University of Groningen

De dialectisch-materialistische filosofie van Joseph Dietzgen Schaaf, Jasper Willem

IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record

Publication date: 1993

Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database

Citation for published version (APA): Schaaf, J. W. (1993). De dialectisch-materialistische filosofie van Joseph Dietzgen. Kok/Agora.

Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).

Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.

Download date: 12-11-2019 SUMMARY

Joseph Dietzgen (1828-1888)

Joseph Dietzgen was a philosopher and a tanner. At the congress for the 'our International in The Hague in 1872, Marx called him philosopher', the philosopher of proletarian social democracy; he also said once that Dietzgen was one of the most brilliant workers he knew. Dietzgen was a self-educatedphilo- sopher. On the political scene, he played a part in the notorious'Haymarket' affair in in 1886; one of the events which led to the introduction of annual First of May celebrations of the international labour movement. After his 'Chicago death on 15 April 1888, Dietzgen was buried next to the executed martyrs'. Dietzgen was one of the first from within the labour movement to publish a 'Das review of Kapital'. It is remarkable that he should derivephilosophical ideas from Marx's principal work. Dietzgen's best known publication is Das Wesender Menschlichen Kopfarbeit', which was published in 1869, after he had first presen- ted Marx and Engels with the manuscript.

In the history of Marxist thinking, Dietzgen occupies a special place. His work represents the rapidly growing class consciousnessof his time. He focused his attention on Marx's work, at a time when there was no systematicdevelopment of Marx's ideas to speak of. Dietzgen was one of the few within the social democratic labour movement of the day to be immersed in the study of philo- sophy. Based in particular on Feuerbach, Marx, Kantianism and the development 'self-educated of the natural sciences,the manual labourer' Dietzgen advocated materialist and a -materialistepistemological theory. These, in 'proletarian his view, are a contribution to ', a theory which expresses the 'highest' system of relationships of being and thinking as the form of philoso- phical awareness.

Questions regarding Dietzgen's

Dietzgen's philosophy is monistic in nature. This study is focusedon the question in what way Dietzgen treats the relation between unity and diversity as an epistemological and ontological issue. How does Dietzgen formulate the unity of all that exists, and what is the place and the role of the process of gaining knowledge in this formulation? These questions serve as stepping stones to the central question: What is the position of Dieagen's thinking with regard to the philosophy of Feuerbach, and that of Maa. and Engels? This is an important question in the light of the history of the labour movement. In the early years of this century, Dietzgen's work became a subject of discussion.Some said that Dietzgen had nothing to add to Feuerbach's philosophy; others regarded him as the perfect Marxist philosopher. This discussionhas not ended. The present study

387 sccks to clarify thc positions in this discussionby mcans of an analysisof In Dietzgen's , tt Dictzgen'sphilosophy itsclf. prcsupposes thc existenccof This raiscs the additional qucstions

3Sil In Dietzgen's materialism, thought is governedby 'total coherence'.This presupposesthe existence of objective dialecticswhich encompasssubjective dialectics.This recognitionof objective dialectics,however, is problematicin ils formulation.Objective dialecticsas the determiningfactor in the processof gainingknowledge is insufficientlyemphasized. As a result,Dietzgen's epistemo- logicaltheory underscores the subjectiveaspect. Reality seems almost entirely to play a passivepart in the processof gainingknowledge. On a more concretelevel - for instancethe explanationof ethical views - Dietzgen,on the basis of Feuerbach'sphilosophy and Max's historicalmaterialism, does show an interest in the way in which the manifestationsof objectivereality governthe content and developmentof thought. In his rejectionof limited materialismbased on naturalscience, Dietzgen also emphasizesthe need for further developmentof philosophy.He recognizesthe topicalityof critical philosophicalmaterialism, a form of materialismin which Kant's philosophyis critically incorporated,inst€ad of silentlyneglected. The subjective aspect should be fully recognized, especially in a materialistic philosophy.

