Laws of Dialectics

All of Marx’s propositions are based on the logic of dialectics. Dialectics is a method of understanding developmental processes. Ancient philosophers applied the dialectic to arrive at truth, a system of argument, which brings out the contradictions in an opponent’s reasoning. The Catholic Church did not approve of dialectics and outlawed the practice. It was not renewed until Hegel. The word dialectics refers to a method of intellectual discussion by dialogue.

According to the Greek philosopher Aristotle (384-322 B.C.), it referred to the art of deputation by question and answer. Before Aristotle, another Greek philosopher Plato (427-397 B.C.) developed this term in relation with his doctrine of ideas. He evolved it as the art of analyzing ideas in themselves and in relation to the idea of ultimate good. Even before Plato, yet another Greek philosopher Socrates (470-390 B.C.) used this term to examine the presuppositions at the back of all sciences.

There is one more strand in the meaning of the term dialectics. It is the idea of dialectics as a process. This means that dialectics is a process of reason in ascending and descending forms. In ascending form of dialectics, one is able to demonstrate the existence of a higher reality, e.g., the forms of God. In descending form of dialectic, one is able to of a higher reality, e.g., the forms of God. In descending form of dialectic, one is able to of a higher reality, e.g., the forms of God. In descending form of dialectic, one is able to explain the manifestation of a higher reality in the higher reality in the e.

Dialectical  idealism by hegel 

In order to understand how Karl Marx made use of the term of dialectics, we need to remember that Marx evolved his concept of dialectical materialism on the basis of his critique of the German Philosopher Hegel’s theories of idealism.

Hegel combined the two strands of dialectic, i.e., the idea of dialectic as reason and as process. In broad sense, he used the notion of dialectics as a logical process and more narrowly he traced it as the generator or motor of the logical process. Hegel maintained that God or the Absolute comes to self-knowledge through human knowledge. In other words, the categories of human though are equal to objective forms of being and logic is at the same time the theory about the nature of being. Further, Hegel proposed that dialectics can be conceived more narrowly a grasping of opposites in their unity. Hegel saw it as a process, which brings out what is implicit. In this way, each development is a product of a previous less developed phase. In a way new development is a fulfillment of the previous state. Thus there is always a hidden tension between a form an its process of becoming a new form. Hegel interpreted history as progress in the consciousness of freedom. For Hegel, “the rational is real, the real is rational”—whatever does exist is the way that it is supposed to be. It is only through the consciousness of humanity that the (absolute) spirit, which is often translated as the movement of history, can know itself.

Marx’s dialectic is scientific because it explains the contradictions in thought and the crises of socio-economic life in terms of the particular contradictory essential relations, which generate them. And Marx’s dialectic is historical because it is both rooted in, and (conditionally) an agent of, the changes in the relations and circumstances it describes. As Marx himself put it in a letter to J.B. Schweitzer in January 24, 1865:

”the secret of scientific dialectics depends on comprehending economic categories as the theoretical expression of historical relations of production, corresponding to a particular stage of development of material production.”

Therefore, Marx was initially influenced by Hegel’s philosophy but later on he criticized it due to its idealist nature and propounded his own dialectical materialism. Marx  criticized Hegel for deducing the laws of dialectics from consciousness instead of material existence. On this point Marx said that to get a scientifically should dialectical method one will have to totally invert the logic of Hegelian dialectics. This is what Marx did in his dialectical materialism, where in contradistinction to Hegel, he said it is the matter, which is supreme and determinant of consciousness and idea not vice-versa.

Let us now discuss Marxian concepts and laws of dialectical materialism.

Dialectical materialism evolved by Marx is diametrically opposite to Hegelian dialectics. It seeks to explain everything in terms of the contradictions of matter. Dialectical materialism provides abstract laws for natural and social changes. Contrary to metaphysics, it believes that in nature, things are interconnected, interrelated and determined by each other. It considers nature as an integral whole. Dialectical materialism declares that the law of reality is the law of change. There is constant transformation in inorganic nature and human world. There is nothing eternally static. These transformations are not gradual but there is a violent, revolutionary shift. Marx’s colleague Friedrich Engels put forward the 3 major laws of dialectical materialism. They are as follows:

