The development of an object occurs through quantitative changes, which, accumulating, exceed a certain measure and cause qualitative changes, and these, in turn, give rise to new possibilities for quantitative changes.
Basic concepts and characteristics of the law of transition of quantitative and qualitative changes:
Property(the original concept of the given) is the presence and nature of the variability of an object, which manifests itself in relationships with other objects. Properties show the similarity or difference between objects. Any object has many different properties;
Quality- a set of basic necessary properties of an object, thanks to which it exists as such and differs from others. This set of properties determines its state of compatibility with its original status. With the loss of at least one of these properties, the object loses its original definition and acquires a different status. For example, a student who fails his exams ceases to be a student;
Quantity— the volume of change in the object. Often, but not always, this volume can be expressed numerically, as in the case of assessing a student’s knowledge in an exam;
Measure - This is the boundary, upon crossing which quantitative changes cause qualitative changes. Within the boundaries of a measure, quality remains unchanged, but quantity varies. For example, a student who passes all tests is transferred to the next course;
Jump- transition from one quality to another.
Thus, through the connection of quantitative and qualitative changes, development of all objects of the world. If they want to achieve qualitative changes in the social structure, technology, or the formation of their own properties, then there is no other way than corresponding quantitative changes, i.e., a gradual change in the culture of society, the accumulation of scientific knowledge, personal training and persistent. And to achieve high quantitative indicators in any field, you must first reach a certain qualitative level of development. For example, if you want to run fast, learn to walk first; if you want to accumulate scientific knowledge, learn to read first. Development- this is reaching a new qualitative level, otherwise it is not development, but simply a quantitative change in the properties of the object.
General concept of the laws of dialectics.
Among the ways of understanding the dialectics of development - laws, categories, principles - the laws of dialectics are fundamental.
Law is objective (independent of human will), general, stable, necessary, repeating connections between entities and within entities.
The laws of dialectics differ from the laws of other sciences (physics, mathematics, etc.) in their universality and universality, since they:
1. cover all spheres of the surrounding reality;
2. reveal the deep foundations of movement and development - their source, the mechanism of transition from old to new, connections between old and new.
There are three basic laws of dialectics:
1. unity and struggle of opposites;
2. transition from quantity to quality;
3. negation of negation;
The law of unity and struggle of opposites.
The law of unity and struggle of opposites is that everything that exists consists of opposite principles, which, being united by nature, are in struggle and contradict each other (example: day and night, hot and cold, black and white, winter and summer , youth and old age, etc.).
The unity and struggle of opposite principles is the internal source of movement and development of all things.
Hegel, considered the founder of dialectics, had a special view of unity and the struggle of opposites. He derived two concepts - “identity” and “difference” and showed the mechanism of their interaction leading to movement.
According to Hegel, every object and phenomenon has two main qualities - identity and difference. Identity means that an object (phenomenon, idea) is equal to itself, that is, a given object is precisely this given object. At the same time, in an object that is identical to itself, there is something that strives to go beyond the scope of the object, to violate its identity.
Contradiction, the struggle between the same identity and difference leads, according to Hegel, to change (self-change) of the object - movement. Examples: there is an idea that is identical to itself, at the same time, it itself contains a difference - something that strives to go beyond the scope of the idea; the result of their struggle is a change in the idea (for example, the transformation of an idea into matter from the point of view of idealism). Or: there is a society that is identical to itself, but there are forces in it that are cramped within the framework of this society; their struggle leads to a change in the quality of society, its renewal.
We can also distinguish different types of struggle:
1. a struggle that brings benefits to both sides (for example, constant competition, where each side “catches up” with the other and moves to a higher qualitative level of development);
2. struggle, where one side regularly gains the upper hand over the other, but the defeated side persists and is an “irritant” for the winning side, due to which the winning side moves to a higher level of development;
3. antagonistic struggle, where one side can survive only through the complete destruction of the other.
In addition to fighting, other types of interaction are possible:
1. assistance (when both parties provide reciprocal assistance to each other without fighting);
2. solidarity, alliance (the parties do not provide direct assistance to each other, but have common interests and act in the same direction);
3. neutrality (the parties have different interests, do not promote each other, but do not fight each other);
Mutualism is a complete relationship (to accomplish any task, the parties must act only together and cannot act autonomously from each other).
The law of transition of quantitative changes into qualitative ones.
The second law of dialectics is the law of the transition of quantitative changes into qualitative ones.
Quality is a certainty identical to being, a stable system of certain characteristics and connections of an object.
Quantity – countable parameters of an object or phenomenon (number, size, volume, weight, size, etc.).
Measure is the unity of quantity and quality.
With certain quantitative changes, quality necessarily changes.
However, quality cannot change indefinitely. There comes a moment when a change in quality leads to a change in the measure (that is, the coordinate system in which the quality previously changed under the influence of quantitative changes) - to a radical transformation of the essence of the subject. Such moments are called “nodes,” and the transition itself to another state is understood in philosophy as a “leap.”
We can give some examples of the operation of the law of transition of quantitative changes into qualitative ones.
If you heat water successively by one degree Celsius, that is, change quantitative parameters - temperature, then the water will change its quality - it will become hot (due to the disruption of structural bonds, atoms will begin to move several times faster). When the temperature reaches 100 degrees, a radical change in the quality of the water will occur - it will turn into steam (that is, the previous “coordinate system” of the heating process will collapse - water and the previous system of connections). A temperature of 100 degrees in this case will be a node, and the transition of water into steam (the transition of one quality measure to another) will be a jump. The same can be said about cooling water and turning it into ice at a temperature of zero degrees Celsius.
If a body is given greater and greater speed - 100, 200, 1000, 2000, 7000, 7190 meters per second - it will accelerate its movement (change quality within a stable measure). When the body is given a speed of 7191 m/s (“nodal” speed), the body will overcome gravity and become an artificial satellite of the Earth (the coordinate system itself changes, the change in quality = measure, a jump will occur).
In nature, it is not always possible to determine the nodal moment. The transition of quantity into a fundamentally new quality can occur:
1. sharply, instantly;
2. imperceptibly, evolutionarily.
Examples of the first case were discussed above.
As for the second option (an imperceptible, evolutionary fundamental change in quality - measure), a good illustration of this process was the ancient Greek aporia “Heap” and “Bald”: “When adding which grain, the aggregate of grains will turn into a heap?”; “If a hair falls out of your head, then from what moment, with the loss of which specific hair, can a person be considered bald?” That is, the edge of a specific change in quality may be elusive.
Related information.
This law occupies an important place in the dialectic system, as it provides an explanation of the mechanism of any transformation. According to this law, fundamental changes do not occur on their own, but due to imperceptible, gradual, quantitative increases. At the same time, having occurred, fundamental changes determine further quantitative processes. The content of the law is expressed in the categories of quality, quantity, measure, leap and in their dialectical relationship.
Quality. The world is a great diversity of things and phenomena. Objects, phenomena and processes of the material world are similar to each other in some ways, but different in others. Moreover, the reasons on which objects are combined and differentiated are not of the same level. Some relate to the essence, the main thing in objects, while other reasons are unimportant. For the qualitative definition of a person as a person, differences in height are very insignificant, but in certain situations these differences become significant, for example, when modeling clothes.
140
Yes, in sports, even in astronautics. The same can be said about animals, plants, chemical elements, etc.
