In speaking of the identity of opposites in given conditions, what
we are referring to is real and concrete opposites and the real and concrete
transformations of opposites into one another. There are innumerable
transformations in mythology, for instance, Kua Fu's race with the sun in Shan
Hai Ching, [17] Yi's shooting down of nine suns in Huai Nan
Tzu, [18] the Monkey King's seventy-two metamorphoses inHsi Yu
Chi, [19] the numerous episodes of ghosts and foxes
metamorphosed into human beings in the Strange Tales of Liao
Chai, [20] etc. But these legendary transformations of
opposites are not concrete changes reflecting concrete contradictions. They are
naive, imaginary, subjectively conceived transformations conjured up in men's
minds by innumerable real and complex transformations of opposites into one
another. Marx said, "All mythology masters and dominates and shapes the
forces of nature in and through the imagination; hence it disappears as soon as
man gains mastery over the forces of nature." [21] The myriads of changes in mythology (and also in nursery tales)
delight people because they imaginatively picture man's conquest of the forces
of nature, and the best myths possess "eternal charm", as Marx put
it; but myths are not built out of the concrete contradictions existing in
given conditions and therefore are not a scientific reflection of reality. That
is to say, in myths or nursery tales the aspects constituting a contradiction
have only an imaginary identity, not a concrete identity. The scientific
reflection of the identity in real transformations is Marxist dialectics.
Why can an egg but not a stone be transformed into a chicken? Why
is there identity between war and peace and none between war and a stone? Why
can human beings give birth only to human beings and not to anything else? The
sole reason is that the identity of opposites exists only in necessary given
conditions. Without these necessary given conditions there can be no identity
whatsoever.
No comments:
Post a Comment