The influence of Marxism on sociology in the 20th century was very great. Karl Marx sought to create a strictly objective theory of social development, based on historical facts. Of course, he succeeded.
The sociology of Marxism in Russia has its own history. However, not only in our country, this teaching has gained great popularity. Marxism is one of the largest areas of sociology of the 20th century. Many well-known scholars of public life, as well as economists and other adherents of this teaching, have contributed to it. Extensive material on Marxism is currently available. In this article we will talk about the main provisions of this teaching.
What is Marxism based on?
To better understand what constitutes the sociology of Marxism, we briefly trace its history. Friedrich Engels, Karl’s ally and friend, identifies three traditions that influenced this teaching. These are German philosophy, French historical science and English political economy. The main line that Marx followed was classical German philosophy. Karl shared one of Hegel's main ideas, namely that society as a whole goes through successive stages in its development. After studying English political economy, Karl Marx (pictured above) introduced the terms from it into his teaching. He shared some of his contemporary ideas, in particular, the theory of labor value. He borrowed from the socialists and historians from France such a well-known concept as the class struggle.
Accepting the theories of all these scientists, F. Engels and C. Marx qualitatively reworked them, as a result of which a completely new doctrine appeared - the sociology of Marxism. Briefly, it can be defined as an alloy of economic, sociological, philosophical and other theories that are closely interconnected and are a single whole, expressing the needs of the working class. The teaching of Marx, more specifically, is an analysis of the capitalist society contemporary to it. Karl investigated its structure, mechanism, inevitability of change. At the same time, it is indisputable that for him the analysis of the formation of capitalism was an analysis of the historical development of society and man.
Marxism method
The method that the sociology of Marxism uses is customarily defined as dialectical materialistic. This method is based on a special understanding of the world around, according to which both human thinking and the phenomena of society and nature are subject to qualitative changes. These changes are explained by the struggle of various internal opposites and are interrelated.
The sociology of Marxism claims that an idea is not a creator, not a creator. It reflects material reality. Therefore, in cognition and study of the world, it is necessary to proceed from reality itself, and not from an idea. More specifically, exploring the structure of human society, one must not build on the way of thinking inherent in this society, but on the historical movement.
The principle of determinism
The sociology of Marxism recognizes one of the main principles of determinism, according to which there is a causal relationship in social phenomena and processes. Scientists before Karl found it difficult to determine the basic criteria that determine all other social relations and phenomena. They could not find an objective criterion for such a selection. The sociology of Marxism argues that it is economic (production) relations that should be considered as such. Karl Marx believed that the development of society is a change in the stages of production.
Being determines consciousness
Social life, according to Marx, is determined both by the previous historical development of a given society, and by socio-historical laws. The latter act regardless of the will and consciousness of people. People are not able to change them, but they can open them and adapt to them. Thus, the idealistic idea that the development of society is determined by the will of people, that is, consciousness determines being, is refuted in Marxism. Being determines consciousness, and not otherwise.
The influence of Marxism on sociology
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made a significant contribution to understanding what should be considered the subject of general sociology. This science, in their opinion, should analyze the real life of people, what they really are, and not who they represent themselves. The classics of Marxism advocated such certainty that the subject of general sociology would be society, regarded as a combination of various practical relations that develop between people and are associated with the so-called generic nature of the individual. In this regard, for a correct understanding of its subject matter, such definitions given by K. Marx as the essence of man, nature, labor, society are of great importance. We will briefly consider each of them.
Essence of man
Marx and Engels, considering the individual from the standpoint of materialism, tried to determine what is its difference from the animal. They also wanted to understand what is its specificity as a tribal being. Karl noted that a person is not only a natural being, but also a social one, who realizes the conditions of his social and material existence through an active attitude to the world. The essence of man, according to Marx, is his labor, production activity. He believed that his production life was a tribal life. Karl emphasized that when people begin to produce the objects they need, they begin to distinguish themselves from the animal world.
Work
Let us now talk about how the sociology of Marxism relates to work . K. Marx and F. Engels considered it as a conscious activity of the individual aimed at metabolism with nature. Karl notes that a person, in order to appropriate a natural substance in a form suitable for his life, sets in motion the natural forces that belong to his body. By acting on the external nature with the help of this movement, changing it, a person simultaneously changes his own nature. Labor, according to Marxism, created not only a separate individual, but also a society. It appeared as a result of the relationship of people formed in the process of labor.
Nature
Representations of nature and its relationship with society in pre-Marxist sociology mainly related to one of the following categories:
- idealistic (society and nature are independent of each other, have no connection, since these are qualitatively different concepts);
- vulgar materialistic (all social processes and phenomena are subject to laws prevailing in nature).
