Lenin cw vol 14 (Materialism and empirio-criticism)

Materialism and Empirio-Criticism (International Publishers, 2022

Why a new edition of a book written more than a century ago already translated into many languages and published in multiple editions? On the morning I received an e-mail asking me to write a foreword to this edition, I then scrolled through my Facebook newsfeed to find an update where a young intellectual posted about another young intellectual who lived decades before him: "He erupted into a meeting of the Moral Science Club [Cambridge] with a copy of Materialism and Empirio-Criticism, bubbling over with enthusiasm about it and reading out passages about the class basis of philosophy. Some thought he had gone crazy. Cornforth did not. The scene had made a great impression on him. He went home, read the book and decided to join the CPGB." 1

Studies in East European Thought, 2018

In May 1909, Lenin published Materialism and empiriocriticism, a polemical assault on forms of positivistic empiricism popular among members of the Bolshevik intelligentsia, especially his political rival Alexander Bogdanov. After expounding the core claims on both sides of the debate, this essay considers the relation of the philosophical issues at stake to the political stances of their proponents. I maintain that Lenin's use of philosophical argument was not purely opportunistic, and I contest the view that his defence of realism was designed as a philosophical rationale for revolutionary vanguardism, arguing instead that Lenin primarily saw himself as defending the world-view of ordinary rank-and-file Marxists against varieties of philosophical obscurantism. Although of marginal influence at the time of its first publication, Materialism and empiriocriticism was later celebrated as a model of philosophical excellence, as the cult of Lenin was fashioned by Stalin. As a result of the text's subsequent prominence, Lenin's manner of philosophizing, with its vitriol and abuse, had a disastrous influence on the subsequent course of Soviet philosophical culture.

Philosophical Debate in Russian Social Democracy A voluminous literature of uneven quality exists in the West on the philosophical controversy that erupted in 1909 between Lenin and the 'Machists', much of it naturally centered on Lenin's written intervention, Materialism and Empirio-criticism. 1 Unfortunately, the substantive issues over which Russian Social Democrats disagreed, and the reasons for this disagreement, are still not easily grasped since most historians and philosophers have been less concerned convincingly to present both sides of the debate as they have been to take up sides in the debate and 'do combat with a point of view' 2-Lenin's point of view above all. My purpose therefore is to present the philosophical dispute between the 'Machists' and Lenin in a new light simply by reconstructing the arguments on each side, especially Lenin's side-as clearly and as

Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal, 2022

Lenin's Materialism and Empirio-criticism: Critical Comments on a Reactionary Philosophy (MEC) is more talked about than read. Consequently it is largely treated uncritically. However, far from presenting the dialectical logic of Marx, Lenin's MEC is a confused combination of 18th century materialism, the materialism of Feuerbach, of Epicurus, and, above all, that of Plekhanov. Lenin’s Materialism and Empirio-Criticism is not Marxist, but Plekhanovian. Not only did Lenin contradict himself in MEC, but he broke with it on all major points during his study of Hegel. A true Marxist approach to epistemology is found in the activity approach of Soviet psychology, not MEC.

Studies in East European Thought, 1993

L'A. etudie le conflit opposant Lenine et Mach en 1908-1909 sur la question du materialisme dans les sciences, contre l'empiriocriticisme prone par Mach. L'A. tente de donner objectivement les arguments de chacun, et de rendre intelligibles les remous provoques dans le monde culturel russe de l'epoque

The Social Though of Karl Marx, 2015

What has come to be known as historical materialism is a theory developed by Marx and Engels that attempts to understand why and how societies change based on material causes. In particular, Marx was interested in how humans' ability to learn about and alter their natural environment can cause societies to change. In Marxian language, historical materialism is a theory of how modes of production come into existence and disappear due to the development of the productive forces. The theory of historical materialism is not simply an analysis of the dynamics of social change with no consideration of the consciousness of the actors. On the contrary, it appears that Marx's theory of historical materialism attempts to explain not only the physical possibility for new societies to develop, but also how development of the productive forces brings a change in people's consciousness. Thus, historical materialism utilizes Marx's analysis of alienation, exploitation, and class to understand how people are motivated to change their societies. Phrased in a more modern language, Marx hypothesized that there are feedback loops of causation between macro-structures and micro-structures, which causes a change in the social structure of societies. As briefly discussed in Chapter 2, Marx attempts to identify micro-behaviors as the ground for social change, since individual people bring about these changes. The important caveat made in Chapter 2 was that micro-behaviors are not natural or fixed. They change according to certain macro-structures and macro-phenomenon. The appearance of macro-phenomena such as increased long-term unemployment, technological change, environmental decay, and declining wages can in turn cause individuals to view the potential for social change in a new light. These same macro-phenomena were brought about by a set of micro-behaviors that caused the current problems or let the problems grow into their current form. The newly influenced micro-behavior that seeks social change will seek to institute new macro-structures that try to rectify the problems of unemployment, wages, and pollution. As can be seen, there is a feedback loop between micro-behaviors and macro-phenomena, which causes society to change. Historical materialism is Marx's attempt to understand what the relevant micro-and macro-structures are that cause societal development. This chapter will present Marx's theory of historical materialism in the following steps. First, the famous statement by Marx on historical materialism from the "Preface" to A Critique of Political Economy will be analyzed. This statement is the most commonly utilized passage when historical materialism is discussed. The passage is rather brief and in many ways leaves out Marx's reflections of micro-behaviors. Marx and Engels' statements on historical materialism from The German Ideology will help clear up and perhaps fill in the absence of micro-behaviors in the "Preface" statement. The German Ideology also has a wider consideration of historical change, in particular an analysis of how class positions emerged. Finally, consciousness development due to social change will be considered, the statements on this topic in the "Preface" will be discussed along with passages from The German Ideology, The Communist Manifesto and The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte.

Lenin Philosophical notebooks, 1916

We began our preparation of this volume using the Fourth Printing, having assumed that this edition marked an improvement over the previous one. Only much later did it become clear, after some spot-checking with the Third Printing , that in certain very important respects the newer printing reflected a carelessness that rendered it inferior to its the inconsistent use of Greek and German characters for the same words which introduced unnecessary confusion; there were also instances where verticle lines that Lenin placed in the margins adjacent to his comment were omitted. On a couple of other ocassions small blocks of text were reordered , and while such practice can clearly fall within the purview of editorial discretion, there were also a couple of places where a few lines of text are repeated, word for word, with no ac-where there were disrepancies between the Third and Fourth printings, be they substantive or merely annoying, the greater confidence in the Third Printing prevailed. Notwithstanding such carelessness, we proceeded to use the Fourth Printing as the basis for the formatting, layout and pagination of this digital edition. The afore-mentioned faux pas were removed and this required some reformatting, and this proceeded on the basis of the 1972 printing. Perhaps it is worth noting that neither edition was particulaly generous in translating into English the German expressions and phrases Lenin's frequently used in the body of the texts. Nor companying editorial note to indicate that such a faux pas the problem was with the editorial staff). In nearly all cases had its source in Lenin's reading notes (which suggests that predecessor. For example, in the Fourth Printing there was source: marxists.org/english

In this unpublished chapter from my thesis I examine how Marx's materialism develops throughout his writings and how he overcomes the problem of empiricism in his later writings, particularly in Capital.