That defining thing that underlies objects, processes of a particular class and distinguishes objects of a given class from objects of another class is quality. Thanks to him, the object is a given certainty. In particular, G. Hegel points to the specificity and uniqueness of things as the most important characteristics of quality. “Something,” he writes, “is, thanks to its quality, what it is, and, losing its quality, it ceases to be what it is*.40
Quality is a philosophical category, the content of which expresses the integrity and specificity of an object, which distinguishes it from other objects and phenomena, no matter how similar they may be. The above definition is not complete, if only because integrity itself must be defined, and, as the history of the issue shows, even the very approach to such a definition requires the introduction of new concepts. Such a concept is a property. Indicating the specifics of an object does not mean that it is completely closed or isolated. Its qualitative certainty is formed and exists in a set of interactions in which certain aspects and properties of it are manifested. Each thing enters into many interactions and therefore has many properties. Representing only one side of a thing, a property does not express its integrity. And quality determines integrity, representing it through the organic unity of general and specific properties of a given thing or class of things. In contrast to essential certainty, the concept of quality organically connects essential and inessential properties. This is due to the fact that, depending on the type of interaction, an unimportant property may turn out to be essential, and an essential property may turn out to be unimportant.
Modern science uses the concept of “system,” which is very close to the concept of quality. Any thing as a system, due to the divisibility of matter, represents a unity of certain elements. A system is a dynamic concept, and from this point of view it represents the unity of internal and external connections and interactions. Quality in this sense presupposes the unity of external and internal properties and cannot be thought of only as internal certainty. The specificity of a thing cannot be established outside the relationship of this thing with other things. Nor can it be established without a common basis to distinguish the differences. So, for example, the qualitative certainty of uranium as a radioactive chemical element consists not only of the properties inherent in uranium itself, but also those that are common to a number of chemical elements that are characterized by radioactivity as such.
The concept of a system, being another expression of qualitative certainty, contributes to the solution of another problem that is actively discussed: the relationship between the single-quality and multi-quality things of the material world. The statement about the multi-quality nature of a thing is often denied on the basis of identifying the concepts of quality and property. Quality is determined through the unity of many properties, therefore, multi-quality in relation to the category of quality turns out to be unnecessary. But as soon as we start talking about a thing as a system of natural origin, which, as a rule, is subordinated and hierarchical, it is extremely difficult to refuse to recognize the presence of many relatively independent qualities in it. At this moment, firstly, a number of close philosophical categories are very successfully combined - one (quality) and many (many qualities), the whole and the parts; and secondly, philosophical and scientific concepts that are currently widely used by both philosophy and science - qualitative certainty and system. The concept of a system includes a definition of quality, but helps to interpret it not as an empty abstraction, but as a part of the material world more filled with content, form, and being.
The qualitative characteristics of an object (system) are objective, but terminologically, the concepts of quality and the given object are often used as identical. In the study of a subject, we take into account one or another aspect of it - here subjectivity in assessing quality may be revealed.
Quantity is “a philosophical category that reflects the general in qualitatively homogeneous things and phenomena.”41 Qualitative homogeneity creates the basis for the comparability of things and phenomena. Quantitative certainty determines the possibility of comparability, appropriate methods and standards of comparison.
The beginning of the scientific study of quantitative relationships dates back to antiquity. According to historical sources, the first person to take mathematics away from merchants was Pythagoras. This means that it was the Pythagoreans who tried to make a science out of mathematics. They explored the nature of numbers and their relationships and used their research to understand the harmony of the world.
Mathematics was generally held in high esteem by ancient thinkers. Aristotle gave a definition of the category of quantity, which has not yet lost its value: “Quantity is that which is divisible into component parts, each of which, whether there are two or more, is by nature one thing and a definite something. Every quantity is a set if it is countable, and a magnitude is if it is measurable.”42
In this definition, it is important to note a number of necessary points. First of all, Aristotle distinguishes between “quantity” and “number”. Quantity is expressed by number, but is not identical to it. A number is a form of expression for a set associated with a specific number system. Quantity is an objective, necessary characteristic of an object, opposite to quality and correlated specifically with it. If quality is integrity, then quantity is that which is divisible. By the way, divisibility applies to both discontinuous (many) and continuous (magnitude = line, width, depth). But the main thing here is what divisibility does Aristotle mean? He means divisibility into parts, each of which is one thing and a specific something. This is something homogeneous that serves as the basis and object of comparability of things. For example, the nuclear charge in the elements of the periodic table. If the nuclear charge of a certain element is 17 units, then we define this element as chlorine. The one and definite something indicated by Aristotle is a homogeneous quality or property that can be counted and expressed in numbers. Thanks to the ability to count and measure, quantity can express the size, volume of objects, the degree of presence of properties and homogeneous characteristics. Being a category opposite to quality, quantitative certainty is also necessary for an object and characterizes the peculiarity of its objective existence. Returning to the example with chlorine, we add that chlorine, unlike other elements, not only has a special nuclear charge of 17 units, it is also characterized by a melting point (100.98 degrees), boiling point (34.05 degrees), which together reveals the internal nature of the qualitative certainty of a given chemical element.
Materialist dialectics proceeds from the position of the necessary connection and dependence of quality and quantity. In the history of science and philosophy, there is a view that exaggerates the importance of quantity in determining things, phenomena and their development. This is characteristic of Descartes and Spinoza, Newton and Leibniz and is associated primarily with the intensive development and success of mathematics.
There is also a tendency to imagine the development of science as a movement from the description of objects from the side of their qualitative certainty to the description of quantitative patterns, and to consider the latter the highest stage of its development. However, in reality, a one-sided image of objects is not complete. Science can accumulate a large amount of knowledge that characterizes objects from a quantitative perspective, but this does not provide knowledge of patterns. Only in unity, in the combination of the quantitative and qualitative sides, in the study of this combination, is it possible to understand the laws of the material world. The study of the material world requires mandatory consideration of the unity of quantity and quality. D.I. Mendeleev wrote about this, in particular: “Knowledge related to the quantitative side of chemical transformations has far outstripped the study of qualitative relationships. The connection between these two sides, in my opinion, will constitute a thread that should lead chemistry out of the labyrinth of the modern, already significant, but partly one-sided supply of data. I myself tried to find such a connection: it underlies the periodic system of elements to which my entire presentation is subordinated.”43 A similar situation is now emerging in the physics of elementary particles.
Measure is a philosophical category that expresses the unity of quality and quantity. This is the boundary, the limit of quantitative changes, the achievement of which causes a change in quality. It is known that the idea of measure is of ancient origin. The philosophy “observe moderation in everything” is attributed to many sages known for deep sayings. The measure existed for a long time as a universal norm of behavior, serving as a sign of correct life and behavior. Aristotle paid attention to the concept of measure, but it was not yet part of an important dialectical law.
G. Hegel considers measure as a concept, without which the structure of the law of quantitative and qualitative changes would be incomplete. Emphasizing the ontological and objective aspect, he writes: “Measure is a qualitatively determined quantity, primarily as immediate; it is a certain quantity with which a certain existence or a certain quality is associated.”44 This definition of a measure specifies in the law only the principle of the connection between quantity and quality, and emphasizes the need for this connection of opposites to characterize any object. The concept of measure expresses the form of connection between quantity and quality, in which the function of quality is to determine the total volume of quantity, and the function of quantity is to realize the continuous variability (decrease or increase) of the matter of quality.
