*Greetings All, these are some of my thoughts/summarizations/notes from what has been a roughly 2-3 year long journey of personal study into Dialectical Materialism, This is largely informed by what I have learned from our Vietnamese comrades (shout out to Luna Oi, her YT channel, and her publishing platform, Banyan House Publishing-which is where I first obtained an English translation of the Vietnamese high school students’ textbook on ML Dialectical Materialism and Philosophy; e-book is free for all those who wish to study alongside), Aleksandr Spirkin’s “Dialectical Materialism” text from ~80’s-era USSR’s education ministry, and my own synthesis of what I’ve learned and studied from across the web with regards to “western” and “eastern” traditions of materialist dialectics, namely with the help of DeepSeek // my apologies in advance for the scattered nature of the organization of these study notes-these will be updated and expanded upon more with time. (Edit: this is not meant to be a 101, this is more intended as a reference point for further sharpening and developing one’s theoretical basis and understanding of our theory and Praxis, from one student of the tradition to another, for comrades who are already taught, essentially. A bottom-up “for-beginners” version/approach may be something that I pursue in the near future, depending on a number of variables) -The main aim was to just get this stuff out there so that more could possibly benefit from this knowledge and my own way of framing this philosophical and methodological tradition that those of us who wish to see and create a better world-have at our disposal:
What is Dialectical Materialism?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, a little etymological break-down:
Dialectical=both sides of a pair mutually impacting each other
Materialism-the philosophical premise that matter comes before/predates, mind or consciousness
Dialectical Materialism=philosophical body of knowledge undergirding Marxism-Leninism and Scientific Socialism, stating that “all phenomena in the universe, in nature, in human thought and in human societies, are composed ultimately of Matter, matter existed first” as well as that “consciousness (which is a particular form of matter) impacts matter, consciousness came after matter”
(Fun useless fact: at least in the European philosophical context, “materialism” as a philosophical tradition, , was “incomplete” due to lacking the component of dealing with the phenomenon of consciousness; whereas “dialectics” (the Hegelian kind), were “incomplete” due to lacking the component of being grounded in materialist axioms/presuppositions-Dialectical Materialism can be kind of thought of as the “merging” of the best aspects of both by Marx and Engels, transcending (“sublating”, to use a Marxist term) the shortcomings of each)
What is it “for”?: well, lots of things, but primarily, the way I think about it is: 1 it provides the philosophical groundwork for having a scientific worldview and analysis, 2 it is the ontological basis for the praxis of Marxism-Leninism, and Scientific Socialism
How to “use” this philosophy in every-day situations?
=Materialist Dialectics
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Materialist dialectics (it’s not word play), is essentially the principles of dialectical materialism (matter comes first, matter determines consciousness, consciousness impacts matter), applied for practical contexts.
Essentially, Dialectical Materialism is the Philosophy of ML, Materialist Dialectics is the Methodology.
Another way to look at it is that Dialectical Materialism is the Philosophy
Materialist Dialectics is a subset of the philosophy, it is an applied field of the dialectical materialist philosophy (ie, using the philosophy’s presuppositions to obtain a coherent framework for thinking about, and enacting change in, the external material world correctly =methdology)
Materialist Dialectics states, among other things; that all things in nature, the external objective material universe, human thought, human society and human social formations-are composed of Relationships, and that all things, processes, relationships, people, thoughts, and phenomena, are always changing all the time, and this change is due to mutual impacts (specifically, Contradictions)
Materialist dialectics also states that all things, phenomena, processes, people, and relationships (really, from different viewpoints, these are all kind of the same thing), are connected, and are always changing
Basic Materialist Dialectical principles and categories in a nutshell (essentially the methodological toolkit for the student of revolutionary science):
-2 Principles of Materialist Dialectics
-6 Basic Philosophical Category Pairs of Materialist Dialectics
-3 Universal Materialist Dialectical Laws of Development/Change/Motion
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2 principles are:
-the Principle of General Relationships=
All things, phenomena, people, ideas, and processes are defined by their internal and external relationships
-the Principle of Development =
All things, phenomena, people, ideas, and processes undergo change/self-transformation/development, all the time, and this change is driven by internal and external mutual impacts
(Note: “development” here from the Vietnamese understanding of Marxist—Leninist materialist dialectics does not carry the “western” connotation as we understand this commonly in hegemonic discourse, neither in the moralistic, nor economic definitions of the word-it simply refers to the overall collective summarize process of (contradiction->motion->quantitative shift ->qualitative shift=Development), or in simplest terms: “development” is the process of a thing becoming something other than its past self)