Dietzgen'stheory of knowledgeharbours an epistemologicaland an ontological perspective.According to Dietzgen,the processof gainingknowledge is a process of reflectionas well as an activityof thought.In thought,everything is reproduced subjectively,after which it, as it were, leadsa new and subjectiveexistence. Every abstractionby the facultyof thoughtis basedon a reflectionof reality.Thought reuniteseverything which appears to havebeen separated in the sensoryperspec- tive; in this way it is possibleto reconstructtotatity. Thought transcendsdirect empiricism,and is in this respect'metaphysical', a term whichDietzgen does not often use in this positivesense. Dietzgen refers to the faculty of knowledgeas a 'spiegelartigesInstrument' ('a mirrorJike instrument'). His monism emphasizesthe total coherenceof all that exists.This coherencein reality presupposesan all-embracingunity. Every part of nature in its own specificway is an expressionof nature in is entirety. This is also true for thought,which in its own specificway also expressesreality. Eachparticular object represents itself or individuality,but is at the sametime an expressionof the cosmoswhich is in a state of constantdevelopment. Viewed from this ontological perspectiveof universalrelationality, the epistemological view of reflection is a specific instance of the general relation between the specificand the universal,in which the specificand the universalare reflectedin a particular way.

Dietzgen is one of the first of the 'Marxists' who theoreticallybegins to think through ethical issues.He uplains morality,without formulatinghis own practical ethics. Feuerbach'sphilosophy and Marx's basis-superstructurethesis ring through: material existence governs life and thought. Dietzgen has been reproachedfor takinga utilitarianposition. The questionis whetheror not in the end he excludesa utilitarian approach.Dietzgen recognizes the basisof ethics in the materiallygoverned human needs and emotions.These needs have to be ful- filled in order to make generalhuman progress possible. He rejecs an abstract moralitywhich is not basedon actualhuman needsand emotions.In order to

389 as revisitlnism cncouragc gcncral human moral progrcss,the way in which Lrthicalconccpts Dietzgenism actuallvcvolvc and on which thcv are bascclmusl bc understood. At thc time ol tirc Sccondlntc of Dictzgen'suork. ThcsedtscL ln l\'larx'swork. theorv and praclicc are morc clctscll'rclatcd than in Dictzgcn's intcrprctation.Be sidcs ol hcr re\ analvsis.Dictzgon appoars primarily to bc intercstcd in finding an adcquate arosc.of which Dictzgcn'sson I nrcthod nÍ gaining knowlcdge,which can subscqucntlvbc applicd in praetice. rcprcsents Onc ol thc ritr$s ti Both instanccsof thc relation bct\\'eenthcon' and practice, however,arc not mcritr,are limilcd ntatn studicd in rclation to onc anolhcr. But thcre erc also placcs*'hcrc Dictzgcn Nlan's that his work lacks a sound firlkrwsMarx's ideas morc closcly.Rcligion has cullivalodthc mind, ht: says;bul Dictzgen's work prc-entincnth' hascdon thought.this culturc shouldcultivate thc reul world. and in doing so socialism. chungcit. ln Feuerbuch'sphikrsophr', thc idca is cxplaincdfrom a matcrialistÍc pcrspcctivc.but in thc dcvelopmcnt oí'his conclusions,Fcuerbach is ambivalcntl conlributtonírtlm lhe Ne hc chooses thc rcform:rtion oÍ thought in particular as primurl objcctivc. ln Thc icant. FI. Roland l{oist i: N,lurx'svie*'. rc:lirrmationof thought is not possiblcrvilhout rc[ormation ol thc signif À. Punnckot.k\hr)$\ m:tll\sig world,without a rcvolutionizingrcalitv. Antl lirr that rcalitv,suhjcctivin shoulcl bc clurlr'rthat lr cllltrltcluri./lltii)n undorstoodÍrom a m:rtcrialisticpe rspectivc. Dictzgon sccms to share this vrel| in Pannckock, howcvcr' did cont s0nrc of his slatemcnts.cven though thcsc ha\'o not bccn w0rkcd oul in 3 prc-cntinent N4arxistphikrstlph phikrsophicalsense . ln hise pistcmological thcon, rralitr is not dcvclopc(linto an hand and Dictzucn on thc o cxplanatorv concept. In this rcspcci, Dic:tzgen's philosophv onlv partiallv and dialccticalma corrcspclndslo Marx's vicw as rcÍlccted in Marx's criticismon Fcucrbach.In thc matcrialism crpistcmologicalsensc, Dictzgen's philosophl is predominatedbv a vieu in r"'hich thc subjecthas a senson,.reflcctivc relalion to a rcliitv whichsecms to hc onlv contribution to sciel passir.elyprcscnt. It is possiblc that N4arx'sfirst Feucrhach-thesisrcftrs to l)ietzgerr's Dictzscn'sthinking. Dictzgcn was ont: o[ thc Iirst 'scicntiÍ'icsocialism" He rlas al Dictzgcn'sarÍtumenl cun hardlv he callcu logicallvsound; it shorvsgaps and to refcr to thr somctimcs alkrws f0r vurious lnlcrprctittions.By taking Feucrhach'sc()nccpt C)Í matcrialism' E,ngclswritcs that scnson pcrccptionas a startingpoint, Dictzgcn makcs it possihlcto phiklsophize Feucrhach', bv N'larx and hi. matcrialisticallvand al thc samc time to do justiceto the individualsubjcerire rcdiscovcred and fronr llegcl. 1'hc proccssof thought as an activity in which conceplsarc deveklpcd.At thc same them Pr madc entirolYindcPcn<1cnt limc, the conccpt of scnsory pcrccption uncoversa wcak spot in Dictzgen's not thinking:thc possihilitvoÍ' a naivc.cmpiricist intcrprctation of it. Feucrblrch's the dramatic dcvclopm crnphasison scnson pcrceplionimplies thc risk of iunoringKant's cpistcmo- Sincc discusstonsarc rcv klgical criticism.Evcn though Dictzgen links up closclvwith Fcucrbach'sconcepi idcolilgical imegeis c oÍ scnsorypcrccption as a concopl on thc hasisof which important philosophical lht'ort'lical-politital socialistidcals. This alstlim1 problcms can hc analvzcd,hc makes a critical analvsisol lhe proccssof thought. oí thc work of those whtl contrib can bc intcrPretcd Thc dialectics ol thc spcciÍic and thc univcrsal in the process of gaining Dictzgcn working class.As a socialist.ht knowlcdge and thc dcvclclpmcnt ol gcncral conccpts, Dietzgcn's 'subjcctivc' o*'n thinkingl in timcs whcn sc criticismof mcchanicaland scicntilicmatcrialism and his monisticcriticism of and age-old humanistidcals subjcctiveidcalism and agnosticismare thÍco ways oÍ approachingthe devclop- mcnt of dialcctic-matcrialisticcpistcmokrgv and ontoklgy.In his vicw, a dialcctic ontokrpy is thc Íiuit oÍ an cpistemologicalkrrmulation of thc problcm. The cpistcmologicalpcrspcctivc olfcrs Dictzgcn acccssto a basic analysisol the m:rlcrilrlunilv of illl lhllt ('xisLs. Fr