The philosophy and sociology of Marxism criticize both of these theories. The doctrine proposed by Karl suggests that natural communities and human society have a distinctive quality. However, there is a connection between them. It is impossible to explain the structure and development of the laws of society based solely on biological laws. At the same time, biological factors cannot be completely neglected, that is, exclusively social.
Society
Karl Marx said that a person is distinguished from an animal by expedient labor activity. He defined society (taking into account the fact that there is a metabolism between man and nature) as the totality of people's relations to each other and to nature. According to Marx, society is a system of interaction between individuals, the basis of which is economic relations. People enter them with necessity. It does not depend on their will.
It is impossible to state unequivocally whether the sociology of Marxism is right or wrong. Theory and practice show that certain features of society described by Marx do exist. Therefore, to this day, the interest in the ideas proposed by Karl does not fade.
Basis and add-in
In any society, a basis and a superstructure are distinguished (according to such a teaching as the sociology of Marxism). The main characteristics of these two concepts we will now consider.
The basis is the sphere in which the joint production of material goods takes place. It ensures the social and individual existence of man. Production is considered by Karl Marx as the appropriation of nature with the help of expedient activities within the framework of society. The scientist identified the following elements (factors) of production:
- labor, that is, the expedient activity of the individual, aimed at the creation of certain material goods within society;
- objects of labor, that is, those that a person acts on with his labor (this can be either processed materials or data given by nature itself);
- means of labor, that is, with the help of which people act on certain objects of labor.
Means of production include objects and means of labor. However, they will only be dead things until people connect them with their work. Therefore, as noted by K. Marx, it is man who is the decisive factor in production.
The basis of society is made up of tools and objects of labor, a person with his skills and work experience, as well as industrial relations. A social superstructure is formed by all other social phenomena that appear during the creation of material wealth. These phenomena include political and legal institutions, as well as forms of public consciousness (philosophy, religion, art, science, morality, etc.).
The economic basis, according to the teachings of K. Marx, determines the superstructure. However, not all elements of the add-in are determined equally by the basis. The add-in, in turn, has a certain effect on it. As F. Engels pointed out (his portrait is presented above), only ultimately the influence of the basis can be called decisive.
Alienation and its types
Alienation is the objective separation of one or another subject from the process of activity itself or from its result. Marx considers this problem in more detail in his work entitled "Philosophical and Economic Manuscripts", created in 1844, but published only in the 30s of the 20th century. In this work, the problem of alienated labor is considered as the main form of alienation. Karl Marx shows that the most important part of the "tribal essence" (human nature) is the need to participate in creative, free labor. Capitalism, according to Karl, systematically destroys the given need of the individual. This is the position taken by the sociology of Marxism.
The types of alienation, according to Marx, are as follows:
- from the result of labor;
- from the labor process;
- from its essence (a person is a "tribal essence" in the sense that, as a free and universal essence, he creates himself (a genus) and the world around him);
- from the surrounding world (nature, people).
If the worker does not own the result of his labor, then there must exist what he belongs to. Similarly, if the labor process (activity) does not belong to the worker, there is its owner. Only another person, called the exploiter, can be this alien creature, not nature or god. As a result of this, private property appears, which is also explored by the sociology of Marxism.
The types of alienation (according to Marx) listed above can be eliminated by creating a new society that would be freed from greed and selfishness. At least, so say the socialists, who believe that economic development cannot be stopped. The ideas of Karl Marx, as you know, were used for revolutionary purposes. The sociology of Marxism played an important role not only in science, but also in history. It is not known how our country would have developed in the 20th century if the Bolsheviks had not accepted these ideas. Both the positive and the negative phenomena were brought into the life of Soviet people by the sociology of Marxism, and modernity has not been completely freed from them.
By the way, not only socialists used the ideas proposed by Karl. Are you familiar with such a trend as legal Marxism? Below are basic information about him.
Legal marxism
In the history of domestic sociological thought of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the sociology of legal Marxism occupied a very prominent place. Briefly, it can be described as an ideological and theoretical trend. It is an expression of bourgeois liberal thought. Legal Marxism in sociology was based on Marxist ideas. They mainly concerned economic theory, to justify the fact that the development of capitalism in our country is historically inevitable. His adherents opposed the ideology of populism. The most famous representatives of legal Marxism: M. Tugan-Baranovsky, P. Struve, as well as S. Bulgakov and N. Berdyaev. The sociology of Marxism further evolved towards religious and idealistic philosophy.
Of course, we only briefly talked about the doctrine created by Karl. The sociology of Marxism and its significance is an extensive topic, but its basic concepts were disclosed in this article.