These two principles are also why the Vietnamese Materialist Dialectics stress that when performing analysis, one must always 1 have a comprehensive viewpoint, which means to try to understand as many of thing’s internal and external relationships as possible, from as many viewpoint as possible (principle of general relationships) and 2 have historical analysis which means, because all things are composed of relationships and all things are changing all the time because of contradictions defining, and embedded within those relationships, all things have a past and a past “history” of developmental trajectory which must be understood n ofer to have a clear comprehension of the direction and tendencies of the thing’s development in the future (principle of development)
So essentially, Materialist Dialectics 2 core tenets state that all things are defined by their relationships; and all things change all the time, this change is driven by mutual impacts
Mutual impacts is another way of saying a dialectical interaction, or an interaction between two things which impacts both things mutually, which, spoiler alert, is all impacts between two things in the material world-mutual impacts are also another type of relationship
So even put more simply-all things are defined by relationships, and all things are always changing due to relationships
Indeed, another way of appreciating this methodology is that Materialist Dialectics is is the study of relationships, specifically the most universal relationships that are common to all matter (all things, processes, ideas, people, phenomena)
Materialist Dialectics asks us to see all matter (which is all things, phenomena, idea, and processes), as being composed ultimately of Relationships (relationships between atoms, relationships between gravitational bodies, relationships between chemical compounds, relationships between cells, relationships between individual humans in a particular society or workplace or family or culture, etc)
Materialist Dialectics is also an excellent tool for detecting the origin of change in a given system/process/thing/phenomena-namely, Materialist dialectics is a tool for recognizing contradictions, which are ultimately that which define any given thing, process, relationship, phenomena, and are what drive the change of said thing, process, relationship, or phenomena (more on Contradictions later)
When applying these following categories and laws to every day life practical situations, I often orient myself in the fashion of “how can I use these categories to see the given situation or subject of analysis, Relationally (ie, defining it in terms of the relationships it has, to its component parts, to other things like it, to larger systems in which it serves a role, etc), since understanding every thing, process, and phenomenon relationally is the correct way to perceive things as they actually exist in the material world (African and Indigenous Turtle Island philosophical systems share this in common and possibly pre date the European tradition of dialectics which are materialist, but that’s for another write up for another day), as well as helping me understand and identify which Contradictions in a given system or thing are driving the current phase of development or change that the system is undergoing.
6 Basic Philosophical Category Pairs of Materialist Dialectics (there are actually more than this, but only including the “starter pack” basic six pairs for now), these categories can be applied, and can be used to analyze any thing, person, thought/idea, system, relationship, phenomenon, or process in the material universe (can be applied to any level of organization of matter, ie: mechanical, astronomical, chemical, atomic, molecular, biological, social, political, economic, cultural, semiotic/symbolic, mental/psychological, etc), for what? For analysis into understanding the nature of any thing, understanding any phenomenon to eventually be able to change it (revolutionary praxis\the dialectic of practice+theory).
*One more note before sharing, the astute observer will notice there are 12 philosophical categories below, but they are “arranged” or “coupled” into 6 philosophical category pairs, this is due to the fact that each “pair” counterpart is sort of like the opposite of the other, while at the same time relying completely on the existence of the other, both mutually defining each other, and mutually connected to the other (each pair is a “dialectic”, or a pair of two things which mutually impact each other), and in some particular situations, can “transform into each other” (more on this later); kind of like the relationship that the pair of yin-yang have with each other, for those interested in/familiar with to any degree, Daoism in Chinese philosophy (and in the broader historic geographic region of the “sinosphere,” which yours truly happens to be a proud diasporic member of). The most important thing that I was taught from our Vietnamese comrades, is that while these categories are indeed universal and are some of the most basic philosophical tools to be able to analyze and understand all material phenomena and change in the world around us, the critical lesson is that Materialist Dialectical methodology stresses understanding the Relationship between each of the 6 Dialectical category pairs, not just the 12 categories in and of themselves.*
Particular, General
Reason/Result
Necessity/Accident
Content/Form
Essence/Phenomenon
Reality/Possibility
Particular-refers to any specific phenomenon, thing, system, and process in the material world
General-refers to the shared characteristics, qualities, and relationships which exist within and between specific phenomenon in the material world
The Dialectical relationship between the two: all Particulars share at least one thing in common with another (General), the General only exists through Particular instances
Example: I am holding an apple (particular), this particular apple is uniquely mine, but shares certain characteristics in common with other particular apples, such as the color red, the fact that it is edible, having a stem, the fact that it has white flesh on the inside and is a fruit (General)
Reason-refers to the mutual impact that occurs between two phenomena
result-refers to the change in both participants caused by mutual impact, which go on to have further mutual impacts with other phenomena
