第1章

Preface:London，June11，1878

Preface:London，September23，1885

Preface:London，May23，1894

PREFACESTOTHETHREEEDITIONSPREFACE

IThefollowingworkisbynomeansthefruitofany“innerurge“。Onthecontrary。

WhenthreeyearsagoHerrDühring，asanadeptandatthesametimeareformerofsocialism，suddenlyissuedhischallengetohisage，friendsinGermanyrepeatedlyurgedonmetheirdesirethatIshouldsubjectthisnewsocialisttheorytoacriticalexaminationinthecentralorganoftheSocialDemocraticParty，atthattimetheVolksstaat。TheythoughtthisabsolutelynecessaryiftheoccasionforsectariandivisionsandconfusionswerenotonceagaintoarisewithintheParty，whichwasstillsoyoungandhadbutjustachieveddefiniteunity。[2]TheywereinabetterpositionthanIwastojudgethesituationinGermany，andIwasthereforedutyboundtoaccepttheirview。Moreover，itbecameapparentthatthenewconvertwasbeingwelcomedbyasectionofthesocialistpresswithawarmthwhichitistruewasonlyextendedtoHerrDühring’sgoodwill，butwhichatthesametimealsoindicatedthatinthissectionofthePartypressthereexistedthegoodwill，preciselyonaccountofHerrDühring’sgoodwill，totakealso，withoutexamination，HerrDühring’sdoctrineintothebargain。[3]Therewere，besides，peoplewhowerealreadypreparingtospreadthisdoctrineinapopularisedformamongtheworkers。[4]AndfinallyHerrDühringandhislittlesectwereusingalltheartsofadvertisementandintriguetoforcetheVolksstaattotakeadefinitestandinrelationtothenewdoctrinewhichhadcomeforwardwithsuchmightypretensions。[5]

NeverthelessitwasayearbeforeIcouldmakeupmymindtoneglectotherworkandgetmyteethintothissourapple。Itwasthekindofapplethat，oncebitteninto，hadtobecompletelydevoured;anditwasnotonlyverysour，butalsoverylarge。Thenewsocialisttheorywaspresentedastheultimatepracticalfruitofanewphilosophicalsystem。Itwasthereforenecessarytoexamineitinthecontextofthissystem，andindoingsotoexaminethesystemitself;itwasnecessarytofollowHerrDühringintothatvastterritoryinwhichhedealtwithallthingsunderthesunandwithsomeothersaswell。ThatwastheoriginofaseriesofarticleswhichappearedintheLeipzigVorwärts，thesuccessoroftheVolksstaat，fromthebeginningof1877onwardsandareherepresentedasaconnectedwhole。

Itwasthusthenatureoftheobjectitselfwhichforcedthecriticismtogointosuchdetailasisentirelyoutofproportiontothescientificcontentofthisobject，thatistosay，ofDühring’swritings。Buttherearealsotwootherconsiderationswhichmayexcusethislengthoftreatment。Ontheonehanditgaveme，inconnectionwiththeverydiversesubjectstobetouchedonhere，theopportunityofsettingforthinapositiveformmyviewsoncontroversialissueswhicharetodayofquitegeneralscientificorpracticalinterest。Thishasbeendoneineverysinglechapter，andalthoughthisworkcannotinanywayaimatpresentinganothersystemasanalternativetoHerrDühring’s“system“，yetitistobehopedthatthereaderwillnotfailtoobservetheconnectioninherentinthevariousviewswhichIhaveadvanced。Ihavealreadyhadproofenoughthatinthisrespectmyworkhasnotbeenentirelyfruitless。

