On development of materialist philosophy

7.3 Macro-level, the description of which is based on the ideas of Althusser, consists of the following positions, gaps and transitions:

Gap G1-G3 is between the generalities of ideology and science, constitutive for the entire space of Generalities;

Position 1 — bourgeois ideology with inclusions of religious and magical survivals (texts by Feuerbach and early works of Marx, including the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844);

Transition 1-2 — criticique of bourgeois and all previous ideologies;

Position 2 — philosophical understanding of social contradictions that are the reason for the existence of ideologies, development of concepts adequate for scientific research (works of the gap — German Ideology and Theses on Feuerbach);

Transition 2-3 is a way out of philosophical reflection to the scientific study of reality itself with the help of previously developed concepts;

Position 3 — scientific study of reality (Economic manuscripts of 1857, Capital 1, 2, 3 volumes);

Transition 3-4 — adaptation of scientific conclusions about the structure and possible ways of transforming reality to political philosophy (K. Kautsky “The Economic Teachings of Karl Marx”, “The Path to Power”; V.I. Lenin “The Development of Capitalism in Russia” ”, “Imperialism as the highest stage of capitalism");

Position 4 — political reflection on scientific conclusions and the possibilities of their application (V.I. Lenin “What to be done?”, “State and Revolution”);

Gap 4-2 — demarcation of political and critical-theoretical philosophical positions in the structure of the transition between generalities (V.I. Lenin “Materialism and Empirio-Criticism”);

Transition 4-5 — exit from political philosophy to the practice of political struggle;

Position 5 — the practice of transforming society (the event of the October Revolution of 1917 and its subsequent development);

Transition 5-6 — exit from the revolutionary practice of transforming reality to reflection on its results;

Position 6 — philosophical reflection on the results of the October Revolution (the works of L.D. Trotsky “Permanent Revolution” and “Betrayed Revolution”; but also the Neo-Marxist works of A. Gramsci, D. Lukacs and M. Lifshitz, W. Reich and the entire Frankfurt School).

Obviously, this scheme can be and must be extended.

In general, the methodology conceptualized in this way has not only descriptive but also prescriptive power, allowing us to weed out obviously inadequate methods of philosophizing and select promising ones, submitting to the revolutionary process of development of society.

Conclusion: towards philosophical encyclopedia

Now we have the system. What’s next? As Hegel rightly noted, a system is the highest form of philosophical thought. System development includes three aspects: internal detailing, external adaptation and decomposition, ensuring the restoration of clarity on a new basis in the disintegration of old conceptual schemes. Accordingly, we can distinguish two stages in the implementation of these concepts, forming two corresponding levels:

1. The initial system of absolute materialism, detailed from the starting concept of assemblage;

2. Derivative systems adapted for more specific application problems;

Let’s look at these stages in more detail.

1. On development of initial system

In light of the above, the further development of the system of absolute materialism seems quite obvious. The step-by-step detailing of the presented structure, in which sections are first revealed (+7 articles), then their immediate content (+ about 200 articles), then remote content (+ about 1.5-2 thousand articles), suggests collective philosophical practice in developing the conceptual system from the original principles and contents. At the same time, since subsequent concepts are based on the development of previous ones, at the planning stage it is possible to draw up only an approximate list of terms, outlining the order and scope of the conceptual development:

1. Ontology: being, motion, thing-process distinction, 10 figures of assemblage, 10 processual figures, substantive group, machines (5 subarticles according basic types of machines), body, subject, rhizome, in summary ~34;

2. Syntagmatics or history of philosophy: sintagma, 20 sintagmas from Greek to Us — and to the future + materialism as terminal position, in summary ~22;

3. Critique: ideology (magic, religion, humanism), metaphysics (6 positions + eclecticism), ideological state apparatuses, biases and complexes, deideologization, in summary 12+;

4. Gnoseology: subject-object, knowing, knowledge, + 8×3 compact conceptual sets for three areas of knowing, in summary ~28;

5. Ethics: subject-subject, care, conatus, choice-consequences, benefit-harm, +8×3 compact conceptual sets for three areas of knowing, in summary 32

6. Aesthetics: subject-enjoyment (as adequate mode of impression), object-effectuality (as adequate mode of expression), beautiful-ugly, sublime-base, tragic-comic, +6×5 compact conceptual sets for five basic types of desiring machines: culinary, collecting, erotics, visual art, sound art, in summary ~40;

7. Methodology: meaning system, 3 levels philosophy assemblage, adequacy, division, enumeration, completness, usability, feedback, observation, critique, interpretation, reflection, systematization, deconstruction, communication, investment, translation, seminar, 3 generalities, 6 positions, gaps, figure-consistency, in summary ~32.