The Dialectical relationship between the two: all mutual impacts between two things (Reason) create changes in both things (Result), which go on to have their own mutual impacts with other things, as well as all mutual impacts themselves were previously changes resulting from previous mutual impacts
Example: a person is cooking an egg in a frying pan, the mutual impact of the egg and the pan (Reason), lead to the previously-clean frying pan becoming dirty, and the egg changing from being uncooked to cooked (Result). The cooked egg will go on to have further relationships and mutual impacts (with my teeth, with my tummy), and the dirty pan will go on to have further relationships and mutual impacts as well (being brought to the sink, being washed under soap and water to be made clean again, etc)
Necessity-refers to the outcomes or results or changes which are inevitable and are due to internal relationships
Accident-refers to the outcomes or results which are non-inevitable/contingent/unpredictable and are due to external mutual impacts
The Dialectical relationship: all Necessity can be transformed into accident due to the fact that every system is an open system capable of receiving external mutual impacts, which can divert what would normally be a necessary/inevitable, internally-caused outcome, all Accident can be transformed into Necessary with sufficient scope and analysis (zooming out one’s scope sufficiently can contain incorporate what was previously an externally-caused outside accidental outcome, into being seen as “internal” within a now-larger system, and can be eventually seen as Necessity once the necessary internal relationships which caused the previously non-predictable outcome, have been sufficiently analyzed)
Example: due to internal relationships, a particular alarm clock will always activate its alarm at 6AM every morning, this is predictable and inevitable (Necessity). However, what is not predictable is whether or not a human user is there to deactivate the alarm, or let it keep sounding off (Accident), since this is external to the system that produces the necessary outcome (alarm activating due to the clock’s internal relationships). Additionally, if sufficient analysis of the human which may or may not deactivate the alarm clock each time it goes off is performed, then it become apparent what necessary relationships cause the human to turn off the alarm clock when it activates, and when, why, under which circumstances, etc, so long as the scope of analysis is expanded to include the once-random variable of the human stopping the alarm clock, within the set of “internal relationships” of the now-bigger system (ie, the human and the clock as the system, not just the clock as the system)
Content-refers to the sum total of all the constitutive elements that a phenomenon is composed of (what it’s made of)
Form-refers to the structure and organization as well as the interrelationships of the internal constitutive elements of any phenomena, which distinguish the phenomena from the rest of the material world around it (the outer shape and structural composition of a thing)
The Dialectical relationship: content determines form, form impacts back onto content, form organizes/structures/arranges content of a thing. When content changes, form will change. A form that suits the content of a thing can augment its development, a form that is not suitable to the content of a thing can hinder its development
Example: a wooden chair is composed of wood planks, nails, and paint (Content), and these constituent parts are arranged in the shape of a platform to sit on undergirded by 4 legs contacting the ground, and one backrest, held together with nails and coated on the external surface with paint (Form)
Phenomenon-refers to any process, event, or system in the material world which is observable by the human subject’s senses
Essence-refers to the deeper, unseen, fundamental set of internal, fundamental relationships which define a process, event, or system, at that current phase of its development
The Dialectical relationship: Essence determines phenomena, Essence expresses itself to the external world as and through phenomena when subjected to external conditions. Phenomenon is temporary, conditional, dependent; Essence is more long lasting, stable, and independent of external conditions. When Essence changes or disappears/transforms, phenomenon changes/disappears/transforms
Example: the synthesis of internal relationships which define a cloud is that it is the H2O molecule, gathered in sufficient quantity at a particular density to be able to float in the sky at high altitudes (Essence), but one of the ways that these internal relationships defining the cloud might externally express themselves, may be in the form of rain, given sufficient atmospheric, thermal, hydrological external conditions, might be in the form of dark shadows on the land, given the proper solar conditions, might be in the form of lightning, etc. (Phenomena). When the water that defines the cloud dissipates or phase shifts to a state that cannot allow the cloud formation to be feasible, the phenomena that the water was expressing itself through will also cease to be (rain will stop, no more cloud=no more shadows under sunlight, no more basis for lightning to form, etc)
Possibility-refers to the not-yet-manifested potential phenomena, forms, qualities, characteristics, mutual impacts, conditions, relationships, processes, modalities, or phases of development, which exist within all actually-existing systems and phenomena
Reality-refers to the totality of configurations of any phenomenon, person, relationship, system, process, condition, which currently exists or is existing, or has existed, in the material world
The Dialectical relationship: reality contains new possibilities, possibility can transform into reality; all realities were previously possibilities which were realized upon meeting certain pre requisites. In order for a possibility to transform into reality, Objective conditions and Subjective factors must be met, which are particular to each possibility.