The Law of the Unity and Conflict of Opposites

The law of the unity and conflict of opposites is the core of dialectics. This law reveals the sources, the real causes of the eternal motion and development of the material world. It states that there are internal sides, tendencies, and forces of an object or phenomena, which are mutually exclusive but at the same time presuppose each other. The inseparable interconnection of these opposite tendencies or contradictions is responsible for the unity of opposites. This contradictoriness of objects and phenomena of the world is of a general, universal nature. There is no object or phenomena in the world, which could not be divided into opposites. These opposites coexist and one is inconceivable without the other. However, these opposites cannot coexist peacefully in one object: the contradictory, mutually exclusive character of opposites necessarily causes a struggle between them. The old and the new, the emergent and the obsolete must come into conflict. Here it is important to note that the unity of opposites is a necessary condition of the conflict, because it takes place only where opposite sides exist in one object or phenomenon. It is the contradiction, the conflict of opposites that is the main source of development of mater and consciousness. Development is the struggle of these opposites. Here, more often than not one opposite or tendency of the two tries to maintain the status quo and the other counterpart tries to radically change the status quo. This conflict leads to a new situation, object, phenomenon or stage or development, which the mature conditions come into existence after several quantitative changes. This radical change is the qualitative change. This is how one can find the logical interconnections between these three laws of dialectical materialism.

It would be erroneous to ignore the role of external influences, which may help or hinder one form of movement or another. Nevertheless, all movement takes its source from internal contradictions, so that the emergence of new contradictions gives rise to a new form of movement, while their disappearance gives place to another form of movement for which other contradictions are responsible. The opposites can never become balanced completely. The unity, the equal effect of opposites, is temporary and relative, whereas their conflict is eternal.

Both the laws of transition from quantitative changes to qualitative changes and that of negation of the negation may be regarded as particular instances of the law of unity and conflict of opposites, which reveals the source of all development and change.

This abstract law of the unity and conflict of opposites can be explained and understood if applied to successive modes of production in the history of development of society.

The Law of Negation of the Negation

The term ‘negation’ was introduced in philosophy by Hegel but with an idealist meaning. Marx criticized Hegel and gave a materialistic interpretation of negation. He showed that negation is an integral part of development of reality itself. Marx wrote, “In no sphere can one undergo a development without negating one’s previous mode of existence.” The history of society consists of a chain of negations of the old social order by the new: as Raymond Aron (1965) puts it-capitalism is the negation of feudal society, and socialism would be the negation of feudal society, and socialism would be the negation of capitalism i.e. negation of negation. In the realm of knowledge and science also, each new scientific theory negates the old theories, for example, Bohn’s theory of atom negated

The Law of Transition of Quantity into Quality

In nature, everything is in a state of continuous movement and change. Certain things are arising or coming into existence whereas certain things are developing, and or decaying and certain things are dying or going out of existence at a given time. This means a state of continuous flux. Marx believed that law of reality is the law of change. According to this law, process of change is not simple or gradual but it is a product of quantitative advances, which result in abstract qualitative changes at a particular moment when mature conditions are present. There is never repetition of occurrences. This change is always from lower to higher, simpler to complex, homogeneous to heterogeneous levels of reality.

The appearance or the birth of the new and the death or disappearance of the old can be considered as qualitative changes, philosophically as well as logically. Whereas all other changes, whereby different parts or aspect of an object become rearranged increase or diminish (while the object retains its identity) could be considered as quantitative changes. To explain and simplify it further, one could say that the qualitative changes may be of two forms: (i) something did not exist, but now it does, and (ii) something existed but now it does not. Quantitative changes, on the other hand, are infinitely diverse, e.g., larger-smaller, more less, more often more seldom, faster slower, warmer-colder, lighter heavier, worse better, poorer-richer, and so on.

In fact these quantitative changes occur continuously in every object of nature and they reach to a limit determined by the nature of each process, after which a leap inevitably occurs. This leap is the qualitative change. To give a concrete example, Indian national movement for freedom was continuing for more than a century leading to continuous quantitative change and when it reached its limit there was a leap at the midnight stroke of the clock on 15th August 1947. India was a free country. Independence from colonialism was the qualitative change. Similarly, the process of ageing in human being does not stop even for a fraction of a second. We keep getting older or in other words we keep undergoing quantitative changes and when we reach the limit prescribed by nature, we meet the qualitative change i.e. death. This example could also be applied to birth of an infant. Quantitative changes keep going on during gestation period right from the day of conception but the qualitative change occurs when the baby breaths air in this world i.e. when it is born.