In terms of development, the measure indicates the limit, the achievement of which causes a change in quality. Hegel even introduces the concept opposite to measure - immensity. This is “a measure, due to its quantitative nature, going beyond the limits of its qualitative certainty. But since this is another quantitative relation, which in comparison with the first is immeasurable, is nevertheless also qualitative, then the immeasurable is also a measure. These two transitions (from quality to a certain quantity and from the latter back to quality) can be represented as endless progress - as the removal and self-restoration of measure in the immeasurable.”45 Here Hegel already describes the process of development, expressed in terms of the law of quantitative and qualitative changes. We can talk about the inconsistency of the measure, which lies in the fact that, on the one hand, it is a boundary indicating the finiteness of a given quality, and it not only acts as an external limitation, but is its internal factor, covering and penetrating all its certainty. On the other hand, it is the bearer of the variability of parts of a given quality, striving to go beyond its limits. The quantitative nature of the measure makes it possible to consider it as a mechanism that ensures the process of endless development and the replacement of one quality by another. It is no coincidence that Hegel sometimes designates development as a “nodal line of measures.”
The boundaries of a measure are flexible, since it does not represent an isolated phenomenon or the concept of an isolated phenomenon. The mobility of these boundaries depends on the general conditions and the specific nature of the process. In the purposeful change of conditions lies the solution to the problem of managing the natural connections of nature.
The law of the transition of quantity to quality and vice versa specifies the principles of dialectics, characterizing one of the aspects of development, revealing its mechanism. According to Engels, the essence of this law can be expressed as follows: “... in nature, qualitative changes - in a manner precisely defined for each individual case - can occur only through a quantitative decrease in matter or motion (the so-called energy).”46 Quantitative changes as a continuous process The variability of objects of the material world, reaching a measure, causes qualitative changes. Beyond the limits of the measure, development does not stop, but represents a new relationship, characterized by a new measure. The new quality contains a new measure of quantity, which will continue to develop in the future.
This law, characterizing one of the aspects of development, is nevertheless connected with other laws. The connection with the law of dialectical contradiction has already been mentioned. The same can be said about the connection between the law of quantitative and qualitative changes and the law of the negation of negation. In setting out the last law, it is already possible to use, instead of more abstract concepts such as “being and nothing”, “something and other”, more specific categories of quality, quantity and measure. These concepts, their connections and mutual transitions make the law of negation of negation more meaningful and more fully reveal the unity of all aspects of development.
There is a methodology according to which development, expressed in the necessary connection and mutual transitions of concepts, is not recognized. This is a methodology scientifically based on the principles of a mechanistic picture of the world. According to the tradition coming from Aristotle, the philosophical picture of the world is called metaphysics, and the method is called metaphysical. The metaphysical view of quality and quantity is determined by the general principle of reducing the highest forms of motion of matter to the lowest. The basis of this approach is the fact that higher forms contain simpler ones. Hence the desire to reduce all forms of movement to the simplest - mechanical. If all movement is a mechanical movement of bodies in space, then there can be no talk of qualitative changes. Hence the conclusion: development is nothing more than an increase or decrease in the same object, unchanged in quality.
Metaphysicians, denying the unity of qualitative and quantitative changes, absolutize either one or the other. Thus, preformationists in biology believed that the entire organism already exists in the embryo. The concept of preformationism was adhered to by the idealist G. Leibniz and other philosophers. Materialism XVII-XVIII centuries. also suffered from metaphysical limitations, which was expressed in the fact that he did not distinguish between qualitatively diverse forms of the Movement of matter. Not knowing how to show the emergence of a new quality, these philosophers were forced to endow all nature with the properties of living things, to spiritualize it (B. Spinoza, D. Diderot).
An opposite, but also metaphysically limited position was developed by representatives of the so-called. "catastrophe theories" The French naturalist J. Cuvier, denying the period of accumulation of quantitative changes, tried to explain the qualitative diversity of animal species by the presence of catastrophes in nature. The same point of view was developed by a Dutch botanist at the beginning of the 20th century. Hugo de Vries. “For thousands of years everything remains at peace...” he wrote. - From time to time, however, nature tries to create something new and better. She captures once one, another time another species. The creative force comes into motion, and new forms arise on the old, hitherto unchanged basis.”47 Each new species of animals and plants arises suddenly, as a result of the action of some creative force.
These theories remove the problem of development: development becomes impossible, because there is no connection with the previous one.
The metaphysical concept was refuted by the very course of development of natural science. The Kant-Laplace theory of the emergence and development of the Solar system as a natural process played a significant role in the fight against metaphysics. Charles Darwin's doctrine of the origin of species put an end to metaphysics in biology. Chemistry played a huge role in resolving the issue of the relationship between quantitative and qualitative changes in the material world. This is an extremely big merit to M. V. Lomonosov, A. M. Butlerov, D. I. Mendeleev. Mendeleev's periodic table is a concrete illustration of the inextricable connection between quantitative changes and qualitative transformations. In chemistry in general, the essence of the relationship between the qualitative and quantitative certainty of objects and processes is most clearly revealed. The development of science has prepared a dialectical understanding of quantitative-qualitative connections and development.
Jump. The diversity and life of nature contain the need for qualitative transformations. “The leap here means a qualitative difference and a qualitative change,” notes Hegel.48 The new quality interrupts the gradualness of quantitative changes. A break in gradualism does not mean a break in development. A leap is a process, not an instantaneous flight through the void. And this process is universal in nature, i.e. the transition from quality to quality on the basis of quantitative changes always and at all levels of the movement of matter represents a leap.
The qualitative diversity of the material world determines the diversity of leaps. They are classified according to many criteria: the nature of the subject, system, scale of change, form of occurrence. Complex multi-level systems, for example the human body, contain within themselves the possibility of many leaps that characterize qualitative changes in its parts and do not change the quality of the organism itself. Another example describes the transformation of a globule, which is a turbulent mass of gas and dust, into a full-fledged star.
This process, which continues for millennia, undergoes at least two significant jumps based on quantitative changes - the transition of the kinetic energy of particles into thermal energy and the emergence of thermonuclear processes. As a result, the globule turns into a protostar, and the protostar into a full-fledged one. The situation with the evolution of species is even more complicated. For example, an ancient shrew (mouse), whose age is over 50 million years, is the “progenitor” of modern mammals (bear, wolf, elephant). You can imagine how many jumps this process contains. Based on the scale of the jump, one can distinguish between private and general jumps. Partial leaps relate either to the structural elements of the system or to intermediate stages of its development. The scale of the jump is related to the time it occurs.
The form differs between gradual jumps and with an “explosion”. Graduality as a form of leap should be distinguished from the gradualness of quantitative changes. The gradualness of quantitative changes is not associated with fundamental changes in the subject or system. The graduality of the leap as a form of qualitative change expresses precisely fundamental changes in development. With regard to the question of mutual transformations of forms of motion of matter, Engels noted: “Despite all the gradualness, the transition from one form of motion to another always remains a leap.”49
Jumps with an “explosion” mean a qualitative change in the entire basis of the old quality, a change in the system as a whole. Such jumps are characteristic, for example, of the transition of one chemical element to another. It is believed that such transitions do not require a stage of accumulation of quantitative changes, although this is more typical for man-made processes than natural ones, since natural processes include many disordered molecular interactions, which only at certain stages can lead to reactions that signify the process of a qualitative leap.