Example: a currently existing inflated helium balloon (Reality) contains the potential of becoming popped/deflated (Possibility), provided the necessary Objective conditions (a pin being present) and Subjective factors (a human present willing/able to use the pin to pop the balloon) are met. Once popped, the newly realized reality itself contains further possibilities (of being thrown away, of being recycled, or being re purposed by kids as a toy).
Additionally, since a “category” in the philosophical definition is the most general way to define shared characteristics or qualities between phenomena in a given field of science or human study, and Materialist Dialectics is the study of the most general laws and level of matter (those applicable to all matter, regardless of form or level of organization), it is also correct and equivalent to say that the Dialectical relationships between these materialist dialectical philosophical category pairs are also Universal Relationships (that is, relationships which are shared by all things made from matter, including phenomena arising from matter, such as human social connections, human cultural phenomena and processes, money, economy, human thought/ideas, and human semiotics/signs, etc)
My way of understanding this universality of these philosophical category pairs’ relationships is that 1 since Dialectical Materialism asserts that all things in the material world are made of matter (not mind), and all matter is changing all the time due to internal contradiction as well as is connected to all other matter by a common foundation in the material world, 2 all matter, no matter how diverse, still expresses common laws or characteristics or relationships with all other matter (due to every diverse thing existing or that could possibly exist in the material universe is still bound together by being made of matter in common, no matter what kind of matter; being made of matter will necessarily involve the thing in question possessing certain properties and relationships to certain laws and which are shared by all things made of matter, that’s one of the purposes of these below philosophical categories-to be able to have a framework that applies to the infinite diversity of material phenomena, starting from the premise of the commonality of the material world and its discoverable laws of relation and change being the universal uniting factor=the methodology of Materialist (matter first) Dialectics (understanding the science of mutual impact // relationships // contradiction // change, which is the ultimate outcome of mutual impact)
So at its heart, materialist dialectics is the study of the universal relationships of matter, these following basic 6 philosophical category pairs reflect some of these universal relationships of matter, (not the only ones though, again, more to come in the future)
Understanding these 6 universal relationships is the first step needed to align one’s consciousness (which materialist dialectics says is a type of reflection of matter and of objective material conditions) to the way that the the material world already actually is (as opposed to idealist (mind before matter, does not mean the commonly-understood version of the word) metaphysical notions and paradigms, such as white supremacy, liberalism, conservatism, euro-centric hetero-normative patriarchy racism, queerphobia, ableism, fascism, climate change denial, Eurocentric scientific chauvinism, etc), which then allows one to be oriented in the optimal way to be able to change the world around them through practical/praxis activity (labor)
The important thing is, without materialist dialectics, one obviously still acts in and changes the world around them, but usually in a limited way, one animated by far less consciousness or awareness of relational dynamics of the material world, and sometimes acts based on incomplete or inaccurate mental reflections of the actual subjects of analysis that they are trying to change, whether this be a sculpture, a chair, or a political formation; materialist dialectics is simply a practical heuristic or a “mental yardstick” to always “check back against” during our political activity and practices of daily life to make sure we are moving through and thinking in material reality, in the correct modality that ensures we are perceiving and interacting with material phenomena as they actually exist, not how we wish to see them
3 Materialist Dialectical Universal Laws of Change (/motion/development):
*for the sake of brevity, I will provide a condensed and simplified overview here, more detailed notes and applications of these laws to come in the future)*
1. the Law of Transformation Between Quantity and Quality (law of quantity and quality)
2. the Law of Unity and Contradiction of Opposites (law of contradiction)
3. the Law Negation of Negation (law of negation)
These laws above apply to all matter, all things, phenomena, ideas, people, processes, relationships, and systems in the material world, and thus are universal due to being consequences of the fact that matter is universally composed of relationships and these relationships are perpetually changing/developing, just like the aforementioned philosophical dialectical category pairs
(everything, from a cheeseburger to a fight between parent and child, obey and exhibit change and development in accordance to these universal materialist dialectical laws)
1. the law of quantity and quality state that all, for any phenomenon, changes in quality* are first preceded by changes in quantity** that have reached a certain threshold (the quantity threshold, in Vietnamese Materialist Dialectics), and once quality changes occur, this will also cause/induce/affect changes in quantity (dialectical relationship between the quality and quantity of a given phenomenon)
The dialectical materialist understanding of the categories of Quantity and Quality:
