to be communication. This is [[idealism]], for it substitutes the idea of âspiritâ for everything
Contrasting Leibniz, atomism and materialism arenât the same: atoms exist in relation to one another
Matter, unlike monads, is external to a person
Atoms are individualistic but they must be brought together and united into a whole, organized world
[[Epicurus]] believed that the first cause of atoms was falling. He correctly predicted that in empty space, all objects would fall at the same rate, since there could be no resistance in empty space
[[Empedocles]] is credited with being the person who came up with the idea that the four fundamental elements were earth, air, fire, and water
He also believed in two fundamental forces through which matter interact: attraction and repulsion
He believed that when things came together and were purposeful and stable, they would survive, and the inverse would perish or be destroyed (âselectionâ). In this way he could have anticipated [[Darwin]] and [[natural selection]]
Bogdanov criticizes [[Darwin]] because he felt that he didnât quite grasp the social nature of biology, and instead grafted on the idealized capitalist ideology of [[Malthus]]
Competition is only a particular kind of selection
Bogdanov criticizes [[sensualism]], the idea that all we know is sensuous experience, and that this can be universalized. E.g. âexternal objects are nothing more than my mental imagesâ
Bogdanov says that [[solipsism]] is 1. a characteristic example of [[abstract fetishism]] and 2. could only come from thinkers who are cut off from the labor process
For the sensualist [[Protagoras]], the sensory organ undergoes an action in perception, but is also acted upon. For example, a tree cannot be known in itself, but, once observed, you obtain a visual sensation and the tree suddenly exists in relation to you via its visual form in relation to you, but only for that moment
Here we encounter an interesting peculiarity of Protagorean sensualism, which distinguishes him from later sensualists such as Locke, Condillac, and many moderate materialists. To be specific, for Protagoras the subject or the subjectâs sensory organ plays a much more active role. The sensory organ not only undergoes an action from the object from which the sensation is actually produced, but it also acts on the object, generating in it âwhat is sensedâ. So, a tree cannot be known in itself and has no optical image, but when you look at it, not only do you obtain a visual sensation, but the tree itself attains a visual form in relation to you â its optical appearance. Both fully correspond to one another, therefore sensation is always true and always truly conveys what is sensed. But what is sensed, itself, exists in the subject only in that moment and only for that given subject; the object in itself is not accessible to a person. This is a transitional point of view, the result of a situation in which theory is still not sufficiently removed from practice â not sufficiently specialised â to be able to live a completely separate, independent life. Practical people will always be ânaĂŻve realistsâ, i.e. they accept that objects are precisely as they are seen, perceived, and, in general, apprehended. The fetishism of naĂŻve realism consists in that it considers the object to exist in such a form completely inde- pendently of any human practice. The naĂŻve realist supposes that the object in itself is, for example, âquadrangularâ, âtwo yards longâ, âweighing three poundsâ, and does not understand that all these âpropertiesâ can in no way belong to the object âin itselfâ. Humanity, in its labour experience over millennia, had to work out methods of comparing and defining forms, measurement, and weight, in order to make âquadranglesâ, âyardsâ, âpoundsâ, etc. possible. In nature itself â in the instances of elemental resistance which labouring effort comes up against â there are no such things, nor can there be. They are the result of the activity of humanity in overcoming, changing, forming, and organising these resistances. In the hands of fetishists â theoreticians who lock themselves up in their studies and whose narrow specialties have almost nothing to do with the resistance of material objects â this distortion develops further. Their sense of isolation from material objects and their sense of the âindependenceâ of material objects are considerably deeper. They believe that such objects not only exist independently from themselves but that they are so independent as to be completely inaccessible to their minds; only their âoutward appear- anceâ is accessible â masks which they put on before the observer. And a feeling of their individual powerlessness â their personal passivity in relation to the external world â reinforces in them the conviction that this âoutward appear- anceâ is entirely the result of the objectâs action on them, that they themselves only âapprehendâ that action.
The main characteristics of ancient materialism were âunconscious applications of models taken from social practiceâ
All forms of ancient materialism had individualism (i.e. an individualized and atomistic perspective) and individualistic development of society at their core
Bogdanov makes the claim that the collapse of the [[Roman Empire]] was due to a lack of technological innovation due to the existence of [[slavery]]
[[Slavery]] was ineffective as a [[mode of production]] in the end because it required constant wars to obtain new slaves, and therefore commercial activity could not really spring up in such circumstances. Slavery prevents there from being suitable workers
The [[Renaissance]] was born hand-in-hand with the emergence of [[capitalism]]
Ancient philosophy and law provided for means of individualistic thinking, which also goes hand-in-hand with the rise of capitalism
New materialism was born out of this period as well, going along with the desire for a new rationality
This new materialism concerned itself with method rather than systems
[[Francis Bacon]] believed that the goal of knowledge was its practical value. âPrecise and accurate knowledge was a tool that could conquer the world⌠[ushering in a] dominion of humanityâ
There are âpure theoreticiansâ that Bogdanov criticizes, who believe the pursuit of knowledge should be done for its own sake, without regard for what the application of its discovery is
The psychological truth is that if you search for truth you must concentrate all your attention and energy of thought on it alone; you must not be distracted at that moment by any collateral considerations â about what the truth is that one is seeking, where it objectively comes from, the practical tasks that it must help resolve, etc. But this applies generally to all intense and complicated human activity. When turning any delicate part of a machine on a lathe, a mechanic of course should not at that moment be thinking either about the usefulness of this part in the machine or about the usefulness of the machine in production; the mechanic should be thinking only about how to achieve the necessary form. When performing a difficult operation, a surgeon should not think about the benefit of that operation for the patient, oneâs personal reputation as a surgeon, or even about the scientific results which can be obtained from findings connected with it; the surgeon should think solely about the means of successfully accomplishing the operation. However, this is not a reason why the tasks of the turner or the tasks of the surgeon must be self-contained, âpureâ tasks. It is not harmful for either of them to know what they are doing, i.e. to have an idea of those needs that are objectively served by their work. The same can be said about cognition as a means of satisfying the practical needs of society. â p. 99 - 100
No one has ever proven that work is completed better and faster when the worker does not understand its objective meaning.