The law of the transition of quantitative changes into qualitative ones, expressed through the specificity of its categories and their interrelation, characterizes the general mechanism of development of the material world, its general content as a unity of discontinuity and continuity.
Laws and principles of dialectics in examples. June 16th, 2012
Original taken from blogmaster in Laws and principles of dialectics in examples.
Dialectics can be defined as the doctrine of the development of being, cognition and thinking, the source of which (development) is the formation and resolution of contradictions in the very essence of developing objects.
By the way, I’m not entirely sure whether you asked for examples of the principles of dialectics or the laws of dialectics, but let’s take a look at both.
Dialectics theoretically reflects the development of matter, spirit, consciousness, cognition and other aspects of reality through:
. laws of dialectics;
. principles.
The main problem of dialectics is what is development?
Development is the highest form of movement. In turn, movement is the basis of development.
Movement is also an internal property of matter and a unique phenomenon of the surrounding reality, since movement is characterized by integrity, continuity and at the same time the presence of contradictions (a moving body does not occupy a permanent place in space - at each moment of movement the body is in a certain place and at the same time is no longer in it). Movement is also a way of communication in the material world.
There are three basic laws of dialectics:
. unity and struggle of opposites;
. transition from quantity to quality;
. denials denials.
The law of unity and struggle of opposites is that everything that exists consists of opposite principles, which, being united in nature, are in struggle and contradict each other (example: day and night, hot and cold, black and white, winter and summer, youth and old age and etc.). The unity and struggle of opposite principles is the internal source of movement and development of all things.
Examples: there is an idea that is identical to itself, at the same time, it itself contains a difference - something that strives to go beyond the scope of the idea; the result of their struggle is a change in the idea (for example, the transformation of idea into matter from the point of view of idealism). Or: there is a society that is identical to itself, but there are forces in it that are cramped within the framework of this society; their struggle leads to a change in the quality of society, its renewal.
We can also distinguish different types of struggle:
A struggle that brings benefits to both sides (for example, constant competition, where each side “catches up” with the other and moves to a higher qualitative level of development);
A struggle where one side regularly gains the upper hand over the other, but the defeated side persists and is an “irritant” for the winning side, due to which the winning side moves to a higher level of development;
An antagonistic struggle, where one side can only survive by completely destroying the other.
In addition to fighting, other types of interaction are possible:
Assistance (when both parties provide reciprocal assistance to each other without fighting);
Solidarity, alliance (the parties do not provide direct assistance to each other, but have common interests and act in the same direction);
Neutrality (the parties have different interests, do not promote each other, but do not fight each other);
Mutualism is a complete relationship (to accomplish any task, the parties must act only together and cannot act autonomously from each other).
The second law of dialectics is law of transition of quantitative changes into qualitative ones.
Quality- a certainty identical to being, a stable system of certain characteristics and connections of an object. Quantity— countable parameters of an object or phenomenon (number, magnitude, volume, weight, size, etc.). Measure- unity of quantity and quality.
With certain quantitative changes, quality necessarily changes. However, quality cannot change indefinitely. There comes a moment when a change in quality leads to a change in the measure (that is, the coordinate system in which the quality previously changed under the influence of quantitative changes) - to a radical transformation of the essence of the subject. Such moments are called “nodes”, and the transition itself to another state is understood in philosophy as "leap".
You can cite some examples the operation of the law of transition of quantitative changes into qualitative ones.
If you heat water successively by one degree Celsius, that is, change quantitative parameters - temperature, then the water will change its quality - it will become hot (due to the disruption of the usual structural bonds, the atoms will begin to move several times faster). When the temperature reaches 100 degrees, a radical change in the quality of water will occur - it will turn into steam (that is, the previous “coordinate system” of the heating process will collapse - water and the previous system of connections). A temperature of 100 degrees in this case will be a node, and the transition of water into steam (the transition of one quality measure to another) will be a jump. The same can be said about cooling water and turning it into ice at a temperature of zero degrees Celsius.
If a body is given greater and greater speed - 100, 200, 1000, 2000, 7000, 7190 meters per second - it will accelerate its movement (change quality within a stable measure). When the body is given a speed of 7191 m/s (the “nodal” speed), the body will overcome gravity and become an artificial satellite of the Earth (the very coordinate system of the quality change will change, a jump will occur).
In nature, it is not always possible to determine the nodal moment. The transition of quantity into a fundamentally new quality may happen:
Sharply, instantly;
Imperceptibly, evolutionarily.
Examples of the first case were discussed above.
As for the second option (an imperceptible, evolutionary fundamental change in quality - measure), a good illustration of this process was the ancient Greek aporia “Heap” and “Bald”: “When you add which grain, the totality of grains will turn into a heap?”; “If a hair falls out of your head, then from what moment, with the loss of which specific hair, can a person be considered bald?” That is, the edge of a specific change in quality may be elusive.
Law of Negation of Negation lies in the fact that the new always denies the old and takes its place, but gradually it itself turns from new into old and is negated by more and more new things.Examples:
Change of socio-economic formations (with a formational approach to the historical process);
. "relay of generations";
Change of tastes in culture, music;
Evolution of the family (children are partly parents, but at a new stage);
Daily death of old blood cells, emergence of new ones.
The denial of old forms by new ones is the cause and mechanism of progressive development. However the question of the direction of development - controversial in philosophy. The following stand out: main points of view:
Development is only a progressive process, a transition from lower forms to higher ones, that is, ascending development;
Development can be either upward or downward;
Development is chaotic and has no direction. Practice shows that of the three points of view, the most
The second one is close to true: development can be either upward or downward, although the general trend is still upward.
Examples:
The human body develops and grows stronger (ascending development), but then, developing further, it weakens and becomes decrepit (descending development);
The historical process follows an upward direction of development, but with recessions - the heyday of the Roman Empire was replaced by its fall, but then a new upward development of Europe followed (Renaissance, modern times, etc.).
Thus, development quicker coming not in a linear manner (in a straight line), but in a spiral Moreover, each turn of the spiral repeats the previous ones, but at a new, higher level.
Let's move on to the principles of dialectics. Basic principles of dialectics are:
. principle of universal connection;
. principle of consistency;
. principle of causality;
. the principle of historicism.
The principle of universal interconnection occupies a key place in materialist dialectics, since on its basis the most important task is solved - the explanation of both the internal source of development and the external universal coverage of material and spiritual life by it. According to this principle, everything in the world is interconnected. But the connections between the phenomena are different. Eat indirect connections, in which material objects exist without directly touching each other, but are connected by spatio-temporal relations, belonging to a certain type, class of material and ideal objects. Eat direct connections, when objects are in direct material-energy and information interaction, as a result of which they gain or lose matter, energy, information and thus change the material characteristics of their existence.
Systematicity means that numerous connections in the surrounding world exist not chaotically, but in an orderly manner. These connections form an integral system in which they are arranged in a hierarchical order. Thanks to this, the surrounding world has internal expediency.