Ontheotherhand，the“system-creating“HerrDühringisbynomeansanisolatedphenomenonincontemporaryGermany。ForsometimenowinGermanysystemsofcosmogony，ofphilosophyofnatureingeneral，ofpolitics，ofeconomics，etc。，havebeenspringingupbythedozenovernight，likemushrooms。Themostinsignificantdoctorphilosophiaeandevenastudentwillnotgoinforanythinglessthanacomplete“system“。Justasinthemodernstateitispresumedthateverycitizeniscompetenttopassjudgmentonalltheissuesonwhichheiscalledtovote;andjustasineconomicsitisassumedthateveryconsumerisaconnoisseurofallthecommoditieswhichhehasoccasiontobuyforhismaintenance——sosimilarassumptionsarenowtobemadeinscience。Freedomofscienceistakentomeanthatpeoplewriteoneverysubjectwhichtheyhavenotstudied，andputthisforwardastheonlystrictlyscientificmethod。HerrDühring，however，isoneofthemostcharacteristictypesofthisbumptiouspseudo-sciencewhichinGermanynowadaysisforcingitswaytothefronteverywhereandisdrowningeverythingwithitsresounding——sublimenonsense。Sublimenonsenseinpoetry，inphilosophy，inpolitics，ineconomics，inhistoriography，sublimenonsenseinthelectureroomandontheplatform，sublimenonsenseeverywhere;sublimenonsensewhichlaysclaimtoasuperiorityanddepthofthoughtdistinguishingitfromthesimple，commonplacenonsenseofothernations;sublimenonsense，themostcharacteristicmassproductofGermany’sintellectualindustry——cheapbutbad——justlikeotherGerman-madegoods，onlythatunfortunatelyitwasnotexhibitedalongwiththematPhiladelphia。[6]EvenGermansocialismhaslately，particularlysinceHerrDühring’sgoodexample，goneinforaconsiderableamountofsublimenonsense，producingvariouspersonswhogivethemselvesairsabout“science“，ofwhichthey“reallyneverlearntaword“。[7]Thisisaninfantilediseasewhichmarks，andisinseparablefrom，theincipientconversionoftheGermanstudenttoSocialDemocracy，butwhichourworkerswiththeirremarkablyhealthynaturewillundoubtedlyovercome。

ItwasnotmyfaultthatIhadtofollowHerrDühringintorealmswhereatbestIcanonlyclaimtobeadilettante。InsuchcasesIhaveforthemostpartlimitedmyselftoputtingforwardthecorrect，undisputedfactsinoppositiontomyadversary’sfalseordistortedassertions。

Thisappliestojurisprudenceandinsomeinstancesalsotonaturalscience。

Inothercasesithasbeenaquestionofgeneralviewsconnectedwiththetheoryofnaturalscience——thatis，afieldwhereeventheprofessionalnaturalscientistiscompelledtopassbeyondhisownspecialityandencroachonneighbouringterritory——territoryonwhichheistherefore，asHerrVirchowhasadmitted，justasmucha“semi-initiate“aasanyoneofus。

Ihopethatinrespectofminorinexactitudesandclumsinessofexpression，Ishallbegrantedthesameindulgenceasisshowntooneanotherinthisdomain。

JustasIwascompletingthisprefaceIreceivedapublishers’

notice，composedbyHerrDühring，ofanew“authoritative“workofHerrDühring’s:NeueGrundgesetzezurrationellenPhysikundChemie。ConsciousasIamoftheinadequacyofmyknowledgeofphysicsandchemistry，IneverthelessbelievethatIknowmyHerrDühring，andtherefore，withouthavingseentheworkitself，thinkthatIamentitledtosayinadvancethatthelawsofphysicsandchemistryputforwardinitwillbeworthytotaketheirplace，bytheirerroneousnessorplatitudinousness，amongthelawsofeconomics，worldschematism，etc。，whichwerediscoveredearlierbyHerrDühringandareexaminedinthisbookofmine;andalsothattherhigometer，orinstrumentconstructedbyHerrDühringformeasuringextremelylowtemperatures，willserveasameasurenotoftemperatureseitherhighorlow，butsimplyandsolelyoftheignorantarroganceofHerrDühring。

London，June11，1878

PREFACE

IIIhadnotexpectedthataneweditionofthisbookwouldhavetobepublished。Thesubjectmatterofitscriticismisnowpracticallyforgotten;theworkitselfwasnotonlyavailabletomanythousandsofreadersintheformofaseriesofarticlespublishedintheLeipzigVorwärtsin1877and1878，butalsoappearedinitsentiretyasaseparatebook，ofwhichalargeeditionwasprinted。HowthencananyonestillbeinterestedinwhatIhadtosayaboutHerrDühringyearsago？

