MAO ZEDONG

2 Lecture Notes on
Dialectical Materialism

(p. 265) [p. 187]! Chapter One: Idealism and

Materialism
19382

This chapter will discuss the following questions:

(1) The two opposed forces within philosophy;
(2) The differences between idealism and materialism;
(3) The origins of the emergence and development of
idealism;
(4) The origins of the emergence and development of
materialism.3

1. The Two Opposed Forces within Philosophy

_ (p. 266) The entire history of philosophy is the history of the

struggle and development of the two mutually opposed
philosophical schools of idealism and materialism. All
philosophical trends of thought and schools are disguised forms
of these two fundamental schools.

Sources: Takeuchi Minoru (ed.), Mao Zedong Ji (Tokyo:

Hokubasha, 1970-72), Vol. VI, pp. 265-305; and Takeuchi
Minoru (ed.), Mao Zedong Ji Bujuan (Tokyo: Sososha, 1984),
Vol. V, pp. 187-239. Translated and annotated by Nick
Knight.

84
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM — 85

The various forms of philosophical theories are all

created by persons who belong to definite social classes. The
consciousness of these persons is historically determined by a
particular social life. All of the theories of philosophy express
the needs of certain social classes, and reflect the level of
development of society's forces of production and the historical
stage+ of mankind's knowledge of nature. The fate of a
philosophy is determined by the extent to which it satisfies the
requirements of a social class.
[p. 188] The social origins of idealism and materialism are to
be found in the contradictory social structure of class. The
occurence of the earliest idealism was a product of the ignorance
and confusion of a primitive and barbaric humankind. The
development of the forces of production which followed acted
as a spur to the subsequent development of scientific
knowledge, and idealism should have declined and materialism
should have emerged to replace it. However, to the present day
idealism has not only not declined but has developed, to
compete vigorously with materialism on an equal footing; and
the reason for this is that society has had class divisions. On the
one hand, an oppressing class cannot but, in the pursuit of its
own interests, develop and consolidate its idealist theories; on
the other, the oppressed class, similarly in pursuit of its own
interests, can do no other than develop and consolidate its
materialist theories. Idealist and materialist theories both exist as
instruments of the struggle between classes, and prior to the
elimination of classes, the opposition between idealism and
materialism cannot be eliminated. In the process of its own
historical development, idealism has represented the
consciousness of the exploiting classes, thus performing a
reactionary function. Materialism, the world view of the
revolutionary classes, has grown and developed in class society
in the ceaseless battles with the reactionary philosophy of
idealism. Consequently, the struggle in philosophy between
idealism and materialism has consistently reflected the struggle
of interests between the reactionary classes and the revolutionary
classes. Whether philosophers are conscious of it or not, their
particular philosophical tendency invariably approximates the
political orientation of their own class. All tendencies within
86 MAO ZEDONG

philosophy always directly or indirectly> fosters the fundamental

political interests of their class. In this sense, the particular form
taken by the policies of their class can be seen as the
implementation of a particular tendency within philosophy.
(p. 267) The specific features of the Marxist philosophy of
dialectical materialism are its ability to explain clearly the class
characteristic of all social consciousness (philosophy included),
its open declaration of its proletarian character, and its resolute
struggle with the idealist philosophy of the propertied classes;
and moreover, these specific tasks are subordinate to the general
task of overthrowing capitalism, organizing and establishing a
proletarian dictatorship, and constructing a socialist society.
The tasks of philosophy during the current stage in
China are subordinate to the general tasks of overthrowing
imperialism and the semi-feudal system, the thorough
achievement of bourgeois democracy, the establishment of a
completely new Chinese democratic republic® and also to
prepare through peaceful means’ for the transformation to
socialism and communism. Philosophical theory and political
practice should be intimately connected.

[p. 189] 2. The Differences between

Idealism and Materialism

What is the fundamental difference between idealism and

materialism? It is the opposite answers that each provides to the
basic question of philosophy, namely the question of the
relationship between spirit and matter (the question of the
relationship between consciousness and existence). Idealism
considers the world to have its sole origins in spirit
(consciousness, concepts, the subject), and matter (the natural
world, society, the object) to be dependent on it. Materialism
considers matter exists independently of spirit, and spirit to be
dependent on it. A confusing variety of opinions on all
questions grows from the opposite answers given to this basic
question.
According to idealism, the world is either a synthesis of
the entirety of consciousness, or the spiritual process created by
our reason or the world's reason; it regards the external material
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 87

world as either a completely fabricated illusion or the material

external trapping of spiritual elements. Idealism regards the
knowledge of humankind as emanating spontaneously from the
subject, and the product of spirit itself.
(p. 268) Materialism, on the other hand, considers the unity of
the universe to derive from its materiality, and that spirit
(consciousness) is one of the natural characteristics of matter
which emerges only when matter has developed to a certain
stage. Nature, matter and the objective world exist apart from
spirit and are independent of it. Human knowledge is a
reflection of the objective external world.

3. The Origins of the Emergence and

Development of Idealism

What are the origins of the emergence and development

of idealism, a philosophy which considers matter to be a product
of spirit and which has inverted the position of the real world?
[p. 190] As previously stated, the emergence of the earliest
idealism was a product of the ignorance and confusion of a
primitive and barbaric humankind. However, following the
development of production, the division of manual and mental
labour created the primary conditions under which idealism
became a philosophical trend. The result of the development of
society's forces of production was the emergence of division of
function, and with the development of this division of function
were created persons who specialized in mental labour. But
during periods when the forces of production were poor and
undeveloped the degree of separation between the two remained
incomplete. However, a major transformation occurred when
classes appeared, private property emerged and exploitation
became the basis of the existence of the dominant class; at that
time mental labour became the prerogative of the dominant class
and manual labour became the fate of the oppressed class. The
dominant class began to observe the relationship between
themselves and the oppressed class in an inverted fashion,
perceiving that it was not the workers who provided the
dominant class with the means of livelihood, but themselves
who provided the workers with it. Because of this, they
88 MAO ZEDONG

disdained manual labour and there emerged the idealist view.

The elimination of the distinction between mental and manual
labour is one of the conditions for the elimination of idealist
philosophy.
Of the social origins of the development of idealist
philosophy, the principal one was the conscious representation
of ruling class interest by that philosophy. The dominance of
idealist philosophy in all spheres of culture must be explained by
reference to this. If there were no exploiting class idealism
would lose its social basis. The final elimination of idealist
philosophy must follow the elimination of classes and the
establishment of communist society.
(p. 269) The reason why idealism has deepened, developed
and had the capacity to struggle against materialism, must be
sought in the process of knowledge of humankind. When
humankind employs concepts to think, there exists the
possibility of drifting into idealism. Humankind cannot but use
concepts when thinking and this facilitates the division of our
knowledge into two aspects; the one deals with individual and
particular things, the other incorporates generalized concepts
(such as the judgement that "Yan'an is a city"). The particular
and the general are actually indivisibly connected, for to divide
them is to depart from objective truth. Objective truth is
expressed in the unity of the general and particular; without the
particular, the general could not exist; and without the general,
there could be no particular. To separate the general from the
particular, that is, to treat the general as an objective entity and to
regard the particular only as a form of existence of the general,
is the method adopted by all idealists. All [p. 191] idealists
substitute consciousness, spirit or concepts for objective entities
which exist independently of human consciousness.
Commencing from this premise, idealism stresses the dynamic
role of human consciousness in social practice; it cannot point
out the materialist truth that consciousness is limited by matter,
maintaining instead that only consciousness is dynamic and that
matter is nothing but an inert ensemble of objects. In addition,
driven by inherent class characteristics, idealists utilize every
possible means to exaggerate the dynamic role of
consciousness, one-sidedly developing and limitlessly
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM — 89

expanding it so that it becomes the dominant aspect of

intelligence. They conceal the other aspect, leaving it
subordinate. This artificially expanded role for consciousness is
established as a general world view to the extent of transforming
it into a god or an idol. Idealism in economics greatly overstates
one non-essential aspect of exchange by elevating the principle
of supply and demand to the extent that it becomes the basic
principle of capitalism. Many people have observed the active
role that science plays in the life of society; but they fail to
realise this role is determined and limited by definite social
relations of production, and come to the conclusion that science
is the motive force of society. Idealist historians perceive heroes
as the creators of history, idealist statesmen see politics as an
omnipotent entity, idealist military strategists wage all-out war
regardless of the costs, idealist revolutionaries advocate
Blanquism, and there are those who advocate revival of the
national character and restoration of the old morality;® all are the
result of an excessive exaggeration of the dynamic role of the
subjective. Our thought cannot reflect a phenomenon in its
entirety at one stroke, but is constituted of knowledge which, in
a dialectical process, approximates reality, and is lively and (p.
270) infinitely variegated. Idealism is founded on the specific
properties of thought and has exaggerated this individual aspect;
it is thus unable to achieve a correct reflection of this process
and only succeeds in distorting it. Lenin said: "Human
knowledge is not a straight line, but a curve. Any segment of
this curve can be transformed into an independent, complete,
straight line and this straight line may lead to confusion.
Rectilinearity and one-sideness, to see the trees and not the
wood, woodenness and petrification, subjectivism and
subjective blindness - voila the epistemological roots of
idealism". "Philosophical idealism is a one-sided, exaggeration
of one of the fragments or aspects of knowledge until it becomes
a deified absolute, divorced from matter, from nature. Idealism
is thus a religious doctrine. This is very true."?
[p. 192] Pre-Marxist materialism (mechanistic materialism) did
not emphasise the dynamic role of thought in knowledge,
attributing it only with a passive role, and perceiving it as a
mirror which reflected nature. Mechanistic materialism adopted
90 MAO ZEDONG

an unreasonable attitude towards idealism, ignoring the causes

of its epistemology, and consequently was incapable of
overcoming it.
Only dialectical materialism has correctly pointed out the
dynamic role of thought while at the same time pointing out the
limitations which matter imposes on thought, has pointed out
that thought emerges from social practice, and at the same time
that it actively guides practice. Only the dialectical theory of the
"unity of thought and action” can thoroughly overcome
idealism.

4. The Origins of the Emergence and

Development of Materialism

The foundation of materialism is the recognition that

matter exists independently of thought in the external world, and
was acquired by humanity through practice. Through the
practice of productive labour, class struggle, and scientific
experiment, humankind gradually broke away from superstition
and wishful thinking (idealism), gradually recognised the
essence of the (p. 271) world, and in so doing arrived at
materialism.
Primitive humans, yielding before the force of nature
and capable only of using simple tools, were unable to explain
change in the environment and so turned to the gods for help.
This was the origin of religion and idealism.
However, during a lengthy process of production,
humans came into contact with the surrounding natural world,
acted on it and changed it; and in producing the basic necessities
of life, made the natural world conform to their interests, and
allowed them the firm belief that matter exists objectively.
In the social life of humankind, there emerges relations
and influence between people, and in class society class struggle
also occurs. The oppressed class evaluates the situation, makes
an estimation of its own strength, formulates a programme, and
when its struggle succeeds, it becomes confident that its own
views are not merely the product of an illusion, [p. 193] but a
reflection of the objectively existing material world. The failure
of the oppressed class because it has adopted an incorrect
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 91

programme, and the success resulting from a correction of that

programme, allows the oppressed class to comprehend that only
correct knowledge in which a subjective programme relies on
the materiality and law-like regularity of the objective world can
achieve its purpose.
The science of history has proved to humankind the
materiality and law-like regularity of the world, and given rise to
: a consciousness of the uselessness of the fantasies of religion
i and idealism, and resulted in humankind's arrival at materialism.
In summary, the history of humankind's practice - the
history of the struggle with nature, the history of class struggle,
the history of science over a protracted period - has, through the
necessity of life and struggle, led to a consideration of material
reality and its principles, and so testified to the correctness of the
materialist philosophy. Consequently, humankind has found
the ideological instrument for its own struggle - the philosophy
of materialism. As the development of production advances to a
higher level, as the class struggle becomes more developed, and
as scientific knowledge reveals even more 'mysteries' of nature,
so does the philosophy of materialism develop and become
consolidated; and humankind is increasingly able to liberate
itself gradually from the two-fold oppression of nature and
society.
The bourgeoisie, during the period of its struggle against
the feudal classes and at a time when the proletariat did not yet
constitute a threat, had already discovered and moreover
EE SRI
ey

employed (p. 272) materialism as an instrument in its own

struggle; it was already convinced that objects in the
st

environment were material products and not spiritual products.