So, we have next subsequens of extensions:

1. One this article wich present the system in general;

2. Seven articles that describe basic parts of the system;

3. 34+22+12+28+32+40+32=200 articles of detralization of sections of the system.

Thus, we get a total array of 208 articles — a voluminous, but completely achievable task. Consideration of further detail at the current stage does not seem rational, since it will follow from the nearest detail, which is currently planned but not realized.

Now let’s move on to considering derivative systems adapted to social existence.

2. On development of derivative systems

Philosophy must serve to adequation of technoscientific and social progress. However, since the progress of the system in its parts has its own specifications, the philosophical system must be adaptable to the specific conditions of its application. In this sense, most metaphysical philosophies are non-adaptive to conditions beyond the original ones; they are not capable of purposeful movement in social space, ecologically resembling plants that are not capable of actively moving and therefore do not have a nervous system. And just as animals that have followed the path of active movement today feed on plants, so evolutionarily more advanced philosophies are able to feed on those who lag behind, processing their conceptual and socio-economic bodies.

In this regard, our materialist predecessors made serious progress towards adapting philosophy to the movement of progress and destroying idealistic metaphysics. Thus, mechanistic materialism is firmly established in the block of commercialization of technical achievements of science; Marxist materialism achieved unprecedented triumph, based on the connection between economic growth and political struggle; aleatory materialism was based on the digitalization of techno-commercial and socio-political developments. So that every major materialist philosophy to this day has always had some kind of social support in the form of a growing block of feedback loops. The necessary consequence of this was the destruction of reactionary social relations and the metaphysics that justified them. In this sense, mechanistic materialism, which sent the spiritualists to the guillotine; Marxist materialism, which put idealists against the wall; aleatory materialism, which today ostracize obscurantists — they are all united in the desire to destroy their philosophical enemies.

The destruction of metaphysical doctrines and their social foundations creates a void in the cultural space, which can and should be filled with new materialisms based on similar blocks. In fact, these two moments — devastation and filling, form two parts of the philosophical game-ender — a social weapon that can to close confrontation between philosophy and metaphysics.

Therefore, contemporary materialism must look for feedback blocks that destroy the social base of metaphysics and support new conceptualizations. Let us list some of them, and also formulate concepts through which the source system can be claimed and used for a particular block.

Devastation blocks:

1. The block of commercialization of technical achievements of science, which is the support of mechanistic materialism, forms an obvious feedback loop: the more scientific discoveries are made in science, the more useful technical devices can be created; the more technical devices are created, the more they can be used in production, increasing labor productivity and improve profits; the more profits grow, the more funds can be invested in further scientific research and technical inventions. In this sense, entrepreneurship as reflective enrichment is the basic concept of mechanical materialism.

2. The block of interconnection of economic growth and political struggle, which is the mainstay of Marxist materialism, forms a more complex set of feedback loops, simplified as follows: the more large capitalists ruin small ones, the more they replace market anarchy with a plan — and the more they proletarianize the workers who unite for fighting for one’s interests; the struggle of workers for their interests leads to an increase in wages and a reduction in working hours; rising wages and shorter working hours force capitalists to purchase new, more efficient equipment, further increasing labor productivity, which ruins and proletarianizes even more capitalists who are lagging behind in this race. In this sense, expropriation as a normative state of capitalism and expropriation of expropriators as its limit are the main concepts of Marxist materialism.

3. The block of interconnection of progress and desire, which is the support of aleatory materialism, sublate two previous blocks as follows: the more capitalists introduce new technical devices into social production, the more interactive the relationship with them becomes; the more interactive the relationship with technical devices becomes, the more it outweighs the interactivity from relationship with oedipal family interfaces — the more the desire for entertainment with technosocial assemblages replaces the oedipal anthropomorphinous desire — so that the objective process of technosocial revolution is accepted subjectively, enthusiastically accelerating the whole process. In this sense, entertainment as promiscuous connecting with any possible assemblages is the main concept of aleatory materialism.

And since all of the listed blocks, as well as their philosophical understandings, are forms of motion of matter, and motion presupposes the existence of objects and spaces, elements and systems, causes and effects — then the system based on the notion of assemblage, which captures these moments in one concept, is adaptable for their comprehensive description. The same is true for the following blocks.