*Quality: the characteristics, aspects, properties of a phenomenon that make it differentiated from every thing in the material world around it that are not it (wetness, the color, the softness, the different parts that comprise it, the shape and ingredients of the thing, its ability to burn you, its ability to resist pressure/torsion, etc)
**Quantity: the countable, measurable, quantifiable aspects of a phenomenon (temperature, speed, mass, weight, height, spatial dimensions, number of structural components, number of years in age, number of tasks, amount of wage, etc)
this law, to me, basically reminds us to be both patient (recognize that a quality shift, if desirable, cannot occur prior to the sufficient accumulation of the needed quantity shifts; ie you cannot hope to solve the food needs of the population without housing in your city without first solving the food needs of the population without housing on your block, in your district, etc); as well as to not be un dialectically resistant to change (recognize that a quality shift, desirable or otherwise, is inevitably going to occur if enough quantities have accumulated, regardless of efforts or thoughts otherwise)
2. the law of contradictions state that all things and processes are defined by contradictions (specifically internal contradictions determine, whereas external contradictions shape/condition/impact), the motion/movement/change/development of all things is also driven by contradictions (this bleeds into the Principle of Development); as well as that contradictions are temporary unities of opposing forces/sides. Contradictions are a permanently built in feature of matter, the material universe, and of every thing and process within and arising from matter and the material world (including consciousness, money, economies, human thought, human societal constructs, human political and cultural and semiotic and psychological phenomena, and all things arising from human consciousness); contradictions are constantly being created, resolved (ended, or materialist dialectical terms, negated), and re created/re emerging
The phase of time in which any two given opposing sides are unified with each other only lasts as long as the opposition which binds them/brings them together in opposition with one another and thus is temporary; however, once the contradiction ends or is negated, a new one will always emerge (this is a fundamental property of matter, of the motion of matter and all things made from matter, and of contradictions themselves, more on this a little further down), and thus is permanent/infinite/absolute (this is what Marxist Materialist Dialecticians mean when it is said that *unity is relative, struggle is absolute, there is unity in struggle and struggle in unity*; it means that contradiction as a universal process in General is ongoing, but Particular contradictions are only ever temporary (no matter how long they last) and will always eventually be resolved, and their unity defining that particular pair, dissolved)
Both these aspects of contradictions are two opposite sides of the same yin yang coin, my friend
In addition, there are also a variety of forms and classifications of contradictions in Materialist Dialectics (primary, secondary, fundamental, non fundamental, antagonistic, non antagonistic, etc) as well as resolution methods (19 at least, in my own Materialist Dialectics studies), but I will save this for a future time and place. For now, just understand, in addition to the above:
Any thing or process always contains multiple contradictions, but there is always one contradiction which defines the development of that thing for that particular phase of its development (all things and processes develop uniquely, even if they share aspects in common with the development of other things, each process must be understood and studied in its own development, on its own developmental terms), this is the primary contradiction. This primary contradiction, once identified, can allow for insight, analysis, and eventually action and influence on the process of the development of that particular process at that particular stage of its development. Also, because materialist dialectics requires us to be fluid and dynamic with our understanding of matter and its categorical abstractions, we must understand that which contradiction of a given thing is the primary contradiction will vary throughout the time (what phase of development it is currently in) and space (what other systems or relationships it is around and/or dialectically being mutually impacted by)
In another way of speaking, Materialist Dialectics is the study of, and the science of, contradictions, and of development/change
When using this law in every day life, I find it easiest to ask myself when confronting/analyzing any given thing/system/phenomenon/person/idea/process, ^where are some contradictions, or points of tension/opposition/mutually opposing sides or needs or properties? Which ones are the likely sources of movement for the particular system that I am analyzing at this current moment in time, given its external relationships to other things around it and connected to it?
(ie, an atom is defined by the unity of electrons and protons, a human economy is defined by the unity of production and consumption, a war is defined by a unity of opposing sides engaged in direct or otherwise civilizational confrontation, a living cell is defined by a unity of anabolism and catabolism, a wager laborer (in the scope of class analysis and class struggle) is defined by a unity of their human metabolic needs and the reality that they do not own their own means of production and thus must sell their labor power to someone who does (a capitalist), etc)
Which side will prevail in this temporary unity of opposing forces? If either? How long will the equilibrium of this contradiction last, if possible to understand? What are outside conditions and internal dynamics that are shaping and defining this contradiction? Can this unity of opposing sides be intervened in, and if so, what outcome would result for the overall system? Can new contradictions be introduced to disrupt/overtake the pre existing one(s)?