The value of truth is derived by crystallized social experience. Truth is produced, created out of humanity interacting with objects of nature. New truth replaces old truth
[[Scholasticism]] asserts several given truths, and new truths had to be derived from the truths that were there
[[Empiricism]] (âempirical methodologyâ) asserted that new truths could be discovered without regard for what had already been known. It is the only avenue through which modern materialism could be possible
âpure experienceâ is the idea that correct thinking will lead to truth
Everyday experience is full of contradictions; observations are entangled with many illusions. The scientific method must first of all liberate cognition from such elements; otherwise induction would not be able to lead to truth. This is the idea of âpure experienceâ, which plays a very large role in all further development of philosophical ideas; we will meet it many times in our account. Bacon gave it form in his doctrine about âidolsâ â a word that can be translated both as âfetishâ and âillusionâ. Its meaning is so broad that it contains both of these connotations. Baconâs classification of these âidolsâ is interesting because it so clearly sets forth the revolutionary mood of the new thinking against the entire traditional and conventional system of ideas.
Idola tribus: Idols of the tribe, âdelusions associated with the general conditions of humankind.â Anthropomorphism and anthropocentrism, tendency to understand phenomena of nature as having human characteristics
Idola specus: Idols of the cave, individuals living within themselves and not being able to see outside of it. For example, specialists who believe their specialty is important and essential, while something unrelated isnât
Idola fori: Idols of the marketplace. Commodity fetishism.
Idola theatric: Idols of the theatre. Illusions that arise due to a disguise, âto which reality is subjected at the hands of historians and philosophersâ
Data of experience is organized through the method of generalization
A group voting to do something is attempting to correlate statistical data with organizing experience
Pages 104 - 106 (in PDF) sound like [[cybernetics]]
Abstract analysis is carried out through both observation and experimentation
[[Thomas Hobbes]] is seen as the next modern materialist for Bogdanov
The mathematics of Hobbesâ time arose out of trying to find the relationship of magnitudes (calculus)
For Hobbes, the only things that were real were the things that could be mathematically constructed
[[John Locke]] is next. Bogdanov categorizes him as a sensualist, who thought the most important thing was physical experience
Locke developed a sort of proto-psychology as well
Locke correctly disproved that there was no objective âideaâ, that all knowledge was learned to some degree, and that this could be shown by virtue of the fact that there was a multiplicity of ideas (some people had no concept of God, etc.)
Locke categorized qualities as primary (form, size, position in space), secondary, and tertiary, and that experiencing these was completely subjective
[[David Hume]] is a representative of English sensualism as well, and maybe not materialism
Hume thought that all human experience essentially boils down to individual experience
Hume considered causality to be a succession of perceptions
Causation is a permanent interconnectedness of phenomena
Hume was a proponent of [[skepticism]] which was only an influence on ideas to come later
The early English bourgeoisie supported [[absolute monarchy]] because it led to political and civil stability
The early bourgeoisie and the late aristocracy were often similar people and had similar interests
The early French bourgeoisie originally aligned itself with the monarchy, but the monarchy didnât provide political freedom for the bourgeoisie and was unable to cope with the economic needs of the country. Thus the [[French Revolution]] occurred
French materialism, unlike English materialism, was more about systematizing more than individualizing
The most relevant contribution of the French materialists is that human nature wasnât something immutable, but was something that depended on social context
They also contributed the idea that the ideas of the time are subordinate to the social context in which they arise. Ideas in themselves do not transform society
Individuals are not actively conscious of their interconnectedness through society, and therefore things only appear individualistic
f(x, y) => z
where x
, y
, and z
are natural phenomenaBogdanov asserts that all worldviews are predicated on a view of causailty, fundamentally
Sociomorphism can be defined as:
Thought takes its forms from social practice.
or
The interconnectedness of the elements of experience in cognition has as its basis the correlation of the elements of social activity in the labor process.
This sounds like [[Sartre]]âs âexistence precedes essence.â
The problem, says Bogdanov, is that we make a fetish of the part of the total labor process that we happen to do ourselves, taking it to be the key part. We compound this error by imagining the rest of the process, the social whole, even the whole universe, according to metaphors drawn from our own particular labors. He called this substitution. Philosophy, says Bogdanov, is any system of thought that takes an image from a concrete labor process and explains the rest of the world by via substituting metaphors from what is known toward what is unknown. We image the rest on the pattern of the part we know. Thus: âThe Lord is my shepherdâ is a way of understanding heaven and earth â if one happens to be a shepherd. â Against Social Determinism - Public Seminar
Rendering context...