Hence the dialectical level or law of transition from quantity to quality and vice-versa is that continuous quantitative changes, upon attaining measure, cause abrupt qualitative changes, which in their turn determine the character of the further continuous quantitative changes.

From this law, we move on to the other very significant law of dialectical materialism known as the law of negation of the negation.

When these laws are applied to the history of society they take the shape of historical materialism. We have already seen how the laws of dialectical materialism are applied to understand the successive forms and modes of production and hence social change.All of Marx’s propositions are based on the logic of dialectics. Dialectics is a method of understanding developmental processes. Ancient philosophers applied the dialectic to arrive at truth, a system of argument, which brings out the contradictions in an opponent’s reasoning. The Catholic Church did not approve of dialectics and outlawed the practice. It was not renewed until Hegel. The word dialectics refers to a method of intellectual discussion by dialogue.

According to the Greek philosopher Aristotle (384-322 B.C.), it referred to the art of deputation by question and answer. Before Aristotle, another Greek philosopher Plato (427-397 B.C.) developed this term in relation with his doctrine of ideas. He evolved it as the art of analyzing ideas in themselves and in relation to the idea of ultimate good. Even before Plato, yet another Greek philosopher Socrates (470-390 B.C.) used this term to examine the presuppositions at the back of all sciences.

There is one more strand in the meaning of the term dialectics. It is the idea of dialectics as a process. This means that dialectics is a process of reason in ascending and descending forms. In ascending form of dialectics, one is able to demonstrate the existence of a higher reality, e.g., the forms of God. In descending form of dialectic, one is able to of a higher reality, e.g., the forms of God. In descending form of dialectic, one is able to of a higher reality, e.g., the forms of God. In descending form of dialectic, one is able to explain the manifestation of a higher reality in the
phenomenal world of sense-experience.

Marx’s dialectic is scientific because it explains the contradictions in thought and the crises of socio-economic life in terms of the particular contradictory essential relations, which generate them. And Marx’s dialectic is historical because it is both rooted in, and (conditionally) an agent of, the changes in the relations and circumstances it describes. As Marx himself put it in a letter to J.B. Schweitzer in January 24, 1865:

”the secret of scientific dialectics depends on comprehending economic categories as the theoretical expression of historical relations of production, corresponding to a particular stage of development of material production.”

Therefore, Marx was initially influenced by Hegel’s philosophy but later on he criticized it due to its idealist nature and propounded his own dialectical materialism. Marx  criticized Hegel for deducing the laws of dialectics from consciousness instead of material existence. On this point Marx said that to get a scientifically should dialectical method one will have to totally invert the logic of Hegelian dialectics. This is what Marx did in his dialectical materialism, where in contradistinction to Hegel, he said it is the matter, which is supreme and determinant of consciousness and idea not vice-versa.

Let us now discuss Marxian concepts and laws of dialectical materialism.

Dialectical materialism evolved by Marx is diametrically opposite to Hegelian dialectics. It seeks to explain everything in terms of the contradictions of matter. Dialectical materialism provides abstract laws for natural and social changes. Contrary to metaphysics, it believes that in nature, things are interconnected, interrelated and determined by each other. It considers nature as an integral whole. Dialectical materialism declares that the law of reality is the law of change. There is constant transformation in inorganic nature and human world. There is nothing eternally static. These transformations are not gradual but there is a violent, revolutionary shift. Marx’s colleague Friedrich Engels put forward the 3 major laws of dialectical materialism. They are as follows:

The Law of the Unity and Conflict of Opposites

The law of the unity and conflict of opposites is the core of dialectics. This law reveals the sources, the real causes of the eternal motion and development of the material world. It states that there are internal sides, tendencies, and forces of an object or phenomena, which are mutually exclusive but at the same time presuppose each other. The inseparable interconnection of these opposite tendencies or contradictions is responsible for the unity of opposites. This contradictoriness of objects and phenomena of the world is of a general, universal nature. There is no object or phenomena in the world, which could not be divided into opposites. These opposites coexist and one is inconceivable without the other. However, these opposites cannot coexist peacefully in one object: the contradictory, mutually exclusive character of opposites necessarily causes a struggle between them. The old and the new, the emergent and the obsolete must come into conflict. Here it is important to note that the unity of opposites is a necessary condition of the conflict, because it takes place only where opposite sides exist in one object or phenomenon. It is the contradiction, the conflict of opposites that is the main source of development of mater and consciousness. Development is the struggle of these opposites. Here, more often than not one opposite or tendency of the two tries to maintain the status quo and the other counterpart tries to radically change the status quo. This conflict leads to a new situation, object, phenomenon or stage or development, which the mature conditions come into existence after several quantitative changes. This radical change is the qualitative change. This is how one can find the logical interconnections between these three laws of dialectical materialism.