It was only when the bourgeoisie itself became the ruling class
and the struggle of the proletariat threatened it that it abandoned
this 'useless' instrument and took up once again another - the
philosophy of idealism. Evidence of this is the change in
thought from before to after 1927 - from materialism to idealism
- on the part of the spokesmen of the Chinese bourgeoisie Dai
Jitao and Wu Zhihui.!°
The proletariat, which is the gravedigger of capitalism,
"is intrinsically materialist". However, because the proletariat is
historically the most progressive class, its materialism is
92 MAO ZEDONG

different from the materialism of the bourgeoisie, is more

thorough and profound; in character, it is completely dialectical,
and not mechanistic.
Dialectical materialism was created by the spokesmen
[p. 194] of the proletariat Marx and Engels as a result of the
practice of the proletariat!! and at the same time because the
proletariat had assimilated all the results!? of the entire history of
humanity. Dialectical materialism not only maintains that matter
is divorced from human consciousness and exists independently
of it, it also asserts that matter changes. Dialectical materialism
became a thoroughly systematic and completely new world view
and methodology. This is the philosophy of Marxism.

Chapter Two: Dialectical Materialism

The problems which emerge from this subject and which

will be discussed are:!3
() The revo luti onar y wea pon of the prol etar iat - dial ecti cal
materialism;
(2) The relationship between dialectical materialism and the
philosophical legacy of the past;
(3) The unity of the world view and methodology within
dialectical materialism,
(4) The question of the object of philosophy; (p. 273)
(5) On matter;
(6) On motion;
(7) On time and space;
(8) On consciousness;
(9) On reflection;
(10) On truth;
(11) On practice.
My viewpoint on these problems is stated briefly in the
following sections.!4

1. Dialectical Materialism Is the

Revolutionary Weapon of the Proletariat

I have already referred to this problem in Chapter One,

but will discuss it again here in simple terms.
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 93

Dialectical materialism is the world view of the

proletariat. The proletariat, which has been given the task by
history of eliminating classes,!5 utilises dialectical materialism
as a Spiritual weapon in its struggle and as the philosophical
basis for its various viewpoints. Only when we adopt the
standpoint of the proletariat to gain an understanding of the
world can we correctly and completely grasp the world view of
dialectical materialism. Only if we set out from that standpoint
can the real world be truthfully and objectively known. This is
because, on the one hand, only the proletariat is the most
progressive and revolutionary class; and on the other, because
only dialectical materialism, which closely integrates advanced
and rigorous (p. 274) scientificity with a thorough and
uncompromising revolutionary quality, is the most correct and
revolutionary world view and methodology.
The Chinese proletariat, which is at present! ®
shouldering the historical task of the bourgeoise-democratic
revolution in order to arrive at socialism and communism,!7
must adopt [p. 195] dialectical materialism as its spiritual
weapon. If the Chinese proletariat, Chinese Communist Party,
and the broad revolutionary elements of all those people who
wish to take the standpoint of the proletariat adopt!8 dialectical
materialism, they will have gained!9 a most correct and most
revolutionary world view and methodology, and they will be
able to correctly understand the development and change of the
revolutionary movement, put forward revolutionary tasks, unite
their own and their allies’ forces, triumph over reactionary
theories, adopt correct courses of action, avoid errors in work,
and achieve the goal of liberating and transforming2° China.
Dialectical materialism is an especially indispensible subject for
cadres and personnel who lead the revolutionary movement.
This is because subjectivism and a mechanistic outlook, both of
which are incorrect theories and methods of work, frequently
exist amongst cadres and personnel; and this often causes them
to act contrary to Marxism, to take the wrong path in the
revolutionary movement. This weakness can only be avoided
and corrected through conscious study and an understanding of
dialectical materialism, and in so doing, arming their minds
anew.
 aery ames Ste Stent ela
94 MAO ZEDONG

pee
2. The Relationship between Dialectical Materialism

seg clit geen

and the Old Philosophical Legacy

Modern materialism is not a simple inheritance of the

various philosophical theories of the past. It was engendered
and matured in the struggle to oppose previous dominant

meee
philosophies and in the struggle of science to rid itself of

eget dee
idealism and mysticism. The Marxist philosophy of dialectical
materialism not only inherited the supreme result of idealism -
the achievements of Hegelian theory - it also simultaneously
overcame the idealism of that theory and by the application of

agit ie Sr
materialism transformed its dialectics. Marxism is likewise not
merely the continuation and completion of the development of all

ce he
past materialisms, it is also at the same time in opposition to the
limitations and narrowness of all past materialisms, (p. 275)
namely mechanistic and intuitive materialism (of which French
materialism and the materialism of Feuerbach are the most
important). The Marxist philosophy of dialectical materialism
inherits the scientific legacy of past cultures, while at the same
time giving this legacy a revolutionary transformation, thus
forming an historically unprecedented [p. 196] science of
philosophy, one which is most correct, most revolutionary, and
most complete.
After the May Fourth Movement in China in 1919 and
following the Chinese proletariat's conscious entrance onto the
political stage and the heightening of its scientific standard, there
emerged and developed the Marxist philosophical movement.
However, during its first stage, the understanding of materialist
dialectics within Chinese materialist thought was still poorly
developed; bourgeois influenced mechanical materialism and the
subjectivist trends of the Deborin clique constituted its principal
ingredients. After the defeat of the 1927 revolution, Marxist-
Leninist understanding took a step forward and dialectical
materialist thought gradually developed. In very recent times,
because of the gravity of the national and social crisis, and
because of the influence of the movement to expose and criticise
within Soviet philosophy, there has developed an extensive
movement of materialist dialectics within the Chinese intellectual
world. It can be seen from the extensiveness of this movement
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 95

that, while it is at present still in its youthful stage, it will

develop along with the revolutionary struggles of the proletariat
and revolutionary peoples of China and the world; and with a
strength that sweeps all before it, it will establish its own
authority, guide the Chinese revolutionary movement's
courageous and large-scale advance, and lay the foundation for
the path along which China's proletariat will lead the Chinese
revolution to victory.21
Because of the backwardness of the evolution of
Chinese society, the philosophical trend of dialectical
materialism which is presently developing in China has not
resulted from inheriting and transforming its own philosophical
legacy, but from the study of Marxism-Leninism. However, if
the dialectical materialist trend of thought is to deepen and
develop throughout China and, moreover, is definitely to lead
the Chinese revolution along the road to complete victory, then it
is necessary to struggle against the various existing outworn??
philosophies, and raise the flag of criticism on the ideological
front throughout the entire country. It is also necessary to
expose and criticise the ancient philosophical legacy of China.
Only thus will the objective be achieved.

3. The Unity of the World View and Methodology

within Dialectical Materialism

(p. 276) [p. 197] Dialectical materialism is the world view of

the proletariat. It is at the same time the method by which the
proletariat gains knowledge of the surrounding world and a
method for carrying out revolution. The world view and
methodology of dialectical materialism constitute a unified
system. Idealist Marxist revisionists consider the entire essence
of dialectical materialism to be only its "method". They separate
the method from the world view within the general philosophy,
and separate dialectics from materialism. They do not
understand that the Marxist methodology of dialectics is not the
same as the idealist dialectics of Hegel, but is materialist
dialectics; or that the methodology of Marxism cannot depart
from its world view in the slightest degree. On the other hand,
mechanical materialists only perceive in the philosophy of
94 MAO ZEDONG

2. The Relationship between Dialectical Materialism

and the Old Philosophical Legacy

Modern materialism is not a simple inheritance of the

various philosophical theories of the past. It was engendered
and matured in the struggle to oppose previous dominant
philosophies and in the struggle of science to rid itself of
idealism and mysticism. The Marxist philosophy of dialectical
materialism not only inherited the supreme result of idealism -
the achievements of Hegelian theory - it also simultaneously
overcame the idealism of that theory and by the application of
materialism transformed its dialectics. Marxism is likewise not
merely the continuation and completion of the development of all
past materialisms, it is also at the same time in opposition to the
limitations and narrowness of all past materialisms, (p. 275)
namely mechanistic and intuitive materialism (of which French
materialism and the materialism of Feuerbach are the most
important). The Marxist philosophy of dialectical materialism
inherits the scientific legacy of past cultures, while at the same
time giving this legacy a revolutionary transformation, thus
forming an historically unprecedented [p. 196] science of
philosophy, one which is most correct, most revolutionary, and
most complete.
After the May Fourth Movement in China in 1919 and
following the Chinese proletariat's conscious entrance onto the
political stage and the heightening of its scientific standard, there
emerged and developed the Marxist philosophical movement.
However, during its first stage, the understanding of materialist
dialectics within Chinese materialist thought was still poorly
developed; bourgeois influenced mechanical materialism and the
subjectivist trends of the Deborin clique constituted its principal
ingredients. After the defeat of the 1927 revolution, Marxist-
Leninist understanding took a step forward and dialectical
materialist thought gradually developed. In very recent times,
because of the gravity of the national and social crisis, and
because of the influence of the movement to expose and criticise
within Soviet philosophy, there has developed an extensive
movement of materialist dialectics within the Chinese intellectual
world. It can be seen from the extensiveness of this movement
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 95

that, while it is at present still in its youthful stage, it will

develop along with the revolutionary struggles of the proletariat
and revolutionary peoples of China and the world; and with a
strength that sweeps all before it, it will establish its own
authority, guide the Chinese revolutionary movement's
courageous and large-scale advance, and lay the foundation for
the path along which China's proletariat will lead the Chinese
revolution to victory.?!
Because of the backwardness of the evolution of
Chinese society, the philosophical trend of dialectical
materialism which is presently developing in China has not
resulted from inheriting and transforming its own philosophical
legacy, but from the study of Marxism-Leninism. However, if
the dialectical materialist trend of thought is to deepen and
develop throughout China and, moreover, is definitely to lead
the Chinese revolution along the road to complete victory, then it
is necessary to struggle against the various existing outworn??
philosophies, and raise the flag of criticism on the ideological
front throughout the entire country. It is also necessary to
expose and criticise the ancient philosophical legacy of China.
Only thus will the objective be achieved.

