Is it right to divide the understanding of matter into the opposite understanding of materialism and idealism?

At the top of the universe, there is only the primitive universe with mass and energy, the second layer, the universe with matter, the third layer, life born on the earth, and the fourth layer, intelligent life, the so-called' heart'. Look, matter belongs to the second layer, and mind belongs to the fourth layer. Obviously, neither materialism nor idealism is the origin of the universe!

So, with all due respect, what's the point of discussing materialism and idealism?

Is it right to divide the understanding of matter into the opposite understanding of "things" and "idealism"

As early as 2,000 years ago, the Book of Changes put forward that "the metaphysical refers to the Tao, while the metaphysical refers to the device", which means that what people can see and understand with the naked eye is the device (a real object); What is temporarily invisible and incomprehensible is Tao. This is actually telling people that invisibility and temporary incomprehension exist objectively. Qi can be regarded as yang, while Tao can be regarded as yin. Yin and Yang are not absolutely opposite, but mutually transformed. All objects, such as the sun, the moon, the stars, the morning, animals and plants, have all died out, and the yang has become yin and can't be seen. The immortality of matter, this yin, is not to say that there is no, but has become another form, invisible to the naked eye.

Zhang Zai, a philosopher in the Song Dynasty, said: "Too much deficiency leads to qi, and one thing and two bodies". Taixu is not a void and silent vacuum, but a material particle full of "qi", which is extremely detailed and difficult to detect with the naked eye. Taixu and everything are different forms of movement of the material entity "Qi". He said, "Space can't be completely lifeless, qi can't condense into everything, and everything can't condense into tangible things. It's the space" Zhengmeng Yitai ",and everything is scattered into qi, which belongs to invisible emptiness.

This is the "Tao" that I ching tells people to explore. The ancients did the same thing. In the Western Jin Dynasty, Wang Bi was "noble", and the two factions "worshiped you" each held one end. For the benefit of Confucianism, Dong Zhongshu misinterpreted the theory of "harmony between man and nature" and created the theological teleology of Shinto, which violated the original intention of Yijing and led the study of Yijing astray.

In the Song Dynasty, Cheng Hao and Cheng Yi also thought that "everything begins with gasification" and "Cheng's suicide note, Volume One and Five", but Cheng Hao thought that "reason precedes qi, although for a while, it is based on reason after all", which is in line with Wang Yangming's "unity of knowledge and action, knowing before acting".

These ancient sages essentially explored the true meaning of the origin of all things in the universe, but like Dong Zhongshu, they saw through it without breaking it, and then deliberately reversed the relationship between reason and qi, thus creating a theoretical basis for the feudal ruling class.

To sum up, it is inappropriate to regard Tao as metaphysical idealism and Qi as metaphysical materialism. The correct method should be device-based and Tao-based. Don't talk about Tao superstition, and don't exaggerate the mysticism that forms agnosticism infinitely. At the same time, we should oppose the blind and ignorant behavior of labeling idealism at will. Seeking truth from facts is the correct attitude, and the concept of black and white is unacceptable!

Many people like to distinguish philosophers with idealism and materialism.

If Plato is called an idealist, Aristotle is a materialist; Hegel is an idealist and Marx is a materialist; Wang Yangming was an idealist in ancient times and Wang Chong was a materialist in the Eastern Han Dynasty.

Idealism and materialism seem to be panacea, which can be used anytime and anywhere. In fact, this is a very inaccurate and rough identification method. On the one hand, this view is out of date, on the other hand, it is easy to lead to misunderstanding and distort the philosopher's thoughts.

Idealism and materialism did not exist since ancient times, but originated from modern western culture, namely 16 and 17 century western philosophy.

After the West entered the16th and17th centuries, natural sciences rose rapidly, such as Newton's classical physics and lavoisier's modern chemistry. With the rise of physics and chemistry, the western world outlook has undergone new changes, and a new world outlook has emerged: the atomistic world outlook.

The so-called atomistic worldview, also called materialistic worldview, regards the existence of things as independent entities, similar to atoms or molecules in the microscopic world.

The world outlook of atomism is related to Newton's classical physics and the atomism of Greek philosopher Democritus.

This world view holds that things that exist in the world are similar to independent atoms, also called matter. Matter has matrices and properties. Matrix is the basis of matter and reality. Attribute is derived and is a subsidiary attribute of matter.

For example, a light yellow wooden table has a base material and has the first and second properties.

The first attribute of a table is size, dimensions, such as volume and area. The first attribute can be measured by mathematics and is an objective thing. Modern western philosophy is called extension.

The table also has secondary attributes, such as temperature, hardness and texture. The second attribute of the table is related to people's feelings, which is subjective and changeable.

The matrix of the table is hidden behind the attribute. Although it is mysterious, it forms the foundation of the table, and it is also the basis for the table to stand, so the matrix of the table is objective and realistic.

Western modern idealism is derived from this view, such as Becquerel in Britain. Becker believes that the existence of a table depends on people's feelings. Only when people feel the table does the table exist; Otherwise, no one feels it, and the table doesn't exist. This is the classic thinking of modern idealism: Being is being perceived.