Filling blocks:

1. The biotechnology block begins with the development of genetic engineering and other technologies for transforming biological matter and continues with their commercialization, politicization and subjective acceptance as a means of overcoming the human condition at the micro level. That can be conceptualized in the notion of modifiability.

2. The cyborgization block begins with the development of prosthetics, neuroimplants and other technologies of replacing of biological into the machinic, and continues with their commercialization, politicization and subjective acceptance as a means of overcoming the human condition at the micro level. That can be conceptualized in the notion of substitutability.

3. The urbanization block begins with the development of technologies of smart cities and continues in their commercialization, politicization and subjective acceptance as a means of overcoming the human condition at the meso level. That can be conceptualized in the notion of adhesion.

4. The metaverse block begins with the development of tactile 3D internet technologies, continues in their commercialization, politicization and subjective acceptance as a means of overcoming the human condition at the meso level. That can be conceptualized in the notion of simulation.

5. The terraforming block begins with the development of technologies for transforming the surface of planets for colonization, and continues in their commercialization, politicization and subjective acceptance as a means of overcoming the human condition at the macro level. That can be conceptualized in the notion of transformation.

6. The astroengineering block begins with the development of technologies for the construction of industrial and computing structures in outer space, and continues in their commercialization, politicization and subjective acceptance as a means of overcoming the human condition at the macro level. That can be conceptualized in the notion of frontier.

All futurological blocks are conceivable as reterritorializations of moments of already developed blocks of entrepreneurship, expropriation and entertainment, deterritorialized in the methodology of the presented system. Which in its applications turns out to be capable of replacing the syntagma of metaphysics that fill the field of philosophical thought today.

Identify key concepts that capture the nature of reality; expand them into a comprehensive encyclopedia; to form an ecosystem of materialist philosophies based on blocks of feedback loops in a movement which sublate the present state of things; to eradicate the system of metaphysics forever, destroying the conditions of its existence — that is the task of development of materialist philosophy.

Bibliography

In English

Althusser For Marx. Translated: by Ben Brewster; 1965

Baudrillard, J. Simulacra and Simulation, 1981

Bryant, Levi R. Democracy of Objects, 2011

Descartes R. Rules for theDirectionof the Mind, 1626-28

Descartes R. Discourse on the Method, 1637

DeLanda, M. New Philosophy of Society. AssemblagesTheoryand Social Complexity, Bloomsbury Academic. 2006.

DeleuzeG., Guattari F. Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, 1972

DeleuzeG., Guattari F. What is Philosophy? , 1990

Spinoza B. Ethics, 1677

Harman, G. The Quadruple Object, 2011

In Russian

Богданов А. А. Тектология: Всеобщая организационная наука. В 2-х книгах. — М.: Экономика, 1989

Диалектическая логика в 4-х томах, Алма-Ата: Наука, 1986/1987/1987/1985. Под руководством и общей редакцией академика АН КазССР Ж. М. Абдильдина

Ильенков Э. В. Диалектическая логика. Материалистическое понимание мышления. — М., 1984.

Ленин В. И. Материализм и Эмпириокритицизм // Полное собрание сочинений. — 5-е изд. —М.: Издательство политической литературы, 1968.— Т.18.

Ленин В. И. Философские тетради // Полное собрание сочинений. — 5-е изд. — М.: Издательство политической литературы, 1969. — Т. 29.

Леонтьев А. Н. Очерк развития психики // Избранные психологические произведения: В 2-х т. Т. I —М.: Педагогика, 1983. —392 с.

Материалистическая диалектика в 5 т., М.: Мысль, под ред. акад. Константинова Ф. В., т. 1. Объективная диалектика. 1981. 374 с.

Минасян, А М. Диалектический материализм в 3 т., — Ростов-на-Дону: Издательство Ростовского университета, 1972-76 гг.

Регев, Й. Радикальный ти-джеинг. — Пермь: Гиле Пресс, 2021

Руткевич М. Н. Диалектический материализм. Курс лекций для филос. факультетов. М., «Мысль», 1973. 527 с.

Свидерский, В. И. О диалектике отношений. — Л.: Изд-во ЛГУ, 1983. — 137.

Свидерский, В. И. О диалектике элементов и структуры в объективном мире и в познании. — М., 1962

Тугаринов В. П. Соотношение категорий диалектического материализма. Л. 1956