3. The Unity of the World View and Methodology

within Dialectical Materialism

(p. 276) [p. 197] Dialectical materialism is the world view of

the proletariat. It is at the same time the method by which the
proletariat gains knowledge of the surrounding world and a
method for carrying out revolution. The world view and
methodology of dialectical materialism constitute a unified
system. Idealist Marxist revisionists consider the entire essence
of dialectical materialism to be only its "method". They separate
the method from the world view within the general philosophy,
and separate dialectics from materialism. They do not
understand that the Marxist methodology of dialectics is not the
same as the idealist dialectics of Hegel, but is materialist
dialectics; or that the methodology of Marxism cannot depart
from its world view in the slightest degree. On the other hand,
mechanical materialists only perceive in the philosophy of
96 MAO ZEDONG

Marxism the world view of a general philosophy, removing its

dialectical element. Moreover, they consider this world view to
be nothing more than the conclusions drawn from mechanical
natural science. They do not comprehend that Marxist
materialism is not simply materialism, but is dialectical
materialism. Both of these viewpoints which dissect Marxist
philosophy are incorrect. The world view and methodology of
dialectical materialism are a unified system.

4. The Question of the Object of Materialist

Dialectics - What Is It that Materialist Dialectics
Studies?

Lenin (as an observer of Marxist philosophical science)

regarded materialist dialectics as learning concerned with the
principles of development of the objective world and the
principles of the development of knowledge (in which the
objective world is reflected within the various categories of
dialectics). He said: "Logic is not learning concerned with the
external form of thought, but learning concerned with the
principles of development of all material, natural and spiritual
things; namely, learning concerned with the principles of
development of all of the concrete content of the world and
knowledge of it. In other words, logic is concerned with the
sum total and conclusion of the history of the world's
knowledge".23 Lenin emphasised the significance of materialist
dialectics as a general scientific methodology, and this was
because of the conclusions [p. 198] arrived at by the system of
dialectics from the history of world knowledge. (p. 277) It was
because of this that he said: "Dialectics is the history of
knowledge”.
The meaning of the definition, given above, which Lenin
gave to scientific materialist dialectics and its object is as
follows: firstly, materialist dialectics, as with any other science,
has its object of study, and this object is the most general
principles of development of nature, history and human thought.
Moreover, the task of materialist dialectics when studying is not
to arrive, through thought within the brain, at the relationship
which exists between various phenomena, but to arrive at that
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 97

relationship through investigation of the phenomena themselves.

There exists a fundamental distinction between this view of
Lenin's and that of the Menshevik idealists (who in fact depart
from concrete science and concrete knowledge) over the
categories of study which function as the object of materialist
dialectics. Because the Menshevik idealists have attempted to
establish a philosophical system whose various categories have
become dissociated from the actual developments of the history
of knowledge, social science and natural science, they have in
fact abandoned materialist dialectics. Secondly, all of the
various sciences (mathematics, mechanics, chemistry and
physics, biology, economics and other natural sciences and the
social sciences) study the various aspects of the development of
the material world and its knowledge. Because of this, the
principles of the various sciences are restricted in a narrow and
one-sided way24 by concrete realms of study. Materialist
dialectics is however quite different; it is the universalisation, the
totality, the conclusions and the finished product of all the
general content of value from all of the concrete sciences and all
of humankind's other scientific knowledge. In this way, the
concepts, judgements, and principles of materialist dialectics
constitute exceedingly extensive laws and formulations
(incorporating the most general principles of all of the sciences,
and consequently incorporating the essence of the material
world). This is one side of the picture and from this
perspective, materialist dialectics is a world view. From the
other perspective, materialist dialectics is the logical and
epistemological foundation for genuine scientific knowledge
liberated from all idle speculation, fideism25 and metaphysics;
hence it is at the same time the only true, objectively reliable
methodology for the study of concrete science. This further
adds to our comprehension of what we mean when we speak of
materialist dialectics or dialectical materialism as a unified
system of world view and methodology. In this way can also
be understood the errors of the vulgarisers and distorters of
Marxist philosophy who deny its philosophical right of
existence.
(p. 278) [p. 199] In relation to the problem of the object of
philosophy, Marx, Engels, and Lenin all opposed the separation
98 MAO ZEDONG

of philosophy from concrete reality and allowing philosophy to

be transformed into various independent entities. They pointed
out the necessity of a philosophy which grew out of analysis
founded on real life and real relations, and opposed the approach
of formal logic?® and Menshevik idealism in which logical
concepts and a natural world of logical concepts are the object of
study.27 The so-called philosophy which grew out of analysis
founded on real life and real relations is none other than the
theory of development?8 of materialist dialectics. Marx, Engels,
and Lenin all explained that materialist dialectics was a theory of
development. Engels described materialist dialectics as the
theory “of the general principles of development of nature,
society and thought".29 Lenin regarded materialist dialectics as
"the theory of development which is most profound, multi-
faceted and richest in content". They all consider that3® "the
forms of all principles of development stated by all other
philosophical theories beside this theory, in their narrowness
and lack of content cut in two the actual process of development
of nature and society". (Lenin) And the reason why materialist
dialectics has been described as the theory of development
which is most profound, multi-faceted, and richest in content,
lies in the fact that materialist dialectics reflects, in a manner
which is most profound, multi-faceted, and rich in content, the
contradictoriness and leaps within the process of change of
nature and society; there is no other reason.
One further problem must be resolved in this question of
the object of philosophy, and that is the problem of the unity of
dialectics, logic, and epistemology.
Lenin emphatically pointed out the identity of dialectics,
logic, and epistemology, stating this is "an extremely important
question" and that "the three terms are superfluous, they are one
and the same thing". He fundamentally opposed those Marxist
revisionists whose approach involves treating the three terms as
completely distinct and independent theories.
Materialist dialectics is the only scientific epistemology
and it is also the only scientific logic. Materialist dialectics
studies the emergence and development of our knowledge of the
external world, studies how we move from a state of ignorance
to one of knowledge and the transformation of incomplete
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 99

knowledge to more complete knowledge; it studies the

increasingly profound and extensive reflection of the principles
of development of nature and society in the mind [p. 200] of
humankind. This is the unity of materialist dialectics and
epistemology. Materialist dialectics studies the most general
principles of (p. 279) development of the objective world, and
studies the form reflected in thought of the most developed
behaviour and characteristics of the objective world. In so
doing, materialist dialectics studies the principles of emergence,
development, passing away and mutual transformation of each
process and phenomenon of material reality; at the same time, it
studies the forms in which the principles of development of the
objective world are reflected in human thought. This is the unity
of materialist dialectics and logic.
To gain a thorough understanding of the reasons why
dialectics, logic, and epistemology constitute a single entity, we
will turn now to an examination of how materialist dialectics
resolves the problem of the mutual relations between the logical
and the historical.
Engels said: "In relation to the method of thought of the
various philosophers,*! the strong point of the Hegelian method
of thought resides in the extremely rich historical sensitivity
which permeates its foundations. Although its form is abstract
idealist, the development of its thought nevertheless frequently
parallels the development of world history. Moreover, history
was actually taken as the verification of thought. History
frequently progresses through leaps and in a confused manner.
Consequently, if history is to be complied with, not only must a
mass of insignificant data be given attention, but thought must
be allowed to pursue a discontinuous path. At such a moment,
the only appropriate method was the logical method. However,
this logical method was basically still an historical method, but
one which had abandoned its historical form and accidental
character". Marx, Engels, and Lenin paid ample attention to this
concept of "the unity of the development of logic and history".
"The categories of Logic are abbreviations for the ‘endless
multitude’ of ‘particulars of external existence and of action'”.
"Categories constitute divided compartments which help us
comprehend the dividing line between classes of things". "The
100 MAO ZEDONG

practical activity of man had to lead his consciousness to the

repetition of the various logical figures thousands of millions of
times in order that these figures could obtain the significance of
axioms". "Man's practice, repeating itself a thousand million
times, becomes consolidated in man's consciousness by figures
of logic. Precisely (and only) on account of this thousand-
million-fold repetition, these figures have the stability [p. 201]
of a prejudice, an axiomatic character".3? These words of
Lenin's demonstrate clearly the distinguishing characteristic of
materialist dialectical logic which is dissimilar to formal logic
which regards (p. 280) its principles and categories as empty,
divorced from content and autonomous, and whose form is
unconcerned with content. It is also unlike Hegel, who
regarded logic as estranged from the material world, an
independently developing conceptual essence, reflected and
transplanted in our minds; moreover, he perceived the
manifestation of the movement of matter as being dealt with via
a process of creation in the mind. Basing himself on the identity
of existence and thought, Hegel saw the identity of idealism in
the identity of dialectics, logic, and epistemology. In contrast,
the identity of dialectics, logic, and epistemology within Marxist
philosophy is founded on a materialist basis. Only when
materialism is employed to resolve the question of the
relationship of existence and thought, and only when one adopts
the position of reflection theory, can the problems of dialectics,
logic, and epistemology be completely resolved.
Marx's Capital must be regarded above all others as the finest
model of the utilisation of dialectical materialism to resolve the
mutual relationship between things logical and things historical.
Capital contains firstly an understanding>? of the historical
development of capitalist society, and simultaneously
incorporates the logical development of that society. What
Capital analyses is the dialectics of the development of the
various economic categories which reflect the emergence,
development and passing away of capitalist society. The
materialist character of the solution to this problem resides in the
fact that it takes material objective history as its basis, resides in
taking concepts and categories as reflections of this actual
history. The identity of the theory and history of capitalism, of
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 101

the logic and epistemology of capitalist society, is expressed in

model form in Capital. From it we can gain access to some
understanding of the identity of dialectics, logic, and
epistemology.
What has been discussed above is the question of the
object of dialectical materialism.

[p. 202] 5. On Matter

(p. 281) Marxism continued and developed the materialist line

within philosophy, and correctly resolved the question of the
relationship between thought and existence; that is, it
thoroughly and in a materialist manner indicated the materiality
of the world and objective reality, and the material origins of
thought (or, the dependent relationship of thought to existence).
. The recognition that matter is the origin of thought has as
its premise the materiality of the world and its objective
: existence. The first condition of belonging to the materialist
camp is the acknowledgement that the material world is separate
from and exists independently of human consciousness - it
existed prior to the appearance of humankind, and following the
appearance of humankind it remained separate from and existed
independently of human consciousness. The recognition of this
point is the fundamental premise of all scientific research.
How can this point be verified? There are numerous
proofs. At the very moment humankind comes in contact with
the external world, it must employ harsh means to cope with the
oppression and resistance of the external world (the natural
world and society); humankind not only should but can
overcome such oppression and resistance. All of the actual
conditions of human social practice manifested in the historical
development of human society are the best proof of this point.
Throughout the course of the ten-thousand /i Long March, the
Red Army had no doubts about the objective existence of the
regions it traversed, the Yangtze and Yellow Rivers, the snow-
covered mountains, and the grasslands, or the enemy armies
which did battle with it, etc.; neither did it doubt the objective
existence of the Red Army itself.34 China*> does not doubt the
objective existence of an invading Japanese imperialism, nor of
102 MAO ZEDONG