It would be erroneous to ignore the role of external influences, which may help or hinder one form of movement or another. Nevertheless, all movement takes its source from internal contradictions, so that the emergence of new contradictions gives rise to a new form of movement, while their disappearance gives place to another form of movement for which other contradictions are responsible. The opposites can never become balanced completely. The unity, the equal effect of opposites, is temporary and relative, whereas their conflict is eternal.

Both the laws of transition from quantitative changes to qualitative changes and that of negation of the negation may be regarded as particular instances of the law of unity and conflict of opposites, which reveals the source of all development and change.

This abstract law of the unity and conflict of opposites can be explained and understood if applied to successive modes of production in the history of development of society.

The Law of Negation of the Negation

The term ‘negation’ was introduced in philosophy by Hegel but with an idealist meaning. Marx criticized Hegel and gave a materialistic interpretation of negation. He showed that negation is an integral part of development of reality itself. Marx wrote, “In no sphere can one undergo a development without negating one’s previous mode of existence.” The history of society consists of a chain of negations of the old social order by the new: as Raymond Aron (1965) puts it-capitalism is the negation of feudal society, and socialism would be the negation of feudal society, and socialism would be the negation of capitalism i.e. negation of negation. In the realm of knowledge and science also, each new scientific theory negates the old theories, for example, Bohn’s theory of atom negated

The Law of Transition of Quantity into Quality

In nature, everything is in a state of continuous movement and change. Certain things are arising or coming into existence whereas certain things are developing, and or decaying and certain things are dying or going out of existence at a given time. This means a state of continuous flux. Marx believed that law of reality is the law of change. According to this law, process of change is not simple or gradual but it is a product of quantitative advances, which result in abstract qualitative changes at a particular moment when mature conditions are present. There is never repetition of occurrences. This change is always from lower to higher, simpler to complex, homogeneous to heterogeneous levels of reality.

The appearance or the birth of the new and the death or disappearance of the old can be considered as qualitative changes, philosophically as well as logically. Whereas all other changes, whereby different parts or aspect of an object become rearranged increase or diminish (while the object retains its identity) could be considered as quantitative changes. To explain and simplify it further, one could say that the qualitative changes may be of two forms: (i) something did not exist, but now it does, and (ii) something existed but now it does not. Quantitative changes, on the other hand, are infinitely diverse, e.g., larger-smaller, more less, more often more seldom, faster slower, warmer-colder, lighter heavier, worse better, poorer-richer, and so on.

In fact these quantitative changes occur continuously in every object of nature and they reach to a limit determined by the nature of each process, after which a leap inevitably occurs. This leap is the qualitative change. To give a concrete example, Indian national movement for freedom was continuing for more than a century leading to continuous quantitative change and when it reached its limit there was a leap at the midnight stroke of the clock on 15th August 1947. India was a free country. Independence from colonialism was the qualitative change. Similarly, the process of ageing in human being does not stop even for a fraction of a second. We keep getting older or in other words we keep undergoing quantitative changes and when we reach the limit prescribed by nature, we meet the qualitative change i.e. death. This example could also be applied to birth of an infant. Quantitative changes keep going on during gestation period right from the day of conception but the qualitative change occurs when the baby breaths air in this world i.e. when it is born.

Hence the dialectical level or law of transition from quantity to quality and vice-versa is that continuous quantitative changes, upon attaining measure, cause abrupt qualitative changes, which in their turn determine the character of the further continuous quantitative changes.

From this law, we move on to the other very significant law of dialectical materialism known as the law of negation of the negation.

When these laws are applied to the history of society they take the shape of historical materialism. We have already seen how the laws of dialectical materialism are applied to understand the successive forms and modes of production and hence social change.

By: Parveen bansal