Causality - the presence of such connections where one gives rise to the other. Objects, phenomena, processes of the surrounding world are caused by something, that is, they have either an external or internal cause. The cause, in turn, gives rise to the effect, and the relationships in general are called cause-and-effect.
Historicism implies two aspects of the surrounding world:
Eternity, indestructibility of history, the world;
Its existence and development in time, which lasts forever.
In fact, these are only the basic principles of dialectics, but there are also epistemological principles and alternative ( sophistry, eclecticism, dogmatism, subjectivism). There are also categories of dialectics, the main ones of which include:
Essence and phenomenon;
Cause and investigation;
Individual, special, universal;
Possibility and reality;
Necessity and chance.
Number is the purest quantitative determination known to us. But it is full of qualitative differences. Hegel, quantity and unit, multiplication, division, exponentiation, root extraction. Thanks to this, qualitative differences are already obtained - which Hegel does not point out: primary numbers and products, simple roots and powers are obtained. 16 is not simply the sum of 16 units, it is also the square of 4 and the bisquare of 2. Moreover, the primary numbers impart new certain qualities to the numbers obtained by multiplying them by other numbers: only even numbers are divisible by two, the same applies to 4 and 8. For division by three we have a rule about the sum of the digits. The same is true in the case of 9 and 6, where this also merges with the property of an even number. For 7 there is a special law. This is the basis for tricks with numbers that seem incomprehensible to those who do not know arithmetic. Therefore, what Hegel says (III, p. 237) about the meaninglessness of arithmetic is not true. Wed. however: "Measure".
Mathematics, speaking about the infinitely large and the infinitely small, introduces a quantitative difference that even takes the form of an irreducible qualitative opposition. Quantities that are so colossally different from each other that there is no continuity between them. all sorts of things rational relation, any comparison, become quantitatively incommensurable. The usual incommensurability of a circle and a straight line is also a dialectical qualitative difference, but here it is precisely quantitative difference homogeneous elevates magnitudes quality difference to the point of incommensurability.
Number. A separate number acquires a certain quality already in the numerical system, since this 9 is not simply the sum of nine times 1, but the base for 90, 99 , 900000, etc. All numerical laws depend on the underlying system and are determined by it. In the binary and ternary systems, 2x2 does not = 4, but = 100 or = 11. In every system with an odd base number, the distinction between even and odd numbers disappears. For example, in the fivefold system 5 = 10, 10 = 20, 15 = 30. Similarly, in this system the number Zn, as well as the product (6 = 11, 9 = 14) by 3 or 9. Thus, the root number does not determine only the quality of oneself, but also of all other numbers.
In the case of powers, the matter goes even further: each number can be considered as a power of every other number - there are as many systems of logarithms as there are integers and fractions ( F. Engels, Dialectics of Nature, pp. 47 - 48, 1932)
Examples from the fields of physics and chemistry
1. The law of the transition of quantity to quality and vice versa. We can express this law for our own purposes in such a way that qualitative changes can occur in nature - in a precisely defined way for each individual case - only through a quantitative addition or quantitative decrease in matter or motion (the so-called energy).
All qualitative differences in nature are based either on different chemical composition, or on different quantities or forms of movement (energy), or - as is almost always the case - on both. Thus, it is impossible to change the quality of any body without adding or subtracting matter or motion, that is, without a quantitative change in this body. In this form, the mysterious Hegelian position not only takes on a rational appearance, but also seems quite clear.
There is no need to point out that the various allotropic and aggregative states of bodies, depending on the different grouping of molecules, are based on a greater or lesser amount of motion imparted to the body.
But what about changing the form of motion or so-called energy? After all, when we transform heat into mechanical movement, or vice versa, then the quality changes, but the quantity remains the same? This is true, but regarding the change in the form of movement, one can say what Heine says about vice: everyone can be virtuous in himself; for vice, two subjects are always necessary. A change in the form of motion is always a process that occurs between at least two bodies, of which one loses a certain amount of motion of such and such quality (for example, heat), and the other acquires a corresponding amount of motion of such and such another quality (mechanical motion, electricity , chemical decomposition). Consequently, quantity and quality correspond here to each other mutually. Until now, it has not yet been possible to transform the movement inside a separate isolated body from one form to another. Here we are talking only about inorganic bodies; This same law applies to organic bodies, but it occurs under much more complicated circumstances, and quantitative measurement here is still often impossible.
If we take any inorganic body and mentally divide it into smaller and smaller particles, then at first we will not notice any qualitative change. But in this way the process can only go to a certain limit: if we succeed, as in the case of evaporation, in releasing individual molecules, then although we can in most cases continue to divide these latter further, a complete change in quality occurs. The molecule breaks down into its individual atoms, which have completely different properties than it does. In molecules that consist of various chemical elements, the place of the composite molecule is taken by atoms or molecules of these elements; in elementary molecules, free atoms appear that exhibit completely different quality of action: free oxygen atoms in statu nascendi effortlessly produce what bound ones will never do molecules atoms of atmospheric oxygen.
But the molecule is already qualitatively different from the mass to which it belongs. It can make movements independently of the latter, while this mass appears to be at rest; a molecule can, for example, undergo thermal vibrations; it can, due to a change in position or connection with neighboring molecules, transfer the body to another, allotropic or aggregate, state, etc.
Thus, we see that the purely quantitative operation of division has a limit at which it turns into a qualitative difference: the mass consists of molecules alone, but it is essentially different from the molecule, just as the latter, in turn, is different from the atom. It is on this difference that the separation of mechanics, as the science of celestial and terrestrial masses, from physics, as the mechanics of molecules, and from chemistry, as the physics of atoms, is based.
In mechanics we do not encounter any qualities, but at best states, like<покой>equilibrium, motion, potential energy, which are all based on a measurable transfer of motion and can be expressed in a quantitative way. Therefore, insofar as a qualitative change occurs here, it is determined by a corresponding quantitative change.
In physics, bodies are viewed as chemically unchanging or indifferent; we are dealing here with changes in their molecular states and with a change in the form of movement, in which in all cases molecules come into action - at least on one of both sides. Here, every change is a transition from quantity to quality - a consequence of a quantitative change in the inherent quantity of motion of a body or the amount of motion imparted to it of some form. “So, for example, the temperature of water at first has no meaning in relation to its drop-liquid state; but as the temperature of liquid water increases or decreases, a moment comes when this state of cohesion changes, and the water turns in one case into steam, in another into ice" ( Hegel, Enzyklopädie, Gesamtausgabe, Band VI, S. 217). Thus, a certain minimum current is required for the platinum wire to produce light; Thus, each metal has its own heat of fusion; Thus, each liquid has its own specific freezing and boiling point at a given pressure, since we are able to achieve the appropriate temperature with our means; so, finally, every gas has a critical point at which, with appropriate pressure and cooling, it can be turned into a liquid state. In a word, the so-called constants of physics are for the most part nothing more than the names of nodal points where the quantitative<изменение>the addition or decrease of movement causes a qualitative change in the state of the corresponding body - where, therefore, quantity turns into quality.