the Chinese people themselves; neither do students of the Anti-

Japanese Military and Political University doubt the objective
existence of this university and the students themselves. These
are all material things which exist independently and are separate
from our consciousness; this is the fundamental viewpoint of all
materialism, it is the materialist viewpoint of philosophy.
The philosophical materialist viewpoint and the
materialist viewpoint of natural science are not identical. If we
say that the philosophical material viewpoint resides in its
pointing out the objective existence of matter, that what is
described as [p. 203] so-called matter is the entire world which
is separate from human consciousness and exists independently
(this world acts on the sense organs of humans which produces
human sense perceptions, and from these sense perceptions
reflection is achieved), then that way of portraying it is
permanent and unchangeable, it is absolute. The material
viewpoint of natural science resides in its study of material
structures, for example, previous atomic theory and subsequent
electron theory, etc; and the way in which this is described
changes in line with progress in natural science; it is relative.
The distinction, based on the insights of dialectical
materialism, between the materialist viewpoint of philosophy
and the materialist viewpoint of natural science, is a necessary
condition for thoroughly implementing the orientation of the
philosophy of materialism, and is of great significance in the
struggle with idealism and mechanical materialism.
(p. 282) Materialists3© were not aware of scientific knowledge
of material structures, such as electron theory which demolished
the erroneous theory of the elimination of matter and which
clearly bears out the correctness of the materialism of dialectical
materialism. Through the discoveries of modern natural
science, such as the discovery of electron theory, certain
material properties which appeared in old material concepts
(weight, hardness, impermeability, inertia, etc.) were shown to
exist only in certain material forms and not in others. Facts like
these eradicated the one-sideness and narrowness of old
materialism's approach to material concepts and nicely
demonstrated the correctness of materialism's recognition of the
world.37_ The materialist viewpoint of former dialectical
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 103

materialism perceived the unity of the material world through

diversity, that is the unity of the diversity of matter; and there is
not the slightest contradiction between this materialist viewpoint
and the fact that the movement and change involved in the
transformation of matter from one form to another are eternal
and universal. Ether, electrons, atoms, molecules, crystals,
cells, social phenomena, phenomena of thought - these are
various stages of the development of matter, are various
temporary forms in the history® of the development of matter.
The deepening of scientific research, and the discovery of all
manner of forms of matter (the discovery of the diversity of
matter) only serves to enrich the content of the materialist
viewpoint of dialectical materialism; and is there any
contradiction in that? It is necessary to make a distinction
between the materialist viewpoint of philosophy and the
materialist viewpoint of natural science, and this is so because
the two do have differences which range from minor to
extensive; however, [p. 204] they are not mutually
contradictory, for matter in the broad sense incorporates matter
in the narrow sense.
The materialist viewpoint of dialectical materialism does
not acknowledge that there are so-called non-material things in
the world (independent spiritual things). Matter exists eternally
and universally and is limitless in both time and space. If there
is something in the world which has "always been thus" and
"everywhere is the same" (like its unity) then that something is
so-called objectively existing matter referred to by philosophy.
If things such as consciousness are observed employing the
thoroughgoing insights of materialism (that is, the insights of
materialist dialectics), then so-called consciousness is no
different; it is only29 a form of matter in movement, it is a
particular property of the material brain of humankind. It allows
material processes external to consciousness to be reflected in
consciousness, which is a particular property of the material
brain. Accordingly, it is apparent that it is conditional when we
make a distinction between matter and (p. 283) consciousness
and moreover oppose the one to the other; that is to say, it has
significance only for the insights of epistemology. Because
consciousness and thought are only properties of matter (brain),
104 MAO ZEDONG

the opposition of knowledge and existence, that is, the

opposition between matter that knows and matter that is
known,‘° cannot be sustained. In this way, the opposition of
subject and object departs from the realm of epistemology and is
without any significance. If, beyond epistemology,
consciousness and matter are still placed in opposition, this is
tantamount to foresaking materialism. In the world there is only
matter and its various manifestations; and signified by this are
the following - the subject itself is matter, the so-called
materiality of the world (matter is eternal and universal), the
objective reality of matter, and matter as the origin of
consciousness. In a word, matter encompasses everything in
the world. The saying goes, "Unity belongs to Si-ma Yi"; but
we say, "Unity belongs to matter". This is the principle of the
unity of the world.
What has been discussed above is the theory of matter of
dialectical materialism.

6. On Motion (On Development)

[p. 205] The first fundamental principle of dialectical

materialism is its theory of matter; namely, the recognition of
the materiality of the world, the objective reality of matter, and
that matter is the origin of consciousness. This principle of the
unity of the world has already been explained in the previous
section "On Matter”.
The second fundamental principle of dialectical
materialism is its theory of motion (or theory of development):
that is, the recognition that motion is a form of the existence of
matter, that it is an intrinsic property of matter, and that itisa
manifestation of the diversity of matter; this is the principle of
the development of the world. The principle of development of
the world and the principle of the unity of the world referred to
above are linked one to the other to become the complete world
view of dialectical materialism. The world is none other than a
material world of limitless development (or, the material world
is one whose development is without limit).
(p. 234) The theory of motion of dialectical materialism cannot
tolerate (1) thoughts on motion separate from matter;
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 105

(2) thoughts on matter separate from motion; and (3) the

simplification of matter in motion. The theory of motion of
dialectical materialism has instituted an unequivocal and resolute
struggle with these idealistic, metaphysical, and mechanical
viewpoints.
The theory of motion of dialectical materialism is first
and foremost in opposition to the idealism and religious deism
of philosophy. The essence of all idealisms and religious
deisms resides in their refusal to recognise the material unity of
the world; they assume that the world's motion and
development are non-material, or were at the very beginning
non-material, and are the consequence of the operation of spirits
or God's supernatural power. The German idealist philosopher
Hegel believed that the contemporary world had developed out
of the so-called "World Idea"; and in China, the philosophy of
the Book of Changes and the moral theories of Song and Ming
neo-Confucianism all engendered views of the development of
the world which were idealist. Christianity asserts God created
the world, and in Buddhism and the various Chinese fetishisms
the motion and development of the world's myriad things is put
down to the supernatural. All of these explanations which
contemplate motion divorced from matter are fundamentally
incompatible with dialectical materialism. Besides idealism and
religion, all pre-Marxist materialism and all present-day anti-
Marxist mechanistic materialism, are proponents of materialist
theories of motion when it comes to discussing natural
phenomena, but the moment social phenomena are mentioned,
they cannot but become [p. 206] divorced from material
causes‘! and revert to spiritual causation.
Dialectical materialism resolutely refutes all of these
incorrect views on motion and points out their historical
limitations - the limitations of class status and the limitations of
the degree of development of science - and constructs its own
view of motion on a thoroughgoing materialism which takes the
standpoint of the proletariat and the most advanced level of
science as its basis. Dialectical materialism first of all points out
that motion is a form of the existence of matter, it is an intrinsic
attribute of matter (and not a function of some external impetus);
to imagine motion without matter and matter without motion is
106 MAO ZEDONG

equally incomprehensible. Materialism's view of motion is in

intense opposition to the views on motion espoused by idealism
and deism.
(p. 285) The observation and study of matter divorced from
motion results in a metaphysical theory of a static universe or a
theory of absolute equilibrium. These consider matter to be
eternally unchangeable, and that within matter there is no such
thing as development; they also consider absolute immobility to
be matter's general or original state. Dialectical materialism
resolutely opposes these viewpoints, and regards motion as the
most universal form of the existence of matter and an
inseparable property intrinsic to matter. All immobility and
equilibrium have only relative significance, and motion is
absolute. Dialectical materialism recognizes that all forms of
matter possess the possibility of relative immobility or
equilibrium, and moreover considers this differentiates matter,
and consequently that it is the most important condition for
distinguishing life (Engels).42 However, it considers the
condition of immobility or equilibrium to be only one of the
essential aspects of motion, it is a particular condition of motion.
The error of observing and studying matter separate from
motion resides in overstating the importance of the factors of
immobility or equilibrium, in concealing their limitations and
substituting these partial factors for the whole, in generalizing a
particular condition of motion, and in presenting them in
absolute terms. The saying beloved of China's ancient
metaphysical thinkers, “Heaven changeth not, neither does the
Dao" ,43 is indicative of this theory of a static universe; and
although these thinkers recognised change in the phenomena of
the universe and society, they refused to recognise it as change
in their essence. From their perspective, the essence of the
universe and society remained eternally unchangeable. And the
principal reason that they thought like this was the limitations of
their class; for if the feudal landlord class admitted that the
essence of the universe and society is in motion and develops,
then theoretically this was tantamount to signalling the [p. 207]
death sentence of their own class. The philosophy of all
reactionary forces is the theory of immobility. The
revolutionary classes and masses have perceived the principle of
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 107

the development of the world, and therefore advocate the

transformation of society and the world - and their philosophy is
dialectical materialism.
In addition, dialectical materialism does not recognise the
theory of the simplification of motion which lumps all motion in
one particular form, namely, mechanical motion; this is the
distinguishing feature of the world view of old materialism.
Although old materialism (seventeenth and eighteenth century
French materialism, and the nineteenth century German
materialism of Feuerbach) did recognise the permanence of the
existence and motion of matter (recognised the limitlessness of
motion), it still had not broken free of the metaphysical world
view. Needless to say, the explanations of their social theories
were still idealist in their views on development; in their
approach to the theory of nature, they also restricted the unity of
the material world (p. 286) to a certain one-sided attribute,
namely one form of motion - mechanical motion. The cause of
this motion is an external force, like a machine which moves
when externally impelled. They do not explain, by reference to
essences or internal causes, matter or motion or the interrelated
dive rsit y of thin gs. Rath er, they are expl aine d by refe renc e to
simple forms found externally, and to external force as a cause.
In so doing, the diversity of the world is actually lost. They
explain all of the world's motion as movement in place and an
increase or decrease in quantity; an object at a certain place at a
particular moment, and at another at a different moment, is thus
described as motion. If there is change, it is only change
involving an increase or decrease in quantity, not qualitative
change; motion is cyclical, a repeated production of the same
result. Dialectical materialism takes a contrary position to this
view ; it does not perc eive moti on as simp le mov eme nt in plac e
and as cyclical, but as limitless and qualitative in its diversity.
Dialectical materialism regards motion as transformation from
one form to another, and the unity of the world’s matter and the
motion of matter as the unity and motion of the limitless
diversity of the world's matter.44 Engels said: “Each of the
higher forms of motion is necessarily connected with mechanical
(external or molecular) forms of motion. For example, just as
chemical action is not possible without change of temperature
108 MAO ZEDONG

and electric changes, so too is organic life without mechanical

(molecular), thermal, electric, chemical, etc. changes. This
naturally cannot be denied. But the presence of these subsidiary
forms does not exhaust [p. 208] the essence of the main form in
each case".45 These words absolutely and truthfully correspond
to the facts. Even simple mechanical motion cannot be
explained by the metaphysical viewpoint. It must be understood
that all forms of motion are dialectical, although there are
enormous differences between them in the depth and diversity of
their dialectical content. Mechanical motion is still dialectical
motion. And as for the view that an object "occupies" a point in
space at a certain moment: in actuality, it both "occupies" that
point while simultaneously not occupying it. The so-called
"occupation" of a point and "immobility" are only particular
conditions of motion; the object is still fundamentally in motion.
While an object moves within the confines of time and space, it
invariably and unceasingly overcomes such confines; it moves
beyond the definite and limiting bounds of time and space to
become an unbroken stream of motion. Moreover, mechanical
motion is only one form of the motion of matter; in the real
world, it has no absolutely independent (p. 287) existence and is
always related to other forms of motion. Heat, chemical
reaction, light and electricity, right through to organic and social
phenomena, are all qualitatively particular forms of the motion
of matter. The great and epoch-making contribution rendered by
natural science at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth
centuries resides in its discovery of the principle of the
transformation of motion, in pointing out that the motion of
matter is always via the transformation of one form into another,
and that the new form produced by this transformation is in
essence different from the old form. The reason for the
transformation of matter is not external but internal; it is not due
to the impulsion of an external mechanical force, but to the
struggle of the two mutually contradictory and qualitatively
different elements which exist internally, and it is these which
impel the motion and development of matter. Because of this
discovery of the principle of the transformation of motion,
dialectical materialism was able to extend the principle of the
material unity of the world to natural and social history, not only
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 109