Materialist view is just the opposite. According to materialism, the existence of a table is an objective thing, which has nothing to do with people's feelings. In other words, whether people see the table or not, it exists.

Materialism has another example that is hard to refute: the sun and the moon. Many people will say that the existence of the sun and the moon is objective, because they all exist whether people can't see them.

Idealism and materialism represent the special stage of the development of western science and philosophy, that is, the existence of the world is divided into two parts, one is human feelings and thoughts, and the other is the material world. The most representative thinker is Descartes of France.

Descartes believes that the material world exists; The spiritual world also exists; The two influence each other and are independent of each other. This is the famous dualism of body and mind.

Idealism and materialism based on atomistic worldview represent a stage or a type of human cultural worldview; But it is definitely not the only stage or type. Western classical culture, China Taoist philosophy and Buddhist world outlook are all different from idealism and materialism.

For example, is Taoism in China idealistic or materialistic?

Some people say that the Tao taught by Laozi and Zhuangzi is materialistic and natural. But we know that the Tao advocated by Laozi and Zhuangzi is the general principle and program of all things in the universe. In this sense, the Tao of Laozi and Zhuangzi is also idealistic.

Therefore, what Laozi and Zhuangzi preach is neither pure materialism nor pure idealism. On the contrary, Tao is both idealistic and materialistic, and it is the contradiction and antinomy of things.

Another example is the concepts of karma, reincarnation, nirvana, and tacit knowledge in Buddhist teachings, which are also difficult to be explained by idealism and materialism, because Buddhist thinking is different from the western dichotomy of subject and object or idealism and materialism, but a kind of "relationship" thinking, intuitive thinking and epiphany thinking that transcends the mind and things.

As far as western culture is concerned, before 16 and 17 centuries, there was no distinction between idealism and materialism, and Plato, Hegel and Kant were classified as idealists. The classification of Feuerbach, Marx and other thinkers into the materialist camp is entirely based on the concept of modern western philosophy, and a distinction is made afterwards.

Even so, it is difficult to distinguish the views of many western thinkers with the boundary between idealism and materialism.

For example, Pythagoras and Plato in Greece, their thoughts are closely related to mathematics and geometric thinking. But are the ideas or concepts of mathematics and geometry idealistic or materialistic?

Pythagoras and Plato affirmed the objective existence of ideas, but they never said that ideas originated from human feelings or spirits, nor did they say that ideas were similar to material existence. They just emphasize that from the cognitive level, ideas are not the object of feeling, but the object of rational thinking.

Another example is Kant's philosophy. Most people think that Kant's philosophy belongs to typical idealism. Because Kant advocates that not the world affects people, but people affect the world, which is the famous theory of natural generation of people.

But Kant's philosophy also contains materialistic elements, such as Kant's affirmation of the existence of things themselves and the existence of nature. These views cannot be classified as idealism.

More importantly, after entering the 20th century, the main criticism of modern western culture is to deny the dichotomy between subject and object and the distinction between idealism and materialism.

For example, Bergson's life intuitionism, Heidegger's existentialism, French structuralism, linguistic analysis philosophy, ecological ethics, post-modern culture, modern quantum mechanics and so on.

It can be said that with the development of modern culture, people find that the distinction between idealism and materialism is a specific historical and cultural phenomenon, not a way of thinking that dominates the world. At least until now, the methods of understanding the mysteries of the universe have been continuously explored and developed.

Materialism is a philosophical school opposite to idealism; It is believed that matter determines spirit and matter is the essence of the world.

Materialism has three stages of development:

① ancient naive materialism;

② Modern metaphysical materialism;

③ Dialectical materialism is Marxist philosophy.

3. The definition and basic form of idealism.

Idealism is a philosophical school opposite to materialism; It holds that spirit determines matter and spirit is the essence of the world.

Idealism is divided into subjective idealism and objective idealism

There is something wrong with the topic. Philosophy is not divided into "idealism" and "materialism" because of its understanding of matter. "Idealism" and "materialism" are distinguished on the primacy of ontology.

The primary question of ontology is what is the world made of, or is it made of matter? Or is it formed by spiritual consciousness? Materialism is divided into three stages. Idealism is divided into subjective idealism and objective idealism

This is the same as dividing material knowledge into idealism and materialism, and the problem is not completely accurate. Idealism does not recognize matter at all, because idealism only recognizes the absolute existence of consciousness, and matter is produced by consciousness.

And dualism. This theory can't unify idealism and materialism at all. Dualism regards spirit as the only motive force and unifies the absolute existence of "spirit" and "matter" with God. This is logically contradictory. There is only one way of logic, and logical contradiction is wrong.

Judging from the meaning of your question, are you inclined to dualism?

So far, "dialectical materialism" is the most scientific and convincing. In dialectical materialism, matter is primary, consciousness is secondary, matter is absolute, consciousness is relative, matter determines the existence of consciousness, consciousness is the product of the development of matter to a higher stage, and consciousness can change matter through practice. This is the most convincing and objective philosophical thought.