Just some food for thought for now, more to come in the future, specifically, in addition to the above, my understanding/sharing of notes of study on the Chinese Marxist Leninist Materialist Dialectical understanding of contradictions and their general properties and categorizations of resolution scenarios
3. the law of negation states that once a (any contradiction) is resolved/negated, a new one will immediately emerge to take the place of the previous one (again, in Materialist Dialectics, the viewpoint is fluid and is always relative/ie, the materialist dialectical method all depends upon which viewpoint of which subject we are analyzing, ontologically speaking, everything has its own viewpoint/frame of reference to be taken into analytical consideration), either from within the dialectical subject, or from outside of it; as well as that whenever a dialectical negation* occurs, there will always be properties/qualities/characteristics inherited in the new subject from Both sides of the previous contradiction (the prevailing side as well as the negated side), this is called the property of inheritance in Vietnamese ML Materialist Dialectics
*the materialist dialectical definition of dialectical negation refers to a negation wherein some thing or phenomena/quality or aspect of a thing or phenomena, stops existing the way that it currently does and becomes something new, something other than what it was previously in time (this is as opposed to the previous European philosophical non dialectical conception of ^terminal negation^, which essentially states that once things or aspects disappear/end, they are totally gone and have no impact on what comes after, which ultimately sees all processes as disconnected and misunderstands the dialectical relationship between rupture and continuity that the present has with the past that Materialist Dialectics centers in its methodological framework); spoiler alert: all negations are dialectical negations, this is just the proper, materialist way to understand the *end* of something as really just the end of a certain phase of a bigger, longer overall process (whatever is being analyzed), rather than metaphysical way of not seeing the continuing development and mutual impacts of a system or its relational components which occur after something is done/dies/ends/terminates
Thus, whenever change occurs (changes occurs through the collective and successive resolutions of contradictions), there is always some kind of continuity to the past, as well as elements of the new.
Whenever another negation occurs after the first negation (from any frame of reference), the resulting dialectical subject will, in some way, reflect the earlier, first form prior to both negations, but also different, on a *higher* level (Marx and Engels referred to this as what in English translates to Sublation: which refers to the situation of simultaneously negating/getting rid of, transcending, synthesizing, retaining/*bringing forward* the differences between two opposing forces/sides, into a new, higher form, the German word is Aufheben); the generalized way to understand this motion is that this collective process of undergoing two rounds of dialectical negations will cause a dialectical subject to have gone through a *spiral like* shape of development
So basically, change is happening all the time, and change happens in spirals (Lenin said this too!*)
Very basic example: 1 the dialectical subject (car), currently in a state of having the qualities of newness, shininess, being un broken, fully functional/suitable for current needs in its current form, usable, etc, gets into an accident with another car (first contradiction) 2 our car emerges from this mutual impact in a new state reflecting the nature of the relationship it had to the contradicting subject (broken due to the second car hitting it; first negation) 3 after getting shipped to the scrap yard, the damaged former car is now processed into raw materials and now has the form of simple raw sheet metal (second negation/negation of negation), this is no longer a car, having been dialectically negated and transformed into raw material, but now can be said, after having gone through another negation after the first negation of its previous identity, to have acquired a unity of characteristics of some of those of its first form (in stage 1 it was previously a car with the qualities of newness, shininess, suitability/usability for its current form), but now in a *higher* state, or retained, but with differences, in its current state (in stage 3 it is now a sheet of metal, not a car any more, but now once again, can be understood as having the qualities of newness, shininess, suitability/usability for its current form, but it is also no longer a car, it is the same as the past but different at the same time, this shiny new, undamaged sheet metal will now go own to experience further mutual impacts and develop in other ways into other things, and so on, etc
*pretty much word for word on the last part
The point of this law is to see all things as not having distinct, metaphysically disconnected *beginnings and ends* but rather, as all being temporary diverse processes, which themselves, are mere phases and moments embedded within larger processes, which are always changing, even after one phase is *done*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What does it all mean?
Well, I like to think of them as having differences uses in practice and analysis:
Axiom: per dialectical materialism, every thing changes all the time
But what does this change look like? How does this change happen? When does it happen? Does it follow a pattern?