But the law of nature discovered by Hegel celebrates its greatest triumphs in the field of chemistry. Chemistry can be called the science of qualitative changes in bodies that occur under the influence of changes in quantitative composition. Hegel himself already knew this ( Hegel, Gesamtausgabe, V. III, S. 433). Let's take oxygen; if three atoms are combined into a molecule here, and not two, as usual, then we have before us ozone - a body that is definitely different in its smell and action from ordinary oxygen. And what can be said about the various proportions in which oxygen combines with nitrogen or sulfur, and each of which produces a body qualitatively different from all other bodies! How different is laughing gas (nitrous oxide N 2 O) from nitric anhydride (nitrogen dioxide N 2 O 5)! The first is a gas, the second, at ordinary temperature, is a solid crystalline body! Meanwhile, the only difference between them in composition is that the second body contains five times more oxygen than the first, and between both there are other nitrogen oxides (NO, N 2 O 3, N 2 O 7), which all differ qualitatively from both of them and from each other.
This is even more strikingly revealed in homologous series of carbon compounds, especially in the case of the simplest carbohydrates. Of the normal paraffins, the simplest is methane CH4. Here, 4 affinity units of a carbon atom are saturated with 4 hydrogen atoms. In the second paraffin - the C 2 H 6 stage - two carbon atoms are connected to each other, and the free 6 bond units are saturated with 6 hydrogen atoms. Next we have C 3 H 8 , C 4 H 10 - in a word, according to the algebraic formula, C n H 2 n +2, so that by adding the CH 2 group each time we get a body that is qualitatively different from the previous body. The three lowest members of the series are gases, the highest known to us, hexadecane, C 16 H 34, is a solid with a boiling point of 270 ° C. The same can be said about a series of primary alcohols derived (theoretically) from paraffins with the formula C n H 2 n +2 O and about monobasic fatty acids (formula C n H 2 n O 2). What qualitative difference the quantitative addition of C 3 H 6 brings with it can be found out on the basis of experience: it is enough to take wine alcohol C 2 H 6 O in some drinkable form, without the admixture of other alcohols, and another time take the same the most wine-like alcohol, but with a small admixture of amyl alcohol C 5 H 12 O, which is the main component of the vile fusel oil. The next morning our head will feel, to its detriment, the difference between both cases, so we can even say that the hop and the subsequent hangover from fusel oil (the main component of which, as is known, is amyl alcohol) is also a converted quality quantity: on the one hand, wine alcohol, and on the other, C 3 H 6 added to it.
In these series, Hegel's law appears to us in yet another form. Its lower members allow only one mutual arrangement of atoms. But if the number of atoms uniting into a molecule reaches a certain value specific for each series, then the grouping of atoms into molecules can occur in several ways: two or more isomers may appear, containing the same number of C, H, O atoms in the molecule, but qualitatively different from each other. We can even calculate how many similar isomers are possible for each member of the series. Thus, in the series of paraffins, there are two isomers for C 4 H 10, and three for C 5 H 12; for higher members the number of possible isomers increases very quickly<как это также можно вычислить>. Thus, again, the number of atoms in a molecule determines the possibility, and also - since this is shown experimentally - the actual existence of such qualitatively different isomers.
Little of. By analogy with the bodies familiar to us in each of these series, we can draw conclusions about the physical properties of the members of such a series still unknown to us and predict with some degree of confidence - at least for the bodies following the members known to us - these properties, for example, the boiling point and etc.
Finally, Hegel's law is valid not only for complex bodies, but also for the chemical elements themselves. We now know "that the chemical properties of elements are a periodic function of atomic weights" ( Roscoe- Schorlemmer, Ausführliches Lehrbuch der Chemie, II Band, S. 823), that, therefore, their quality is determined by the quantity of their atomic weight. This was brilliantly confirmed. Mendeleev showed that in the series of related elements arranged according to atomic weights, there are various gaps, indicating that new elements must still be discovered here. He described in advance the general chemical properties of one of these unknown elements - which he called eka-aluminium, because in the corresponding series it follows immediately after aluminum - and approximately predicted its specific and atomic weight and its atomic volume. A few years later, Lecoq de Boisbaudran actually discovered this element, and it turned out that Mendeleev's predictions were justified with minor deviations: eka-aluminum was embodied in gallium (ibid., p. 828). Mendeleev, unconsciously applying the Hegelian law of the transition of quantity into quality, accomplished a scientific feat that can easily be placed next to the discovery of Leverrier, who calculated the orbit of a still unknown planet - Neptune.
This very law is confirmed at every step in biology and in the history of human society, but we prefer to limit ourselves to examples from the field of exact sciences, because here the quantity can be specified and accurately measured.
It is very likely that those same gentlemen who have hitherto glorified the law of the transition of quantity into quality as mysticism and incomprehensible transcendentalism will now find it necessary to declare that this is a self-evident, banal and flat truth, that they have been applying it for a long time and that, thus, they are not told anything new here. But the establishment for the first time of a universal law of development of nature, society and thought in the form of a universally significant principle will forever remain a feat of world-historical significance. And if these gentlemen for many years allowed quantity to turn into quality, not knowing what they were doing, then they will have to seek consolation together with Moliere’s Monsieur Jourdan, who also spoke in prose all his life, without realizing it [In the manuscript follows This is a page with excerpts from Hegel’s “Logic” about “nothing” in “negation”, then three pages with calculations of formulas for the laws of motion.]. ( F. Engels, Dialectics of Nature, pp. 125 - 129, 1932)
The universality of the law of transition from quantity to quality
We must be grateful to Herr Dühring for the fact that he, as an exception, abandons the sublime and noble style in order to give us at least two examples of Marx’s perverse doctrine of logos.
“Isn’t it comical, for example, to refer to Hegel’s vaguely vague idea that quantity turns into quality and that therefore a sum of money that has reached certain limits becomes, thanks to this quantitative increase alone, capital?”
Of course, in such a “purified” presentation by Herr Dühring, this idea is quite curious. But let's see what Marx wrote in the original. On page 313 (2nd ed. of Capital), Marx draws the conclusion from his previous study on constant and variable capital and surplus value that “not every arbitrary amount of money or any value whatsoever can be converted into capital; but that for such a transformation, a certain minimum of money or some exchange values must be in the hands of the individual owner of money or goods.” He further says that if, for example, in any branch of labor a worker works on average 8 hours for himself, that is, to reproduce the value of his wages, and the next four hours for the capitalist, for the production flowing into pocket of the last surplus value, then in this case the owner, in order to live with the help of the surplus value appropriated by him, since his workers exist, must already have at his disposal such a sum of values that would be sufficient to supply two workers with raw material, tools and wages fee. And since capitalist production has as its goal not simply the maintenance of life, but the increase of wealth, then an owner with two workers is still not a capitalist. In order to live at least twice as well as an ordinary worker, and to be able to convert half of the surplus value produced into capital, he must already be able to hire 8 workers, that is, own an amount 4 times greater than in the first case. And only after these, and even more detailed, considerations to illuminate and justify the fact that not every insignificant amount of value is sufficient to transform it into capital and that in this regard, each period of development and each branch of industry has its own minimum limit - Only after all this does Marx notice: “Here, as in natural science, confirmed the fidelity of the law discovered by Hegel in his Logic that purely quantitative changes at a certain point turn into qualitative differences.”
And now one can enjoy the more elevated and noble style that Herr Dühring uses, attributing to Marx the opposite of what he actually said. Marx says: the fact that a sum of value can be transformed into capital only when it reaches a known, although different depending on the circumstances, but in each given case a certain minimum value - this fact is proof of correctness Hegelian law. Dühring imposes the following statement on Marx: because, according to Hegel’s law, quantity turns into quality, then "That's why a certain amount of money, having reached a certain limit, becomes... capital.” Therefore, just the opposite.