to observe and study the world as matter in unceasing motion,

but also to observe and study the world as matter in motion
involving limitless advance from lower to higher forms; namely,
to observe and study the world both as developmental and as a
process. The following saying makes this point: "The unified
material world is a process of development".46 The cyclical
theory of old materialism is thus exploded. Dialectical
materialism has profoundly and comprehensively observed the
forms of motion of nature and society. It considers the process
of development of the entire observed world as eternal (without
beginning or end). At the same time it regards each historically
progressing concrete form of motion [p. 209] as temporary
(having a beginning and an end); that is to say, it comes into
being under definite conditions and passes away under definite
conditions. Dialectical materialism considers that the process of
the development of the world whereby lower forms of motion
give rise to higher forms of motion expresses the historical and
temporary character of motion; simultaneously, any one form of
motion is a part of the eternal flow of motion (a flow without
4 beginning or end) and therefore never the very first or last.
According to the principle of the struggle of opposites (the
a!
&

t}o reason for motion itself), each form of motion invariably arrives
at a higher stage than that which preceded it and makes a real
advance; however, at the same time, when considering the
various forms of motion (the various concrete processes of
development), there can occur motion which alters or reverses
its direction. Forms of motion which advance and retreat are
linked one to the other, so that in entirety they become a
complex spiral motion. This principle also considers that a new
form of motion occurs as the opposite of (or in antagonism to)
an old form of motion; however, that at the same time the new
form of motion necessarily preserves many essential elements of
the old form of motion (p. 288), that new things grow out of old
things. It considers that the new forms, characteristics, and
properties of things are produced in leaps through successive
ruptures, namely through conflict and division; but also that the
connection and mutual relationship of things cannot be
absolutely destroyed. Finally, dialectical materialism suggests
that the world is infinite (limitless); not only is it so in its
110 MAO ZEDONG

totality, but also in its parts. Are not electrons, atoms, and
molecules47 manifestations of a complex and infinite world?
The fundamental form of the motion of matter also
determines the various subjects of the basic natural and social
sciences. Dialectical materialism observes and studies the
development of the world as a progressive motion which passes
through the inorganic world to the organic world to arrive at the
highest form of the motion of matter (society); the subordinate
and related components of forms of motion constitute the
foundations of the subordinate and related components of their
corresponding sciences (inorganic science, organic science,
social science). Engels said: "Classification of the sciences,
each of which analyzes a single form of motion, or a series of
forms of motion that belong together and pass into one another,
is therefore the classification, the arrangement, of these forms of
motion themselves according to their inherent sequence, and
herein lies its importance".48
[p. 210] The entire world (including human society)*? adopts
qualitatively different and varying forms of matter in motion.
Consequently, we cannot forget the question of the varying
concrete forms of matter in motion; there is no such thing as so-
called "matter in general" and "motion in general". In the world
there is only motion or matter which is different in form and
which is concrete. "Words like matter and motion are nothing
but abbreviations in which we comprehend many different
sensuously perceptible things according to their common
properties” (Engels).>9
Narrated above is the dialectical materialist theory of
motion of the world or the principle of development of the
world. These theories are the quintessence of Marxist
philosophy, the world view and methodology of the proletariat.
If all proletarian revolutionaries grasp the weapon of this
thoroughgoing science, they will be able to understand and
transform this world.

(p. 289) 7. On Time and Space

Motion is a form of the existence of matter, and space

and time are also forms of the existence of matter. Matter in
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 111

motion exists in space and time, and moreover, the motion of

matter is itself the premise for these two forms of existence of
matter, space and time. Space and time cannot be separated
from matter. The sentence "matter exists in space" says that
matter itself possesses the capacity of expansion; the material
world is a world in which the capacity of expansion exists
internally. It does not suggest that matter is situated in a space
which is a non-material void. Neither space and time are
independent non-material things; neither are they subjective
forms of our perceptions. They are forms of existence of the
objective material world; they are objective, have no existence
apart from matter, and neither does matter exist apart from them.
The view that sees space and time as forms of the
existence of matter is the thoroughgoing materialist viewpoint.
This conception of time and space is in fundamental opposition
to the [p. 211] various idealist conceptions of time and space
listed below:5!
(1) The Kantian conception of time and space, which
considers time and space are not objective realities, but
forms of intuition of humankind.52
(2) The Hegelian conception of time and space, which
incorporates a conception of time and space as
developing, increasingly approaching the absolute Idea.
(3) The Machist conception of time and space, which
considers time and space are "categories of sense
perception", and “instruments for the harmonization of
experience".°3
None of these idealist viewpoints recognizes the
objective reality of time and space, or recognizes that, in their
own development, the concepts of time and space reflect
materially existing forms. These incorrect theories have all been
refuted one by one by dialectical materialism.
On the question of time and space, dialectical materialism
not only struggles against these idealist theories listed above, it
also struggles against mechanical materialism. Of particular
note>4 (p. 290) is Newtonian mechanics, which treats space
and time as unrelated and static insubstantial entities, and which
situates matter within this insubstantial context. Dialectical
materialism, in opposition to this theory of mechanics, points
112 MAO ZEDONG

out that our conception of time and space is a developmental

one. "There is nothing in the world but matter in motion, and
matter in motion cannot move otherwise than in space and time.
Human conceptions of space and time are relative, but these
relative conceptions go to compound absolute truth. These
relative conceptions, in their development, move towards
absolute truth and approach nearer and nearer to it. The
mutability of human conceptions of space and time no more
refutes the objective reality of space and time than the mutability
of scientific knowledge of the structure and forms of matter in
motion refutes the objective reality of the external world".
(Lenin)56
This is the conception of time and space held by
dialectical materialism.

[p. 212] 8. On Consciousness

Dialectical materialism considers consciousness to be a

product of matter, that it is one form of the development of
matter, and a specific characteristic of a definite form of matter.
The theory of consciousness of materialism and the historical
approach’ is in fundamental opposition to the viewpoint of all
idealisms and mechanical materialisms on this question.
According to the Marxist viewpoint, consciousness
originated in the development from the inorganic world without
consciousness to the animal world possessing rudimentary
forms of consciousness; there then developed humankind
which possessed high-level forms of consciousness. Such
high-level forms of consciousness not only cannot be separated
from the advanced nervous systems which came with
physiological development, they cannot be separated from the
labour and production which comes with the development of
society. Marx and Engels have emphatically pointed out the
dependent relationship which consciousness has to the
development of material production, and the relationship
between consciousness and the development5® of human
language.
So-called consciousness is a particular characteristic of a
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 113

definite form5? of matter; this form of matter is composed of a

complex nervous system, and this type of nervous system can
only occur (p. 291) at a high stage in the evolution of the natural
world. The entire inorganic world, plant kingdom, and
rudimentary animal kingdom - none of these has the ability to
comprehend those processes which occur either within or
without them; they are without consciousness.© It is only the
animal being that possesses an advanced nervous system that
has the ability to comprehend processes;®! that is, which has
the ability to reflect internally or comprehend these processes.
The objective physiological processes of the nervous system of
human beings function in line with the subjective manifestation
of the forms of consciousness that they adopt internally; these
are themselves all? objective things, are certain types of
material process; however, these simultaneously also constitute
subjective psychological functions in the substance of the brain.
There is no mind comprised of thought which is in
essence distinct, there is only ideational matter - the brain. This
ideational matter is matter of a particular quality [p. 213], matter
which has developed to a high degree following the
development of language in human social life. This matter
possesses the particular characteristic of thought, something
possessed by no other type of matter.
However, vulgar materialists consider thought to be
matter secreted from within the brain; this viewpoint
misrepresents our conception of this problem. It must be
understood that the behaviour of thought, emotion, and will is
weightless, neither does it possess the capacity to expand; and
yet consciousness, together with weight, and the capacity to
expand (shenzhangxing), and so on, are all matter with different
characteristics. Consciousness is an intrinsic condition of matter
in motion; it reflects the particular characteristics of the
physiological processes which occur with matter which is in
motion. These particular characteristics cannot be separated
from the objective processes of nerve function, but they are
not® identical with such processes. The confusion of these two
and the repudiation of the particularity of consciousness - this is
the viewpoint of vulgar materialists.
 114 MAO ZEDONG

Similarly, the mechanistic theory of sham Marxism

echoes the viewpoint of certain bourgeois right-wing®™ schools
of thought within psychology; this in actuality has also
completely overturned consciousness. They consider the
processes of the physiology and comprehension of
consciousness to be a particular characteristic of the nature of
advanced material substance, and do not recognise that
consciousness is a product of the social practice of
humankind.®5 For the concrete historical identity of object and
subject, they substitute the equality of object and subject, and
the one-sided mechanistic objective world. These viewpoints
which confuse consciousness with a physiological process are
tantamount to the abolition of the fundamental question of
philosophy of the relationship® between thought and existence.
(p. 292) The idealism of the Mensheviks attempts to employ a
compromise theory, one which reconciles materialism and
idealism, as a substitute for Marxist epistemology. They oppose
the principle of dialectics through the principles of®’ the
"synthesis"68 of objectivism and subjectivism and the "mutual
assistance" of these two methods.®? However, this principle of
dialectics is both non-mechanistic objectivism and non-idealist
subjectivism, and represents the concrete historical identity” of
objective and subjective.
However, there is also the unusual theory of
Plekhanov's animist view on the problem of consciousness,
which is fully expressed in his celebrated dictum "a stone also
possesses consciousness". [p. 214]. According to this
viewpoint, consciousness does not occur in the process of
' development of matter, but exists in all matter from the very
beginning; there is only a difference of degree between the
consciousness of humans, low-level organisms, and a stone.’!
This anti-historical viewpoint is fundamentally opposed to the
viewpoint of dialectical materialism which considers
consciousness to be the ultimately occurring particular
characteristic of matter.72
Only dialectical materialism's theory of consciousness is
the correct theory on problems of consciousness.
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 115

9. On Reflection
To be a thoroughgoing materialist, it is insufficient
simply to acknowledge the material origins of consciousness;
the knowability of matter by consciousness also must be
acknowledged.
The question of whether or not matter can be known is a
complex one; it is a question which all philosophers of the past
have felt powerless’ to deal with. Only dialectical materialism
is able to provide the correct solution. On this question, the
standpoint of dialectical materialism has been in opposition to
agnosticism and is different to strident realism.
The agnosticism of Hume and Kant isolates the subject
of knowledge from the object, and considers that it is not
possible to transcend the limits which isolate the subject;
between the "thing-in-itself" (p. 293) and its outward form
exists an impassable chasm.
The strident realism of Machism equates the object with
sense perceptions, and considers that the truth is already
established in final form in sense perceptions. At the same time,
Machism not only does not understand that sense perceptions
are a result of the effects of the external world, it moreover does
not understand the active role of the subject in the process of
cognition, namely, [p. 215] the transformative work of the
sense organs and thinking brain of the subject»74 on the effects
of the external world (such that two forms - impressions and
concepts - are made manifest).
It is only the theory of reflection of dialectical
materialism which has positively answered the problem of
knowability to become the "soul" of Marxist epistemology.
This theory has clearly demonstrated that our impressions and
concepts not only arise from objective things, but also reflect
them. It demonstrates that impressions and concepts are neither
a product of the spontaneous development of the subject as the
idealists suggest, nor the label given objective things as
suggested by the agnostics; they are rather the reflection of
objective things, a photographic image and sample copy of
them.
116 MAO ZEDONG