That is what these laws are useful for (to me, anyways)
*law of quantity/quality shows us ^when^ change happens (change does not happen all at once, it occurs as quality shifts happen, only after the sufficient amount of quantity shifts have accumulated)
This shows us the *architecture* of change, or the *shape* that the process of change/development takes through the diverse forms of matter that exist
Another way I see it is that this law helps us answer *when* change occurs
*law of contradictions shows us ^why^ change happens, more specifically the source of change in any system or thing, (change/development is driven by contradictions present within and between all things, which are temporary unities of opposing forces)
Another way I see it is that this law helps us answer *where* change comes from, or more specifically, helps us locate the originating point of motion and change in a given system
This laws also helps us understand where the identity of thing comes from (its external and internal relationships, yes, but ultimately, the primary contradiction defining the thing or system at the current phase of development that is in is the source of the identity of said thing)
Of course, what the primary contradiction is at any given time is fluid and not fixed, and can change
Of course, any system or thing is composed of multiple contradictions, but there is always one contradiction which takes precedence over all the other when it comes to which one defines the system at its current stage and form (this is 101 from Mao Zedong Thought as well as Ho Chi Minh Thought)
*law of negation of negation shows us ^what shape the path of change/development takes^, which is that of a spiral (after 2 rounds of negations, the dialectical subject now resembles its initial form, but on a ^higher* level); ie, because development occurs from contradictions which are resolved through negations, and then further successive negations after re emergence of contradiction, which causes all processes to not only engage in perpetual development, but due to the property of inheritance in dialectical negation (after a contradiction is negated, the result will have impacts/characteristics from the negated side, as well as the prevailing side), change/development does not occur through a linear process, but rather one that goes through zigs and zags, inheriting and approximating old forms and characteristics, but with new traits and under new conditions as well, hence the Vietnamese summarization of ^the new grows out of the old^
Another way I see this law, which is admittedly more immediately abstract in its capacity for practical application, is that it provides a ^blueprint^ for the general pattern of change (which is in twists and turns, not a straightforward teleological ^line^, in the form of a spiral, a nonlinear path of cyclic like circumscriptions of past trajectorial segments, but forward in time, always undergoing new additions and modifications alongside the old aspects
One way that the Vietnamese Marxist Leninist understanding illuminates about the application of this law is that, due to the property of inheritance, all emerging phenomena at the end of contradiction being resolved will inherit properties from both past sides of the previous contradiction, as well as due to a corollary of the law of negation of negation being that essentially, negations of contradictions can never be un done, due to the irreversible nature of the flow of time, but change continues onwards (not forward, that would be ontologically Euro centric, just onwards) through further negations of past negations; one should ^keep what is beneficial that is inherited from the past, and negate that which is not beneficial from the past^, this law reminds us to recognize the active agency that humans have in intervening in the natural, objective, and ongoing process of dialectical negation, and making it work to benefit ourselves and the world collectively; because of the property of inheritance of the law of negation, there will always be suitable things to keep and retain from previous contradictions and mutual impacts in the world, and because of the law of negation in general, negations can also be made to negate the unsuitable things retained from previous contradictions: understanding this principle gives us a guideline on how to go about leveraging the Laws of Change to bring about the change that benefits us humans as a whole (revolutionary science), which is also what Materialist Dialectics is
It is The science of studying and understanding the Laws of Change and utilizing them consciously to improve the world and our relations with the world and each other for the betterment of all humans (and all other*than*human*relatives, too!) (scientific revolutionary praxis)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What does it all mean?
Well, I like to think of them as having differences uses in practice and analysis:
Axiom: per dialectical materialism, every thing changes all the time
But what does this change look like? How does this change happen? When does it happen? Does it follow a pattern?