390 Dietzgenism as revisionism

At the time of the Second International, discussionsarose on the interpreration of Dietzgen's work. These discussions,however, did not produce an unambiguous interpretation. Besidesother revisionistschools of thought,so-called 'Dietzgenism' arose, of which Dietzgen's son Eugen was one of the leading figures. Dietzgenism Íepresents one of the views that take as a starting point the proposition that Marx's merits are limited mainly to the formulation of historical materialism, and that his work lacks a sound philosophical basis. Dietzgenism suggests rhar Dietzgen's work pre-eminently provides the philosophical foundation to scientific socialism.

The contribution from the Netherlands to the Dietzgen-discussionis relatively significant. H. Roland Holst is sometimes referred to as a Dietzgenist, while A Pannekoek shows many signs of Dietzgen-reception.The present study con- cludes that a characterization of Roland Holst as a Dietzgenist is unwarranted. Pannekoek, however, did contribute to the promotion of Dietzgen's thinking as pre-eminent Marxist philosophy. Pannekoek places Marx and Engels on the one hand and Dietzgen on the other in the two separate domains of historical materialism and , respectively.

Dietzgen's contribution to scientific socialism

Dietzgen was one of the first to refer to socialism which is focused on Marx as 'scientific socialism'. He was almost certainly the first to use the term 'dialectical 'Ludwig materialism' to refer to the philosophy of social democracy. ln Feuerbach', Engels writes that oddly enough, materialist dialectics were not only rediscovered by Marx and himself, but also by Dietzgen, independently from them and from Hegel. The present study shows thal Dietzgen's rediscoverywas not made entirely independently from them.

Since the dramatic developments in Eastern Europe, all topical political and ideological discussions are reviewed from a new perspective. A new consistent, theoretical-political image is called for, if one is to acknowledge the significance of socialist ideals. This also implies the need for an open-minded interpretation of the work of those who contributed to socialism and communism. In this respect, Dietzgen can be interpreted as an original and self-consciousmember of the working class. As a socialist, he based his ideas on Marx, but he never slighted his own thinking; in times when socialismwas under pÍessure,he adhered to socialist and age-old humanist ideals.

391