Objective truth exists independently and does not depend

on the subject.75 Although it is reflected in our sense
perceptions and concepts, it achieves final form gradually rather
than instantaneously. The viewpoint of strident realism, which
considers objective truth achieves final form in sense
perceptions and that we gain it thus, is a mistaken one.
Although objective truth does not achieve final form at
once in our sense perceptions and concepts, it is not
unknowable. The reflection theory of dialectical materialism
opposes the viewpoint of agnosticism, and considers that
consciousness can reflect objective truth in the process of
cognition. The process of cognition is a complex one; in this
process, when the as yet unknown "thing-in-itself"”® is reflected
in our sense perceptions, impressions, and concepts, it becomes
a "thing-for-us". Sense perceptions and thought certainly do
not, as Kant has stated, isolate us from the external world;
rather, they are what links us with it. Sense perceptions and
thought are reflections of the objective external world. Mental”7
things (impressions and concepts) can be no other than "material
things, altered (p. 294) and transformed, within the brain of
humankind". (Marx) In the process of cognition, the material
world is increasingly reflected in our knowledge more closely,
more precisely, more multifariously, and more profoundly. It is
the task of Marxist epistemology to carry on a struggle on two
fronts against Machism and Kantianism, and to expose the
errors of strident realism and agnosticism.
[p. 216] The reflection theory of materialist dialectics
considers that our capacity to know the objective world is
limitless; this view is in fundamental opposition to the
viewpoint of the agnostics who consider the human capacity for
knowledge to be limited. However, there are definite historical
limits on each approach we make’® to absolute truth. Lenin
referred to it thus: "The Jimits of approximation of our
knowledge to objective, absolute truth are historically
conditional, but the existence of such truth is unconditional and
the fact that we are approaching near to it is also unconditional.
The contours of the picture are historically conditional, but the
fact that this picture depicts an objectively existing model is
unconditional".7? We acknowledge that human knowledge is
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 117

subject to the limitations of historical conditions, and that truth

cannot be achieved at once. But we are not agnostics, and8°
recognise that truth becomes complete in the historical
movement of human knowledge. Lenin also stated: "The
reflection of nature in man's thought must be understood not
‘lifelessly', not ‘abstractly’, not devoid of movement, not
without contradictions; but in the eternal process of movement,
the arising of contradictions and their solution".8! The
movement of knowledge is complex and replete with
contradictions and struggle. This is the viewpoint of the
epistemology of dialectical materialism.
The anti-historical standpoint of all those philosophies
which, epistemologically, do not treat knowledge as a process
consequently lacks breadth of view. This narrow viewpoint in
the empiricism of sensationalism®2 has created a deep chasm
between sense perceptions and concepts; in the rationalist
school, it has caused concepts to become divorced from sense
perceptions. It is only the epistemology of dialectical
materialism (reflection theory) which treats knowledge as a
process, and in so doing thoroughly eliminates this narrow
viewpoint; it does so by attributing knowledge with a material
and dialectical status.
Reflection theory points out: The process of reflection is
not limited to sense perceptions and impressions, and exists in
thought (in abstract concepts); knowledge is a process of
motion from sense perceptions to thought. As Lenin has said:
"Knowledge is the reflection of nature. But this is not a simple,
not an immediate, not a complete reflection, but the process of a
series of abstractions, (p. 295) the formation of concepts, laws,
etc" 83
[p. 217] At the same time, Lenin has pointed out: "The
process of knowledge involving a movement from sense
perceptions to thought is accomplished through a leap".84
Lenin, here, has clearly expounded the dialectical materialist
viewpoint of the interrelation between experiential and rational
elements in cognition. Many philosophers do not comprehend
the sudden change that occurs within the process of the
movement of knowledge, that is, the process of movement from
sense perceptions to thought (from impressions to concepts).
 ad ncaa
118 MAO ZEDONG

oe
Consequently, to understand this transformation, which is

cli
produced by contradiction and adopts the form of a leap,
namely, to comprehend that the identity of sense perceptions and
thought is a dialectical identity, is to have comprehended the
most important element of the essence of Lenin's reflection
theory.

10. On Truth

Truth is objective and relative; it is also absolute - this is

the viewpoint on truth of materialist dialectics.
Truth firstly is objective. Having recognised the
objective existence of matter and the origin of consciousness in
matter is to recognise the objective character of truth. The so-
called objective truth, that is to say, the objectively existing
material world, is the only source of the content of our
knowledge or concepts; there is no other source. It is only
idealists who deny that the material world exists independently
of human consciousness - this fundamental principle of idealism
maintains that knowledge or concepts emerge subjectively and
spontaneously, and without any objective content.®5 Because of
this, it acknowledges subjective truth and rejects objective truth.
However, this is at odds with reality, for any knowledge or
concept which fails to reflect the laws of the objective world is
not scientific knowledge or objective truth; it is superstition or
wishful thinking which subjectively engages in self-deception
and the deception of others. All practical activity of humankind
which has as its purpose the transformation of the environment
is subject to the direction of thought (knowledge), regardless of
whether it be productive activity, activity involving class
struggle or national struggle,®¢ or any other forms of activity. If
this thought does not conform to objective laws, that is, if
objective laws (p. 296) are not reflected in the brain of the
person undertaking the action and do not constitute [p. 218] the
content of his thought or knowledge, then that action will
certainly not be able to achieve its purpose. The errors made by
so-called subjective guidance’? within the revolutionary
movement is indicative of this sort of situation. Marxism
became revolutionary scientific knowledge precisely because it
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 119

correctly reflected the actual laws of the objective world; it is

objective truth.88 All thought that opposes Marxism is therefore
incorrect, and this because it is not founded on correct objective
laws and is completely subjective wishful thinking. There are
those who say that what is universally accepted is objective truth
(the subjective idealist Bogdanov stated this view). According
to this viewpoint, then, religion and prejudice are also objective
truth, because, although religion and prejudice are in fact
erroneous views, they are frequently widely accepted by a
majority of people; and sometimes correct scientific thought
cannot overturn these erroneous widely held beliefs.8?
Materialist dialectics is fundamentally opposed to this viewpoint;
it considers that it is only scientific knowledge which correctly
reflects objective laws which can be designated as truth. All
truth must be objective. Truth and falsity are absolutely in
opposition. The only way to determine whether any knowledge
is truth is to see if it does or does not reflect objective laws. If it
does not conform to objective laws, even though it is
acknowledged by the general populace or by certain wildly
extravagant theories within the revolutionary movement, it can
only be treated as erroneous.
The first problem of the theory of truth of materialist
dialectics is the question of subjective and objective truth. Its
response is to deny the former and recognise the latter. Its
second problem is the question of absolute and relative truth. Its
response is, while recognising both, it does not one-sidedly
accept or reject either aspect; moreover, it points out that the
mutual relationship between them is correct, that it is dialectical.
It is absolute truth it acknowledges when materialist
dialectics acknowledges objective truth. This is because, when
we say the content of knowledge is a reflection of the objective
world, that is the same as acknowledging the object of our
knowledge is that external absolute world. "All true knowledge
of nature is knowledge of the eternal, the infinite, and hence
essentially absolute". (Engels)?! However, objective absolute
truth does not instantaneously and completely become the
knowledge that we have; rather, through the introduction of
countless relative truths in the limitless process of development
of our thought, absolute truth is arrived at. [p. 219] The sum
120 MAO ZEDONG

total of these countless relative truths is the manifestation of

absolute truth. By its very nature, human thought can provide
us with absolute truth. Absolute truth can only come about from
the accumulation of many relative truths. Each stage of the
development of science adds a new dimension to the sum total
of absolute truth. However, the limits of the truth of each
scientific principle are invariably relative; absolute truth is only
manifest in countless relative truths; and if it is not so manifest
through relative truth, absolute truth could not be known.
(p. 297) Materialist dialectics certainly does not deny the
relativity of all knowledge; but in doing so it is only indicating
the historically conditional character of the limits of our
knowledge's approximation to objective absolute truth, and not
suggesting that knowledge itself is only relative. All inventions
of science are historically limited and relative.? But scientific
knowledge is different from falsehood; it displays and depicts
objective absolute truth. This is the dialectical viewpoint on the
interrelationship between absolute and relative truth.
There are two viewpoints, both of which are incorrect on
the question of the interrelationship between absolute and
relative truth. One is metaphysical materialism, the other is
idealist relativism.
On the basis of their fundamental metaphysical principle
of "the unchangeable material world", metaphysical materialists
consider that human thought is also unchanging; that is, they
consider that this unchanging objective world can
instantaneously and in its entirety be absorbed in human
consciousness. That is to say, they acknowledge absolute
truth, but for them it is acquired only once by humans; they
regard truth as immobile and lifeless, something that does not
develop. Their error resides not in acknowledging that there is
absolute truth - to acknowledge this point is correct. It is rather
in their failure to understand the historical character of truth, and
in their not perceiving the acquisition of truth as a knowledge
process. It resides also in their not understanding that absolute
truth can only come to fruition little by little in the process of
development of human knowledge and that every step forward
in knowledge expresses the content of absolute truth; that, in
relation to complete truth, however, such knowledge possesses
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 121

only relative significance and certainly cannot instantaneously

achieve the completeness of absolute truth. The viewpoint on
truth of metaphysical materialism is an expression of one
extreme of epistemology.
[p. 220] The other extreme within epistemology on the
question of truth is idealist relativism. This denies that
knowledge is characterised by absolute truth, only
acknowledging its relative significance. It considers all
scientific inventions contain no absolute truth; they are thus not
objective truth. Truth is only subjective and relative.
Consequently, all erroneous viewpoints have the right to exist.
Where imperialism invades a weak and small nation, where a
ruling class exploits the labouring masses, this doctrine?> of
invasion and system of exploitation are also truth, since truth is
anyway only subjective and relative. The result of the rejection
of objective and absolute?® truth inevitably leads to this
conclusion. Moreover, the purpose of idealist relativism is
actually to present the case for the ruling class; for example, the
purpose of relativist (p. 298) pragmatism (or experimentalism)
is just that.
It can therefore be seen that neither metaphysical
materialism nor idealist relativism can correctly solve the
problem of the interrelationship between absolute and relative
truth. Only materialist dialectics can provide the correct answer
to the problem of the relationship between thought and
existence, and consequently determine the objectivity of
scientific knowledge; furthermore, it at the same time provides a
correct understanding of absolute and relative truth. This is the
theory of truth of materialist dialectics.

11. On Practice - [Refer the second translation in this volume

- Ed.]