We became acquainted with the habit of misquoting, “in the interests of complete truth” and “in the name of duties to a public free from guild bonds,” during Herr Dühring’s analysis of Darwin’s works. The further, the more such a technique turns out to be necessarily inherent in the philosophy of reality and, in any case, represents a very “summary technique.” I'm not even talking about what Mr. Dühring ascribes to Marx, as if he is talking about any expenditure, whereas we are talking only about such expenditure as is spent on raw material, tools and wages; In this way Mr. Dühring forces Marx to speak pure nonsense. And after this he still dares to find comical the absurdity he himself has created. Just as he created the fantastic Darwin in order to test his power on him, so in this case he concocted the fantastic Marx. Truly “history in high style.”
We have already seen above in the world schematics that with this Hegelian nodal line of quantitative relations, according to the meaning of which at certain points of quantitative change a qualitative transformation suddenly occurs, Herr Dühring suffered a small misfortune, namely, that in this moment of weakness he himself recognized and applied it . In this case, we gave one of the most famous examples - an example of the variability of the aggregate states of water, which at normal atmospheric pressure and at a temperature of 0 ° C passes from a liquid to a solid state, and at 100 ° C - from liquid to gaseous, so that, therefore, At these two turning points, a simple quantitative change in temperature leads to a qualitative change in water.
We could cite hundreds more similar facts both from nature and from the life of human society to prove this law. So, for example, in Marx’s “Capital”, in the 4th section (production of relative surplus value, cooperation, division of labor and manufacture, machines and large-scale industry), many cases are mentioned in which a quantitative change transforms the quality of things and, in the same way, a qualitative transformation changes their quantity, so that, to use the expression hated by Mr. Dühring, “quantity turns into quality, and vice versa.” Such, for example, is the fact that the cooperation of many individuals, the fusion of many individual forces into one common force creates, in the words of Marx, a “new force”, which differs significantly from the sum of the individual forces that compose it.
To all this, Marx, in the place that Herr Dühring turned inside out in the interests of truth, added the following note: “The molecular theory used in modern chemistry, first scientifically developed by Laurent and Gerard, is based precisely on this law.” But what does this mean for Mr. Dühring? After all, he knows that “the highly modern educational elements of the natural scientific method of thinking are absent precisely where, as with Mr. Marx and his rival Lassalle, half-knowledge and some philosophizing constitute meager scientific ammunition.” On the contrary, Dühring is based on “the main achievements of exact knowledge in the field of mechanics, physics, chemistry,” etc., and in what form we have already seen this. But so that third parties can form an opinion about this, we intend to take a closer look at the example given in the aforementioned note by Marx.
There we are talking about homological series of carbon compounds, many of which are already known and each of which has its own algebraic formula for composition. If, as is customary in chemistry, we denote the carbon atom by C, the hydrogen atom by H, the oxygen atom by O, and the number of carbon atoms contained in each compound by n, then we can represent the molecular formulas for some of these series in in this form:
C n H 2 n +2 - a series of normal paraffins. C n H 2 n +2 O - a series of primary alcohols. C n H 2 n O 2 - a series of monobasic fatty acids.
If we take the last of these series as an example and take successively n = 1, n = 2, n = 3, etc., we obtain the following result (discarding isomers):
CH 2 O 2 - formic acid. - baling point 100°, melting point 1°.
C 2 H 4 O 2 - acetic acid. - » » 118°, » » 17°.
C 3 H 6 O 2 - propionic acid. - » » 140°, » » -
C 4 H 8 O 2 - butyric acid. - » » 162°, » » -
C 5 H 10 O 2 - valeric acid. - » » 175°, » » -
etc. up to C 30 H 60 O 2 - melissic acid, which melts only at 80° and has no boiling point at all, since it cannot evaporate at all without collapsing.
Here we see, therefore, a whole series of qualitatively different bodies formed by a simple quantitative addition of elements, and always in the same ratio. In its purest form, this phenomenon appears where all the constituent elements change their quantity in the same ratio, as, for example, in normal paraffins C n H 2 n +2: the lowest of them is methane CH 4 - gas; the highest known hexadecane, C 16 H 34, is a solid that forms colorless crystals, melting at 21° and boiling only at 278°. In both series, each new member is formed by adding CH 2, i.e., one carbon atom and two hydrogen atoms, to the molecular formula of the previous member, and this quantitative change in the molecular formula forms each time a qualitatively different body.
But these series provide only a particularly clear example: almost everywhere in chemistry, for example, on various oxides of nitrogen, on various acids of phosphorus or sulfur, we can see how “quantity turns into quality”, and this is the supposedly confused “foggy idea of Hegel”, so to speak, can be felt in things and phenomena, and, however, no one remains confused and foggy except Herr Dühring. And if Marx was the first to draw attention to this phenomenon, and if Herr Dühring read it without understanding anything (for otherwise he, of course, would not have allowed himself his unheard-of impudence), then this is enough to, without even looking further into Dühring’s famous “ Natural philosophy”, find out who lacks “highly modern educational elements of the natural scientific method of thinking” - Marx or Herr Dühring, and which of them does not have sufficient acquaintance with the main foundations of chemistry.
In conclusion, we intend to call one more witness in favor of the transformation of quantity into quality, namely Napoleon. The latter describes the battle of the poorly ridden, but disciplined French cavalry with the Mamelukes, these at that time by far the best in single combat, but undisciplined horsemen: “The two Mamelukes were certainly superior to the three French; 100 Mamelukes were equivalent to 100 French; 300 French usually defeated 300 Mamelukes, and 1000 French always defeated 1500 Mamelukes.” Just as with Marx a certain, albeit variable, minimum amount of exchange value is necessary to make its transformation into capital possible, so with Napoleon a certain minimum size of the cavalry detachment is necessary to allow the power of discipline to manifest itself, which consists in close formation and planned action. , and to rise to a superiority even over the greater masses of irregular cavalry, better fighting and better riding, and at least as brave. Doesn't this say something against Mr. Dühring? Didn't Napoleon fall shamefully in the fight against Europe? Didn't he suffer defeat after defeat? And why? Is it because he introduced Hegel’s confused and vague ideas into cavalry tactics! ( F. Engels, Anti-Dühring, pp. 88 - 91, 1932)
Examples from the field of social production
That form of labor in which many persons systematically and jointly participate in the same labor process or in different but interconnected labor processes is called cooperation.
Just as the attacking force of a cavalry squadron or the resistance force of an infantry regiment are significantly different from the sum of those forces of attack and resistance that individual cavalrymen and infantrymen are capable of developing, in the same way the mechanical sum of the forces of individual workers is different from the social force that develops when there are many hands are involved simultaneously in performing the same inseparable operation, when, for example, it is necessary to lift a weight, turn a gate, or remove an obstacle from the road. In all such cases, the result of combined labor either cannot be achieved at all by single efforts, or can only be achieved over a much longer period of time, or only on a dwarf scale. Here the matter is not only about increasing individual productive force through cooperation, but also about creating a new productive force, which in its very essence is mass force.
