- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
As you know, Marxism has three components, and Lenin made a contribution to the development of only two of them, without touching on its philosophical part, which contained fundamental shortcomings in solving the main question of philosophy. By the author (Yu. A new, relativistic solution was proposed, and as a result, Marx's main materialist thesis, that being determines consciousness, was revised. It was changed to the opposite, namely, that matter and consciousness define being as parts define the whole.
A more detailed answer to this question can be found in the materials of the links to Yu's articles and book given below.Zuyeva. Here is a quote in Russian translation from English from the last article of this author.
“Thus, the Gladyshev-Zuev principle creates a new theoretical paradigm for the practical solution of old controversial humanitarian problems concerning the primacy of matter, consciousness and being (the subject of CF /the main question of philosophy/ and historical materialism), considering them in a complex of these three approaches. The hierarchical approach removes the identity of the categories of matter and being, which after Spinoza was fixed in materialist and Marxist philosophy. By distinguishing these categories hierarchically, he fills them with a new meaning: he relates matter and consciousness to being as parts to the whole [4,17-20, 37-58; 5]. This leads to an important corollary that replaces the well-known Marxist position: “It is not the consciousness of people that determines their being, but, on the contrary, their social being determines their consciousness” [10, 536] to the completely opposite statement: matter and consciousness determine being, just as parts determine the whole. The era of Karl Marx did not know such approaches in thinking. For this reason, Marx could not have solved the problem of CF otherwise than in a materialistic way, with all its historical shortcomings, as a consequence of the lack of a hierarchical understanding of the relationship between the categories of matter, consciousness and being.”
E-mail: [email protected]