That is what these laws are useful for (to me, anyways)
*law of quantity/quality shows us ^when^ change happens (change does not happen all at once, it occurs as quality shifts happen, only after the sufficient amount of quantity shifts have accumulated)
This shows us the *architecture* of change, or the *shape* that the process of change/development takes through the diverse forms of matter that exist
Another way I see it is that this law helps us answer *when* change occurs
*law of contradictions shows us ^why^ change happens, more specifically the source of change in any system or thing, (change/development is driven by contradictions present within and between all things, which are temporary unities of opposing forces)
Another way I see it is that this law helps us answer *where* change comes from, or more specifically, helps us locate the originating point of motion and change in a given system
This laws also helps us understand where the identity of thing comes from (its external and internal relationships, yes, but ultimately, the primary contradiction defining the thing or system at the current phase of development that is in is the source of the identity of said thing)
Of course, what the primary contradiction is at any given time is fluid and not fixed, and can change
Of course, any system or thing is composed of multiple contradictions, but there is always one contradiction which takes precedence over all the other when it comes to which one defines the system at its current stage and form (this is 101 from Mao Zedong Thought as well as Ho Chi Minh Thought)
*law of negation of negation shows us ^what shape the path of change/development takes^, which is that of a spiral (after 2 rounds of negations, the dialectical subject now resembles its initial form, but on a ^higher* level); ie, because development occurs from contradictions which are resolved through negations, and then further successive negations after re emergence of contradiction, which causes all processes to not only engage in perpetual development, but due to the property of inheritance in dialectical negation (after a contradiction is negated, the result will have impacts/characteristics from the negated side, as well as the prevailing side), change/development does not occur through a linear process, but rather one that goes through zigs and zags, inheriting and approximating old forms and characteristics, but with new traits and under new conditions as well, hence the Vietnamese summarization of ^the new grows out of the old^
Another way I see this law, which is admittedly more immediately abstract in its capacity for practical application, is that it provides a ^blueprint^ for the general pattern of change (which is in twists and turns, not a straightforward teleological ^line^, in the form of a spiral, a nonlinear path of cyclic like circumscriptions of past trajectorial segments, but forward in time, always undergoing new additions and modifications alongside the old aspects
One way that the Vietnamese Marxist Leninist understanding illuminates about the application of this law is that, due to the property of inheritance, all emerging phenomena at the end of contradiction being resolved will inherit properties from both past sides of the previous contradiction, as well as due to a corollary of the law of negation of negation being that essentially, negations of contradictions can never be un done, due to the irreversible nature of the flow of time, but change continues onwards (not forward, that would be ontologically Euro centric, just onwards) through further negations of past negations; one should ^keep what is beneficial that is inherited from the past, and negate that which is not beneficial from the past^, this law reminds us to recognize the active agency that humans have in intervening in the natural, objective, and ongoing process of dialectical negation, and making it work to benefit ourselves and the world collectively; because of the property of inheritance of the law of negation, there will always be suitable things to keep and retain from previous contradictions and mutual impacts in the world, and because of the law of negation in general, negations can also be made to negate the unsuitable things retained from previous contradictions: understanding this principle gives us a guideline on how to go about leveraging the Laws of Change to bring about the change that benefits us humans as a whole (revolutionary science), which is also what Materialist Dialectics is
It is The science of studying and understanding the Laws of Change and utilizing them consciously to improve the world and our relations with the world and each other for the betterment of all humans (and all other*than*human*relatives, too!) (scientific revolutionary praxis)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, there you have it, Materialist Dialectics in a nutshell. Essentially, the universal truths that all things are connected, all things are defined by their relationships, the change that all things undergo is driven by internal and external mutual impacts, coupled with the 3 universal dialectical laws of change, and these above 6 universal materialist dialectical category pairs.
That is the revolutionary scientific methodology. I only did not include the epistemology of Marxist Leninist Dialectical Materialism, this will come further down the line
I will be sharing more of my notes and fruits of my study of materialist dialectics, specifically with regards to the further philosophical category pairs not included here, as well as ways of grouping and classifying the universal relationships in materialist dialectics
I encourage you all to use these principles and methodological tools in your every day life, get some practice, use this methodology to locate contradictions and start solving problems for yourself and others. Spread this knowledge, the way our comrades throughout time and space did for me (again, shout out to our Vietnamese comrades)
The best thing about these categories and laws is that, because they are universal, they can be applied any situation, events in your interpersonal life, in the political processes and phenomena occurring around you, to labor processes, to technology, to other more particular sciences (hard and soft), to sports, to the food you eat, to the political economy we are embedded in, to social injustice around you, to movement and political formation and organization/mobilization too.
Organizers, thinkers, doers, theoreticians, educators, agitators, activists, practitioners of praxis, students of any and all kinds, and those who want to see, and build a better world, all can benefit from this methodological and philosophical weaponry. After all, this world is currently being consumed by class contradictions emanating from the most gruesome empire to have ever existed. The whole world is quite literally at stake, not just humanity. We are most certainly in need of the right tools at this current conjuncture. Not just for our personal lives, but for the next seven generations, for our positionality in what is a still-saveable planet under what is an irredeemable political economic system.
Peace to comrades, love to all relatives,
All the power to all the peoples
Alkmi
dialectical materialism materialist dialectics marxism marxism-leninism scientific socialism marxist leninist methodology philosophy universal laws of change laws of change universal relationships marx engels science of relationships contradiction dialectical negation negation of negation dialectics