[p. 234] (p. 298) Chapter 3: Materialist Dialectics

The two questions of "Idealism and Materialism" and

"Dialectical Materialism" have been briefly dealt with above.
We come now to a systematic discussion of the problem of
dialectics which has only been mentioned in outline.97
122 MAO ZEDONG

The Ma rx is t wo rl d (or un iv er sa l) vi ew is dia lec tic al

[p. 235]
materi al is m; it is not me ta ph ys ic al ma te ri al is m (al so cal led
mechanis ti c ma te ri al is m) . Thi s dis tin cti on is a ma jo r iss ue of the
po rt an ce . Wh at is the wo rl d? Fr om an ci en t ti me s
utmost im
until the presen t, the re ha ve be en thr ee ma jo r re sp on se s to thi s
ques ti on . Th e fir st is id ea li sm (ei the r me ta ph ys ic al or dia lec tic al
sm ), wh ic h sta tes tha t the wo rl d is cr ea te d by mi nd , or
ideali
through extension, by spirit. The second is mechanistic
ic h de ni es tha t the wo rl d is a pr od uc t of mi nd ;
materialism wh
the world is a ma te ri al wo rl d, but ma tt er (p. 29 9) do es not
develo p and is un ch an gi ng . Th e thi rd is the Ma rx is t re sp on se
which has ov er tu rn ed the tw o pr ev io us re sp on se s; it sta tes tha t
the world is not cr ea te d by mi nd , and nei the r is it ma tt er wh ic h
does not develop; rat her , it is a de ve lo pi ng ma te ri al wo rl d. Thi s
latter position is dialectical materialism.”
Is not thi s Ma rx is t co nc ep ti on of the wo rl d, wh ic h has
revolutionis ed the pe rc ep ti on of the wo rl d pr ev io us ly hel d by
humanity, a di sc ou rs e of ea rt h- sh ak in g si gn if ic an ce ? Th er e
were tho se in the We st 's an ci en t Gr ee ce wh o es po us ed the vi ew
that the wo rl d is a de ve lo pi ng ma te ri al wo rl d; but be ca us e of the
limitations of the era , it wa s on ly di sc us se d in si mp le an d
general terms, and their view is described as naive materialism.
It did not ha ve (i nd ee d, co ul d not ha ve had ) a sci ent ifi c bas e.
However, its viewpoint was basically correct. Hegel created
dialectic al id ea li sm , sta tin g tha t the wo rl d is de ve lo pm en ta l, but
is created by mind. He was a developmental idealist. His
theory of development (that is, dialectics) was correct, but his
developmental idealism was erroneous. In the West during the
ee ce nt ur ie s of the se ve nt ee nt h, ei gh te en th , an d ni ne te en th
thr
centuries , the bo ur ge oi s ma te ri al is m? of Ge rm an y, Fr an ce , and
other co un tr ie s wa s me ch an is ti c ma te ri al is m. !° ° Th ey as se rt ed
that the world is a material world, and this is correct; however,
they stated tha t the wo rl d is ma ch in e- li ke in its mo ve me nt , wit h
only changes in vo lv in g qu an ti ta ti ve in cr ea se and de cr ea se or in
place, there be in g no qu al it at iv e ch an ge - an in co rr ec t vi ew .
Marx inherited the naive dialectical materialism of Greece,
transforme d me ch an is ti c ma te ri al is m an d dia lec tic al id ea li sm ,
and created dialectical materialism which hitherto had not been
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 123

placed on a scientific basis, and which became the revolutionary

weapon of the entire world proletariat and all oppressed peoples.
Materialist dialectics is the scientific methodology of
Marxism, it is the method of knowledge and logic,!°! and yet it
is a world view. The world [p. 236] is actually a developing
material world: this is a world view. This world view becomes
a method if used to observe the world, to study, think about,
and resolve the problems of the world,!® to lead a revolution,
to do work, to engage in production, to direct warfare, and to
discuss!93 a person's strengths and weaknesses; this is a
methodology. There is no other single methodology apart from
this; therefore in the hands of Marxists,!°4 world view and
methodology are a single entity, and so too are dialectics,
epistemology, and logic.
We will systematically discuss materialist dialectics and
its many issues - its numerous categories, laws, and principles
(these several terms have one meaning).
(p. 300) What actually are the laws!5 of materialist dialectics?
And of these, what are the fundamental laws and which are the
subordinate laws which constitute the aspects, features, and
issues of the theory of materialist dialectics which are
indispensable and must be resolved?! Why is it that all of
these laws are laws inherent in the objective world and not
created subjectively? Why study and understand these laws?
The complete revolutionary theory of materialist
dialectics was created by Marx and Engels, and developed by
Lenin. To the present, with the victory of socialism!0” in the
Soviet Union and the period of world revolution, this theory has
entered a new stage of development which has enhanced and
enriched its content. The following categories included in this
theory are, firstly:
The law of the unity of contradictions;
The law of the transformation of quality into quantity
and vice versa;
The law of the negation of the negation.108
These are the basic laws of materialist dialectics. Apart
from the naive materialism of ancient Greece which simply and
unsystematically pointed out some of the significance of these
laws, and Hegel who developed these laws in an idealist
124 MAO ZEDONG

manner, they have been repudiated by all metaphysical

philosophies (the so-called metaphysical philosophies are
theories opposed to the theory of development). It was only
with Marx and Engels who transformed these laws of Hegel in a
material way, that they became the most fundamental part of the
Marxist world view [p. 237] and methodology.
Besides the basic laws outlined above and related to
these laws are the following categories of materialist dialectics:
Essence and Appearance
(p. 301) Form and Content
Cause and Effect
Basis and Condition
Possibility and Reality
Chance and Necessity
Necessity and Freedom!
Chain and Link, and so on.
Of these categories, some were previously studied in
depth by metaphysical philosophies and idealist dialectics, some
were studied only one-sidedly by philosophy, and some were
put forward for the first time by Marxism. In the hands of
Marxist revolutionary theorists and practitioners, these
categories have stripped away the idealist and metaphysical husk
of former philosophies, overcome their one-sidedness, and
discovered their authentic form; moreover, as the era
progressed, they greatly enriched their content to become an
important component of revolutionary scientific methodology.
The combination of these categories and the basic categories
mentioned above forms a complete and profound system of
materialist dialectics.
None of these laws and categories is created by human
thought itself; they are the actual laws of the objective world.
All idealisms assert [p. 238] spirit creates matter, and from this
perspective, the tenets of philosophy, its principles, laws, and
categories, are naturally created by mind. Hegel, who
developed the system of dialectics, perceived dialectics in this
manner. He saw the laws of dialectics not as being abstracted
from the history of nature and society, but as a logical system in
pure thought. After human thought has created this system, it
imposes it on nature and society. Marx and Engels stripped
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 125

away Hegel's mystical shell, discarded his idealism, and placed

his dialectics on a material basis. Engels stated (p. 302): “It is,
therefore, from the history of nature and humankind that the
laws of dialectics are abstracted. For they are nothing but the
most general laws of these two aspects of historical
development. And indeed they can be reduced to three
fundamental laws: the transformation of quality into quantity
and vice versa, the unity of contradictions, and the negation of
the negation".!!0 While being laws of the objective world, the
laws of dialectics are also laws of subjective thought, and that is
because the laws of human thought are none other than the laws
of the objective world reflected in the brains of humans through
practice. As was discussed previously, dialectics,
epistemology, and logic are one and the same.
Why do we study dialectics? We study it for no other
reason than to change this world, to change the age-old
relationships in this world between humans, and humans and
matter. The lives of the vast majority of this world's humanity
are filled with misery and suffering as a result of the oppression
of the political and economic systems dominated by a minority.
The people who live in China suffer a twofold cruel and
inhuman oppression - national and social oppression. We must
change these age-old relationships and strive for national and
social liberation.
Why is it necessary to study dialectics to achieve the
objective of changing China and the world? It is because
dialectics is made up of the most general laws of development of
nature and society; when we comprehend dialectics, we have
gained a scientific weapon, and in the revolutionary practice of
changing nature and society possess a theory and method suited
to this practice. Materialist dialectics is itself a science (a
philosophical science); it is the starting point for all sciences,
and it is also a methodology. Our revolutionary practice!!! is
itself also a science, called social or political science. If we
don't understand dialectics, our [p. 239] affairs will be badly
handled; mistakes made within the revolution are those that
violate dialectics. However, if dialectics is understood,
immense results can be achieved; and if all things done correctly
are investigated, it will be found they conform with dialectics.
126 MAO ZEDONG

Consequently, all revolutionary comrades, and above all cadres,

should diligently study dialectics.
There are those who say: many people understand
practical dialectics, and moreover are practical materialists; and
although they have not read books on dialectics, things that they
do are done correctly, and in fact conform with materialist
dialectics. They surely have no particular need to study
dialectics. This sort of talk is incorrect. (p. 303) Materialist
dialectics is a complete and profound science. Although
revolutionaries who really do possess materialist and dialectical
minds learn a great deal of dialectics from practice, it is not
systematized and lacks the completeness and profundity already
achieved by materialist dialectics. Therefore, they are unable to
see clearly the long-term future of the movement, unable to
analyse a complex process of development, unable to grasp
important political links, and unable to handle the various
aspects of revolutionary work. Because of this, they still need
to study dialectics.
There are others who say that dialectics is abstruse and
difficult to fathom, and that ordinary people have no possibility
of mastering it. This is also incorrect. Dialectics encompasses
the laws of nature, society and thought. Anyone with some
experience of society (experience of production and class
struggle) actually understands some dialectics. Those with even
more experience of society actually have a greater understanding
of dialectics, although their understanding remains in the chaotic
state of common sense and is neither complete nor profound. It
is not difficult to bring order to this commonsense dialectics and
deepen it through further study. The reason why people feel
dialectics is difficult is that there exist no books which explain
dialectics well. In China, there are many books on dialectics
which, while not incorrect, are explained poorly or none too
well, and which frighten people off. Books which are good
at!12 explaining dialectics employ everyday language and relate
moving experiences. Sooner or later such a book must be put
together. This talk of mine is also far from adequate since I
have myself only just begun to study dialectics. There has been
no possibility of writing a useful book on the subject as yet,
although perhaps the opportunity may present itself in the
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 127

future. I wish to do so, but this will be decided by how my

study proceeds.
In the next section various laws of dialectics will be
discussed. [There follows On Contradiction in the Bujuan text;
see the third translation in this volume - Ed.]

Notes

1. Pagination in round brackets refers to the text published in Mao

Zedong Ji, Volume VI, pp. 265-305 (hereafter Ji). Pagination in square brackets
refers to the text published in Mao Zedong ji bujuan, Volume V, pp. 187-280
(hereafter Bujuan).
2. "(Lecture Notes)" in Ji only. The date 1938 appears in both Ji and
Bujuan. However, this date almost certainly refers to the date of publication,
rather than composition. On this issue, see the Introduction to this volume,
particularly notes 2 and 17.
3. "This chapter ... materialism" in Ji only.
4. Jieduan in Ji; jieji in Bujuan, apparently a misprint.
5. "Indirectly" only in Ji.
6. ".. the establishment of a completely new Chinese democratic
republic ..." only in Ji.
7. "\.. through peaceful means...” only in Ji.
8. This last clause only in Bujuan.
9. This quote is an inverted and rather loose translation of a passage
from Lenin's "On the Question of Dialectics", in V.I. Lenin, Collected Works
(London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1961), Vol. 38, p. 363. In Bujuan, the inverted
commas cease before "This is very true”.
10. This last sentence in Bujuan only.
11. ".., as a result of the practice of the proletariat..." in Bujuan only.
12. "... results..." in Bujuan only.
13. This sentence and the following list of headings appear in Ji only.
14. This sentence in Ji only.
15. This last clause in Bujuan only.
16. "\.. at present ...” in Ji only.
17. "\.. in order to arrive at socialism and communism...” in Bujuan
only.
18. “adopt” in Bujuan only.
19. "... they will have gained..." in Bujuan only.
128 MAO ZEDONG