But even in addition to the new force that arises from the fusion of many forces into one common one, in most productive work even the most social contact causes competition and a comprehensive increase in animal spirits, increasing the individual capacity of individuals. As a result, 12 persons in one joint working day of 144 hours will produce much more product than twelve isolated workers working 12 hours each, or one worker during twelve consecutive days of labor. The reason for this is that man by his very nature is an animal, if not a political one, as Aristotle thought, then at least a social one.
Although many simultaneously or jointly perform the same or homogeneous work, yet the individual labor of each individual, as a part of the total labor, may represent different phases of a certain process of labor, through which the object being worked, through cooperation, runs more quickly. Thus, for example, if masons form a sequential row in order to transfer bricks from the base of a building under construction to its top, then each of them does the same thing, and yet their individual operations represent continuous steps of one general operation, special phases it, which each brick must go through in the process of labor and thanks to which the brick, having passed through two dozen hands of a collective worker, is sooner delivered to its place than if it were carried by two hands of an individual worker, now climbing the scaffolding, now descending from them. The object of labor covers the same space in a shorter time. On the other hand, combined labor is also carried out if, for example, the construction of a building is started simultaneously from different ends, even if the cooperating workers performed the same or homogeneous work. In a combined working day of 144 hours, the object of labor is processed simultaneously from different sides, since the combined or collective worker has eyes and hands both in front and behind, and is to a certain extent omnipresent. In this case, the total product moves towards its end faster than in twelve twelve-hour working days of more or less isolated workers, who are forced to approach the object of labor more one-sidedly. Here, spatially different parts of the product ripen simultaneously.
We emphasize that many complementary workers perform the same or homogeneous work, since this simplest form of joint labor plays a major role in the most developed types of cooperation. If the labor process is complex, then the mere fact of uniting a significant mass of people working together makes it possible to distribute various operations among different workers, therefore, perform them simultaneously and thus reduce the working time required to produce the total product.
In many industries there are critical moments, that is, known periods of time determined by the very nature of the work process, during which a certain labor result must be achieved. If it is required, for example, to shear a flock of sheep or to compress and remove a certain number of morgens of bread, then the quantity and quality of the resulting product depends on whether this operation is started and completed at a certain point in time. The period of time during which the labor process must be completed is predetermined here in advance, as, for example, when fishing for herring. An individual cannot squeeze more than one working day out of a day, say 12 hours, while a cooperative of 100 people expands a twelve-hour day into a working day containing 1200 hours. The short duration of labor is compensated by the magnitude of the mass of labor thrown into the arena of labor at the decisive moment. Timely receipt of results depends here on the simultaneous use of many combined working days, the size of the beneficial effect depends on the number of workers; the latter, however, is always less than the number of those workers who, working in isolation, could produce the same work during the same time. The want of this kind of co-operation is the reason why in the western United States a mass of corn is wasted every year, and in those parts of the East Indies where the English rule has destroyed the old community, a mass of cotton is lost.
Cooperation, on the one hand, makes it possible to expand the spatial sphere of labor and therefore, in certain labor processes, it is required by the very location of the objects of labor in space; for example, it is necessary for drainage work, construction of dams, irrigation work, when constructing canals, dirt roads, railways, etc. On the other hand, cooperation makes it possible to relatively, i.e., in comparison with the scale of production, spatially narrow production area. This limitation of the spatial sphere of labor while simultaneously expanding the sphere of its influence, which allows saving a significant part of the unproductive costs of production (faux frais), is generated by the concentration of the mass of workers, the merging of various labor processes and the concentration of the means of production.
Compared to an equal sum of individual individual working days, a combined working day produces larger masses of use values and therefore reduces the working time required to achieve a certain useful effect. In each individual case, such an increase in the productive power of labor can be achieved in various ways: either the mechanical force of labor increases, or the sphere of its influence expands spatially, or the arena of production spatially narrows in comparison with the scale of production, or at a critical moment a large amount of labor is set in motion during short period of time, or the rivalry of individuals is awakened and their animal spirit (vital energy) is intensified, or the homogeneous operations of many people receive the stamp of continuity and versatility, or various operations begin to be carried out simultaneously, or the means of production are economized through their joint use, or individual labor acquires the nature of average social labor. But in all these cases the specific productive force of the combined working day is the social productive force of labor, or the productive force of social labor. It arises from cooperation itself. In systematic cooperation with others, the worker erases individual boundaries and develops his ancestral potentials. ( K. Marx, Capital, vol.I, pp. 243 - 246, Partizdat, 1932)
The simple addition of peasant tools in the bowels of collective farms gives a sharp increase in labor productivity
In my recent speech in the press (“The Year of the Great Turning Point”), I developed the well-known arguments for the superiority of large-scale farming in agriculture over small-scale farming, meaning large state farms. There is no need to prove that all these arguments apply entirely to collective farms as large economic units. I am talking not only about developed collective farms, which have a machine and tractor base, but also about primary collective farms, representing, so to speak, the manufacturing period of collective farm construction and relying on peasant equipment. I mean those primary collective farms that are now being created in areas of complete collectivization and which are based on the simple addition of peasant instruments of production. Take, for example, the collective farms in the Khopra region in the former Don region. In appearance, these collective farms do not seem to differ from the point of view of technology from small peasant farms (few cars, few tractors). Meanwhile, the simple accumulation of peasant tools in the bowels of collective farms gave an effect that our practitioners had never dreamed of. What was this effect? The fact is that the transition to collective farms led to an expansion of the sown area by 30, 40 and 50%. How to explain this “dizzying” effect? The fact that the peasants, being powerless in the conditions of individual labor, turned into the greatest force, laying down their tools and uniting into collective farms. The fact that peasants had the opportunity to cultivate abandoned lands and virgin lands that were difficult to cultivate under conditions of individual labor. The fact that the peasants had the opportunity to take virgin lands into their own hands. Because it was possible to use vacant lots, individual plots, boundaries, etc., etc. ( I. Stalin, Questions of Leninism, pp. 449 - 450. ed. 9th.)
Jump
“From mechanics with its pressure and push to the connection of sensations and thoughts, one single and only rock of intermediate states extends.” This statement frees Herr Dühring from the need to say anything more detailed about the origin of life; Meanwhile, from a thinker who has traced the development of the world up to a state equal to himself and who feels at home on other world bodies, we would have the right to expect that he knows the real word here too. However, this statement itself, if it is not supplemented with the already mentioned Hegelian nodal line of measure relations, is only half true. Despite all the gradualness, the transition from one form of movement to another is always a leap, decisive for the turning point. Such is the transition from the mechanics of celestial bodies to the mechanics of small masses on them; such is the transition from the mechanics of masses to the mechanics of molecules, embracing the movements that we study in what is called physics in the proper sense of the word: heat, light, electricity, magnetism, just as the transition from the physics of molecules to the physics of atoms - chemistry - is accomplished through a decisive jump; This applies even more to the transition from ordinary chemical action to the chemistry of proteins, which we call life. Within the sphere of life, leaps are becoming increasingly rare and unnoticeable. Thus, again, Hegel must correct Herr Dühring. ( F. Engels, Anti-Dühring, p. 46, 1932)
How does a dialectical transition differ from a non-dialectical transition? Jumping. Inconsistency. A break from gradualism. The unity (identity) of being and non-being. ( "Lenin's collection"XII, page 237.)