Philosophical consciousness refers not only to "perception" or "computing power", but to confirm that "I" is my power, or that I am self-conscious (this is not accurate, but it is similar), otherwise the bug will be conscious and the calculator will be conscious. Philosophical matter refers not to what you see in front of you, but to the world, or the sum of all matter.

Summarizing the ontological understanding of the world can be divided into "materialism" and "idealism", which is not only caused by people's subjective desire, but also caused controversy. The main reason is that "idealism" doesn't make sense logically. Idealism always uses imagination to skip logic to explain the world. Such an explanation is nonsense and fools people. For example, I said that the world would crawl under my feet. Can you believe it? With what letter? Therefore, materialism is correct and should be dialectical materialism. Looking at the medieval history of the dark period in Europe, the subject knows that idealism is wrong and materialism is right.

Although we must adhere to the materialistic world outlook and not waver, we must also persist in thinking and always be ready to answer new understandings and questions.

For example, the world is material. This sentence means "there is nothing in this world except matter". There seems to be no doubt.

Then, since it has been confirmed that there is nothing but matter, why talk about consciousness?

The question now is

(1) What is consciousness? Is it a manifestation of matter?

(2) If a person dies, we know that the matter that makes up the human body is still there, but since consciousness is a form of matter, then consciousness should be the same as matter, that is, consciousness is still there, or has its form changed?

Of course, there are still some questions.

So, is there something wrong with our textbook? That is to say, if consciousness is said, it should be "another special form of matter, meaning", rather than explaining consciousness alone as it is now?

Then, the second question is the biggest one.

Now there are experiments to prove that even if the brain dies for a period of time, there are ways to make the brain survive again. So, did the surviving brain retain its original consciousness, or did its consciousness change? But it doesn't matter. The question is? Where is consciousness?

We know that "matter is immortal and energy is conserved". So, since consciousness is also a matter, is it still there?

Philosophy is the generalization and summary of all natural and social sciences. Modern scientific research has not solved this problem, but has become more and more confusing.

Just ask this question, because it has been bothering me for a long time.

Let me answer this question, which only represents my personal opinion.

The world is ultimately materialistic, the so-called idealism, but we don't know much about it. Just like before the invention of radio, the ancients couldn't have thought that we could talk to people far away. They thought it was a magical skill. When people understand radio waves, they think it's all science.

In the same way, when people don't understand some of the more "superstitious" practices now, we will call them superstitions. When the scientific truth behind it is revealed one day, it becomes science.

Knowing why, but not knowing why, is called idealism. Wait until one day, knowing what it is and why, this is called materialism.

Wukong divides the understanding of matter into the opposite understanding of materialism and idealism, right? The word "fen" in the title is changed to "existence", which is the correct answer. In fact, it is human's "epistemology" of the universe and the world. That is, materialism epistemology and relative idealism epistemology. The two are interrelated. Only materialists believe that material existence is one-sided, that is, material existence determines spiritual consciousness. On the other hand, idealists believe that spirit is the first priority. It is transcendental spiritual consciousness that determines the existence of matter. It can also be said that matter is considered secondary. ..... there is indeed an essential difference between the two. Put it away.

First of all, we must understand the meaning of matter: the so-called matter refers to things that exist objectively in the universe, such as flowers and trees, which we come into contact with in our lives, including the sun and the moon in the universe, as small as invisible molecules, atoms, ions and bacteria. The "understanding of matter" mentioned in the question and answer means that we use our brains and IQ to develop our perception of objective matter.

There are different angles and abilities in understanding matter. At the same time, there are two opposing understandings: one is the understanding that conforms to the objective reality, such as the new pneumonia that is popular in the world today. The explanation of modern science is that coronavirus, which we can't see with the naked eye, invades human lungs and causes illness. This is an understanding of materialism. If people can't explain it in the backward era of science in the past, they can only say that ghosts and gods have brought plague to mankind. This statement is an understanding of "idealism".

Generally speaking, I think it is correct to divide the understanding of matter into the opposite understanding of materialism and idealism.

If you study Marxist philosophy, if you want to adapt to China's national conditions, then this is a complete and fundamental opposition, that is, two fundamental factions in philosophy.

Idealism holds that spirit comes first and matter comes second. Materialism holds that matter comes first and spirit comes second. Materialism and idealism are two fundamentally opposite philosophical schools.

Matter, for materialists, can exist without human consciousness and can be recognized by people; For idealists who prefer dualism, matter refers to things that are chaotic and lack of understanding; For pure idealists, matter is the product of thought, or is perceived. ...

1. think that the origin of things is different, idealism thinks that the origin of things is spirit, and spirit is primary. Materialism holds that the origin of things is matter, matter is primary, spirit is secondary, and spirit exists attached to matter.

2. Idealism holds that matter does not exist objectively, and it only exists when you feel it exists. If you don't feel it, it doesn't exist Materialism holds that matter exists objectively and has nothing to do with human consciousness. Even if you don't feel it, it still exists. 3. Idealism holds that God created everything, God dominates everything, and God is omnipotent. Materialism holds that there is no God in the world. The so-called god was invented by man and does not exist.