[p. 216] The reflection theory of materialist dialectics considers that our capacity to know the objective world is limitless; this view is in fundamental opposition to the viewpoint of the agnostics who consider the human capacity for knowledge to be limited. However, there are definite historical limits on each approach we make[2-250] to absolute truth. Lenin referred to it thus: “The limits of approximation of our knowledge to objective, absolute truth are historically conditional, but the existence of such truth is unconditional and the fact that we are approaching near to it is also unconditional. The contours of the picture are historically conditional, but the fact that this picture depicts an objectively existing model is unconditional”.[2-251] We acknowledge that human knowledge is subject to the limitations of historical conditions, and that truth cannot be achieved at once. But we are not agnostics, and[2-252] recognise that truth becomes complete in the historical movement of human knowledge. Lenin also stated: “The reflection of nature in man’s thought must be understood not ‘lifelessly’, not ‘abstractly’, not devoid of movement, not without contradictions; but in the eternal process of movement, the arising of contradictions and their solution”.[2-253] The movement of knowledge is complex and replete with contradictions and struggle. This is the viewpoint of the epistemology of dialectical materialism.
The anti-historical standpoint of all those philosophies which, epistemologically, do not treat knowledge as a process consequently lacks breadth of view. This narrow viewpoint in the empiricism of sensationalism[2-254] has created a deep chasm between sense perceptions and concepts; in the rationalist school, it has caused concepts to become divorced from sense perceptions. It is only the epistemology of dialectical materialism (reflection theory) which treats knowledge as a process, and in so doing thoroughly eliminates this narrow viewpoint; it does so by attributing knowledge with a material and dialectical status.
Reflection theory points out: The process of reflection is not limited to sense perceptions and impressions, and exists in thought (in abstract concepts); knowledge is a process of motion from sense perceptions to thought. As Lenin has said: “Knowledge is the reflection of nature. But this is not a simple, not an immediate, not a complete reflection, but the process of a series of abstractions, (p. 295) the formation of concepts, laws, etc”.[2-255]
[p. 217] At the same time, Lenin has pointed out: “The process of knowledge involving a movement from sense perceptions to thought is accomplished through a leap”.[2-256]Lenin, here, has clearly expounded the dialectical materialist viewpoint of the interrelation between experiential and rational elements in cognition. Many philosophers do not comprehend the sudden change that occurs within the process of the movement of knowledge, that is, the process of movement from sense perceptions to thought (from impressions to concepts).
Consequently, to understand this transformation, which is produced by contradiction and adopts the form of a leap, namely, to comprehend that the identity of sense perceptions and thought is a dialectical identity, is to have comprehended the most important element of the essence of Lenin’s reflection theory.
10. On Truth
Truth is objective and relative; it is also absolute – this is the viewpoint on truth of materialist dialectics.
Truth firstly is objective. Having recognised the objective existence of matter and the origin of consciousness in matter is to recognise the objective character of truth. The so-called objective truth, that is to say, the objectively existing material world, is the only source of the content of our knowledge or concepts; there is no other source. It is only idealists who deny that the material world exists independently of human consciousness – this fundamental principle of idealism maintains that knowledge or concepts emerge subjectively and spontaneously, and without any objective content.[2-257] Because of this, it acknowledges subjective truth and rejects objective truth. However, this is at odds with reality, for any knowledge or concept which fails to reflect the laws of the objective world is not scientific knowledge or objective truth; it is superstition or wishful thinking which subjectively engages in self-deception and the deception of others. All practical activity of humankind which has as its purpose the transformation of the environment is subject to the direction of thought (knowledge), regardless of whether it be productive activity, activity involving class struggle or national struggle,[2-258] or any other forms of activity. If this thought does not conform to objective laws, that is, if objective laws (p. 296) are not reflected in the brain of the person undertaking the action and do not constitute [p. 218] the content of his thought or knowledge, then that action will certainly not be able to achieve its purpose. The errors made by so-called subjective guidance[2-259] within the revolutionary movement is indicative of this sort of situation. Marxism became revolutionary scientific knowledge precisely because it correctly reflected the actual laws of the objective world; it is objective truth.[2-260] All thought that opposes Marxism is therefore incorrect, and this because it is not founded on correct objective laws and is completely subjective wishful thinking. There are those who say that what is universally accepted is objective truth (the subjective idealist Bogdanov stated this view). According to this viewpoint, then, religion and prejudice are also objective truth, because, although religion and prejudice are in fact erroneous views, they are frequently widely accepted by a majority of people; and sometimes correct scientific thought cannot overturn these erroneous widely held beliefs.[2-261]Materialist dialectics is fundamentally opposed to this viewpoint; it considers that it is only scientific knowledge which correctly reflects objective laws which can be designated as truth. All truth must be objective. Truth and falsity are absolutely in opposition. The only way to determine whether any knowledge is truth is to see if it does or does not reflect objective laws. If it does not conform to objective laws, even though it is acknowledged by the general populace or by certain wildly extravagant theories within the revolutionary movement, it can only be treated as erroneous.
The first problem[2-262] of the theory of truth of materialist dialectics is the question of subjective and objective truth. Its response is to deny the former and recognise the latter. Its second problem is the question of absolute and relative truth. Its response is, while recognising both, it does not one-sidedly accept or reject either aspect; moreover, it points out that the mutual relationship between them is correct, that it is dialectical.
2-250
Apparent typographical error in
2-251
Lenin,
2-253
Lenin, “Conspectus of Hegel’s
2-255
Lenin, “Conspectus of Hegel’s
2-260
This sentence in parentheses in