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.
Why is it that in Russia in 1917 the bourgeois-democratic February
Revolution was directly linked with the proletarian socialist October
Revolution, while in France the bourgeois revolution was not directly linked
with a socialist revolution and the Paris Commune of 1871 ended in failure? Why
is it, on the other hand, that the nomadic system of Mongolia and Central Asia
has been directly linked with socialism? Why is it that the Chinese revolution
can avoid a capitalist future and be directly linked with socialism without
taking the old historical road of the Western countries, without passing
through a period of bourgeois dictatorship? The sole reason is the concrete
conditions of the time. When certain necessary conditions are present, certain
contradictions arise in the process of development of things and, moreover, the
opposites contained in them are interdependent and become transformed into one
another; otherwise none of this would be possible.
Such is the problem of identity. What then is struggle? And what
is the relation between identity and struggle?
Lenin said:
The unity (coincidence,
identity, equal action) of opposites is conditional, temporary, transitory,
relative. The struggle of mutually exclusive opposites is absolute, just as
development and motion are absolute. [22]
What does this passage mean?
All processes have a beginning and an end, all processes transform
themselves into their opposites. The constancy of all processes is relative,
but the mutability manifested in the transformation of one process into another
is absolute.
There are two states of motion in all things, that of relative
rest and that of conspicuous change. Both are caused by the struggle between
the two contradictory elements contained in a thing. When the thing is in the
first state of motion, it is undergoing only quantitative and not qualitative
change and consequently presents the outward appearance of being at rest. When
the thing is in the second state of motion, the quantitative change of the
first state has already reached a culminating point and gives rise to the
dissolution of the thing as an entity and thereupon a qualitative change
ensues, hence the appearance of a conspicuous change. Such unity, solidarity,
combination, harmony, balance, stalemate, deadlock, rest, constancy,
equilibrium, solidity, attraction, etc., as we see in daily life, are all the
appearances of things in the state of quantitative change. On the other hand,
the dissolution of unity, that is, the destruction of this solidarity,
combination, harmony, balance, stalemate, deadlock, rest, constancy,
equilibrium, solidity and attraction, and the change of each into its opposite
are all the appearances of things in the state of qualitative change, the
transformation of one process into another. Things are constantly transforming
themselves from the first into the second state of motion; the struggle of
opposites goes on in both states but the contradiction is resolved through the
second state. That is why we say that the unity of opposites is conditional,
temporary and relative, while the struggle of mutually exclusive opposites is
absolute.
When we said above that two opposite things can coexist in a
single entity and can transform themselves into each other because there is
identity between them, we were speaking of conditionality, that is to say, in
given conditions two contradictory things can be united and can transform
themselves into each other, but in the absence of these conditions, they cannot
constitute a contradiction, cannot coexist in the same entity and cannot
transform themselves into one another. It is because the identity of opposites
obtains only in given conditions that we have said identity is conditional and
relative. We may add that the struggle between opposites permeates a process
from beginning to end and makes one process transform itself into another, that
it is ubiquitous, and that struggle is therefore unconditional and absolute.
The combination of conditional, relative identity and
unconditional, absolute struggle constitutes the movement of opposites in all
things.
We Chinese often say, "Things that oppose each other also
complement each other." [23] That is, things opposed to each other have identity. This saying
is dialectical and contrary to metaphysics. "Oppose each other"
refers to the mutual exclusion or the struggle of two contradictory aspects.
"Complement each other" means that in given conditions the two
contradictory aspects unite and achieve identity. Yet struggle is inherent in
identity and without struggle there can be no identity.
In identity there is struggle, in particularity there is
universality, and in individuality there is generality. To quote Lenin, ".
. . there is an absolute in the relative." [24]
No comments:
Post a Comment