20. Gaizao in Bujuan; Jianshe (reconstruct) in Ji.

21. The last sentence in Bujuan only.
22. Chenfu in Ji; fandong (reactionary) in Bujuan.
23. Inverted commas in Bujuan only.
24. "One-sided” in Bujuan only.
25. “Fideism" is the doctrine that knowledge depends on faith or
revelation.
26. "Formal logic" in Bujuan only.
27. "\., natural world of logical concepts (lunlilguannian de ziran)..." in
Bujuan only. The Ji text reads here as though part of the sentence has been
inadvertently deleted.
28. Lun fazhan de xueshuo in Bujuan. The world "lun" has been left out
of Ji, making the English translation, “this developing theory”.
29. See Frederick Engels, Anti-Dihring (Peking: FLP, 1976), p. 180;
also Frederick Engels, Dialectics of Nature (Moscow: FLPH, 1954), p. 353.
30. According to the editors of Ji, the direct quote from Lenin
commences here. In Bujuan, it commences at "cut in two (jiequ)".
31. Zhexuejia in Bujuan. The jia has been omitted in Ji.
32. These quotes are from Lenin's "Conspectus of Hegel's Science of
Logic", in Collected Works (Moscow: FLPH, 1963), Vol. 38, pp. 90, 190,
217.
33. "... firstly an understanding of..." in Ji only.
34. This last sentence in Bujuan only.
35. "The Chinese" in Bujuan.
36. "Idealists” in Bujuan.
37. Bujuan reads: ". . and nicely demonstrated the correctness of the
recognition by the materialist viewpoint of dialectical materialism of the
materiality and objective existence of the world”.
38. “history” in Ji only.
39. “only" in Bujuan only.
40. This last clause in Bujuan only.
41. Yuanli (principle, tenet) in Ji.
42. See Dialectics of Nature, pp. 92-93.
43. A quotation from Dong Zhongshu (179-104BC). Mao also uses this
quotation in the official text of On Contradiction. See Selected Works, I,
p. 313.
44, "_. as the unity and motion of the limitless diversity of the world's
matter", in Bujuan only.
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 129

45. This quote is drawn from Engels, Dialectics of Nature, p. 328. I have
stayed as close to the official Soviet English translation as the Chinese permits.
46. See Lenin's "Conspectus of Hegel's book Lectures on the History of
Philosophy", in Collected Works, Vol. 38, p. 256. Lenin states, "... the
universal principle of development must be combined, linked, made to
correspond with the universal principle of the unity of the world, nature,
motion, matter, etc.” (emphasis in original).
47. "molecules" in Bujuan only.
48. This quote is drawn from Engels, Dialectics of Nature, p. 330.
Emphasis in original. The official Soviet English translation has been used.
49. Parentheses in Bujuan only.
50. Engels, Dialectics of Nature, p. 313. Emphasis in original. The
official Soviet English translation has been used.
51. The paragraphing of the following four paragraphs is based on Ji.
They are all incorporated in one paragraph in the Bujuan text.
52. Renlei in Bujuan; Keguan (objective) in Ji.
53. For a lengthy discussion on space and time, and the Kantian and
Machian conceptions of them, see V.I. Lenin, Materialism and Empirio-
Criticism (Peking: FLP, 1972), pp. 202-218.
54, “Note (xianzhu)" in Bujuan only.
55. “time” in Bujuan only.
56. Lenin, Materialism and Empirio-Criticism, p. 203. The translation
used here is taken from this source.
57. Lishizhuyi. Mao also uses this term in his 1938 speech "On the New
Stage". See Ji, Vol. 6, p. 260. Stuart Schram has translated the sentence
"Women shi Makesizhuyi de lishizhuyizhe" as “We are Marxist historicists”.
See The Political Thought of Mao Tse-tung (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1969,
revised ed.), p.172. For my reasons for rejecting this translation, see
N.J. Knight, Mao and History: An Interpretive Essay on Some Problems in
Mao Zedong’s Philosophy of History (Unpublished Ph.D thesis, University of
London, 1983), pp. 222-223.
58. "Development" in Bujuan only.
59. "Form (xingtai)" in Ji only.
60. This last clause in Bujuan only.
61. This last sentence in Bujuan only.
62. “All (fan)" in Bujuan only.
63. The negative bu omitted from Ji.
64. “Left-wing” in Bujuan.
130 MAO ZEDONG

65. Bujuan reads: "They understand consciousness as a physico-

chemical physiological process, and consider that the study of the behaviour of
this advanced substance can be carried out through the study of objective
physiology and biology. They do not understand the qualitatively particular
characteristics of the essence of consciousness, and do not recognise that
consciousness is a product of the social practice of humankind".
66. "Relationship" in Bujuan only.
67. "Principles" in Ji only.
68. Zonghe in Bujuan; liangmeng (alliance, coalition) in Ji.
69. "... and the 'mutual assistance’ of these two methods" in Bujuan
only.
70. Identity (yizhi) in Bujuan only.
71. "Stone" appears in Bujuan only.
72. No paragraph break in Ji.
73. Wuli in Bujuan; wufa in Ji.
74. Quaniti in Ji, possibly a typographical error.
75. zhuti in Bujuan; zhuguan in Ji.
76. Zizaizhiwu in Bujuan; Zizailun in Ji.
77, Sixiang.
78. Apparent typographical error in Ji; the negative bu appears before
“approach” (jiejin). Replaced by zhi in Bujuan.
79, Lenin, Materialism and Empirio-Criticism, pp. 152-153. Emphasis
in original. The official Soviet English translation has been used. In Ji, the
quotation is incorrectly extended for a further sentence.
80. Bu in Ji, an apparent typographical error; replaced by you in
Bujuan.
81. Lenin, "Conspectus of Hegel's Science of Logic", Collected Works,
Vol. 38, p. 195. The official Soviet English translation has been used. The
Chinese version reads slightly differently. The quote is incorrectly broken in
two in Bujuan.
82. Ganjuezhuyi: the doctrine that sensation is the sole origin of
knowledge.
83. Lenin, "Conspectus of Hegel's Science of Logic", Collected Works,
Vol. 38, p. 182. The Soviet English translation has been modified, as the
quotation has been slightly altered in the Chinese texts.
84. Given as a direct quote in Ji, but not in Bujuan.
85. "Content" (neirong) in Bujuan only.
86. This last clause in Bujuan only.
87. "Guidance" (zhidao) in Bujuan only.
 DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 131

88. This sentence in parentheses in Ji only. The last clause in Ji reads:

"it is the truth of the objective world”.
89. Puji in Bujuan; dongxi in Ji.
90. The following paragraph in Bujuan only.
91. Engels, Dialectics of Nature, p. 310.
92. This sentence in Bujuan only.
93. Paragraph break in Bujuan only.
94. Chengren in Bujuan; fouren in Ji.
95. zhuyi, in Bujuan only.
96. "Subjective" (zhuguan) in Ji.
97. Paragraph break in Bujuan only.
98. Paragraph break in Bujuan only.
99. “Idealism” in Ji.
100. "Idealism" in Ji.
101. "Logic" in Bujuan only.
102. “Think about and resolve the problems of the world” in Bujuan only.
103. Yilun in Bujuan; renshi (to know) in Ji.
104. "Marxism" in Ji.
105. Faze.
106. Paragraph break in Ji.
107. "Revolution" in Ji.
108. See Engels, Dialectics of Nature, pp. 83-91. In this source, the law
on contradiction is referred to as "the law of the interpenetration of opposites”.
109. In Bujuan only.
110. Engels, Dialectics of Nature, p. 83. Mao has left out a significant
clause in Engels' quote, perhaps to make his attack on idealism more forceful.
The quote is as follows, with the clause omitted by Mao shown in emphasis:
"Tt is, therefore, from the history of nature and human society that
the laws of dialectics are abstracted. For they are nothing but the most general
laws of these two aspects of historical development, as well as of thought
itself..."
111. "Practice" in Bujuan only.
112. "Good at..." in Bujuan only.
130 MAO ZEDONG

65. Bujuan reads: "They understand consciousness as a physico-

chemical physiological process, and consider that the study of the behaviour of
this advanced substance can be carried out through the study of objective
physiology and biology. They do not understand the qualitatively particular
characteristics of the essence of consciousness, and do not recognise that
consciousness is a product of the social practice of humankind”.
66. “Relationship” in Bujuan only.
67. "Principles" in Ji only.
68. Zonghe in Bujuan; liangmeng (alliance, coalition) in Ji.
69. ".. and the ‘mutual assistance’ of these two methods” in Bujuan
only.
70. Identity (yizhi) in Bujuan only.
71. "Stone" appears in Bujuan only.
72. No paragraph break in Ji.
73. Wuli in Bujuan; wufa in Ji.
74, Quanti in Ji, possibly a typographical error.
75. zhuti in Bujuan; zhuguan in Ji.
76. Zizaizhiwu in Bujuan; Zizailun in Ji.
77. Sixiang.
78. Apparent typographical error in Ji; the negative bu appears before
“approach” (jiejin). Replaced by zhi in Bujuan.
79, Lenin, Materialism and Empirio-Criticism, pp. 152-153. Emphasis
in original. The official Soviet English translation has been used. In Ji, the
quotation is incorrectly extended for a further sentence.
80. Bu in Ji, an apparent typographical error; replaced by you in
Bujuan.
81. Lenin, "Conspectus of Hegel's Science of Logic", Collected Works,
Vol. 38, p. 195. The official Soviet English translation has been used. The
Chinese version reads slightly differently. The quote is incorrectly broken in
two in Bujuan.
82. Ganjuezhuyi: the doctrine that sensation is the sole origin of
knowledge.
83. Lenin, "Conspectus of Hegel's Science of Logic", Collected Works,
Vol. 38, p. 182. The Soviet English translation has been modified, as the
quotation has been slightly altered in the Chinese texts.
84. Given as a direct quote in Ji, but not in Bujuan.
85. "Content" (neirong) in Bujuan only.
86. This last clause in Bujuan only.
87. “Guidance” (zhidao) in Bujuan only.
| DIALECTICAL MATERIALISM 131

88. This sentence in parentheses in Ji only. The last clause in Ji reads:

"it is the truth of the objective world”.
89. Puji in Bujuan; dongxi in Ji.
90. The following paragraph in Bujuan only.
91. Engels, Dialectics of Nature, p. 310.
92. This sentence in Bujuan only.
93. Paragraph break in Bujuan only.
94, Chengren in Bujuan; fouren in Ii.
95. zhuyi, in Bujuan only.
96. "Subjective" (zhuguan) in Ji.
97. Paragraph break in Bujuan only.
98. Paragraph break in Bujuan only.
99. "Idealism" in Ji.
100. "Idealism" in Ji.
101. "Logic" in Bujuan only.
102. "Think about and resolve the problems of the world” in Bujuan only.
103. Yilun in Bujuan; renshi (to know) in Ji.
104. "Marxism" in Ji.
105. Faze.
106. Paragraph break in Ji.
107. "Revolution" in Ji.
108. See Engels, Dialectics of Nature, pp. 83-91. In this source, the law
on contradiction is referred to as "the law of the interpenetration of opposites".
109. In Bujuan only.
110. Engels, Dialectics of Nature, p. 83. Mao has left out a significant
clause in Engels’ quote, perhaps to make his attack on idealism more forceful.
The quote is as follows, with the clause omitted by Mao shown in emphasis:
"It is, therefore, from the history of nature and human society that
the laws of dialectics are abstracted. For they are nothing but the most general
laws of these two aspects of historical development, as well as of thought
itself..."
111. "Practice" in Bujuan only.
112. "Good at..." in Bujuan only.