IthinkthatIowethisinthefirstplacetothefactthatthisbook，asingeneralalmostallmyworksthatwerestillcurrentatthetime，wasprohibitedwithintheGermanEmpireimmediatelyaftertheAnti-SocialistLaw[8]waspromulgated。ToanyonewhosebrainhasnotbeenossifiedbythehereditarybureaucraticprejudicesofthecountriesoftheHolyAlliance，[9]theeffectofthismeasuremusthavebeenself-evident:adoubledandtrebledsaleoftheprohibitedbooks，andtheexposureoftheimpotenceofthegentlemeninBerlinwhoissueprohibitionsandareunabletoenforcethem。IndeedthekindnessoftheImperialGovernmenthasbroughtmemoreneweditionsofmyminorworksthanIcouldreallycopewith;Ihavehadnotimetomakeaproperrevisionofthetext，andinmostcaseshavebeenobligedsimplytoallowittobereprintedasitstood。

Buttherewasalsoanotherfactor。The“system“ofHerrDühringwhichiscriticisedinthisbookrangesoveraverywidetheoreticaldomain;

andIwascompelledtofollowhimwhereverhewentandtoopposemyconceptionstohis。Asaresult，mynegativecriticismbecamepositive，thepolemicwastransformedintoamoreorlessconnectedexpositionofthedialecticalmethodandofthecommunistworldoutlookchampionedbyMarxandmyself——anexpositioncoveringafairlycomprehensiverangeofsubjects。AfteritsfirstpresentationtotheworldinMarx’sMiséredelaphilosophieandintheCommunistManifesto，thismodeofoutlookofours，havingpassedthroughanincubationperiodoffullytwentyyearsbeforethepublicationofCapital，hasbeenmoreandmorerapidlyextendingitsinfluenceamongeverwideningcircles，andnowfindsrecognitionandsupportfarbeyondtheboundariesofEurope，ineverycountrywhichcontainsontheonehandproletariansandontheotherundauntedscientifictheoreticians。

ItseemsthereforethatthereisapublicwhoseinterestinthesubjectisgreatenoughforthemtotakeintothebargainthepolemicagainsttheDühringtenetsmerelyforthesakeofthepositiveconceptionsdevelopedalongsidethispolemic，inspiteofthefactthatthelatterhasnowlargelylostitspoint。

ImustnoteinpassingthatinasmuchasthemodeofoutlookexpoundedinthisbookwasfoundedanddevelopedinfargreatermeasurebyMarx，andonlytoaninsignificantdegreebymyself，itwasself-understoodbetweenusthatthisexpositionofmineshouldnotbeissuedwithouthisknowledge。

Ireadthewholemanuscripttohimbeforeitwasprinted，andthetenthchapterofthepartoneconomics(“FromKritischeGeschichte“)waswrittenbyMarx[10]butunfortunatelyhadtobeshortenedsomewhatbymeforpurelyexternalreasons。Asamatteroffact，wehadalwaysbeenaccustomedtohelpeachotheroutinspecialsubjects。

Withtheexceptionofonechapter，thepresentneweditionisanunalteredreprintoftheformeredition。Foronething，Ihadnotimeforathoroughgoingrevision，althoughtherewasmuchinthepresentationthatIshouldhavelikedtoalter。BesidesIamundertheobligationtoprepareforthepressthemanuscriptswhichMarxhasleft，andthisismuchmoreimportantthananythingelse。Thenagain，myconsciencerebelsagainstmakinganyalterations。Thebookisapolemic，andIthinkthatIoweittomyadversarynottoimproveanythinginmyworkwhenheisunabletoimprovehis。IcouldonlyclaimtherighttomakearejoindertoHerrDühring’sreply。ButIhavenotread，andwillnotread，unlessthereissomespecialreasontodoso，whatHerrDühringhaswrittenconcerningmyattack[11];inpointoftheoryIhave:finishedwithhim。Besides，ImustobservetherulesofdecencyinliterarywarfareallthemorestrictlyinhisregardbecauseofthedespicableinjusticethathassincebeendonetohimbytheUniversityofBerlin。ItistruethattheUniversityhasnotgoneunpunished。AuniversitywhichsoabasesitselfastodepriveHerrDühring，incircumstanceswhicharewellknown，ofhisacademicfreedom[12]mustnotbesurprisedtofindHerrSchweningerforcedonitincircumstanceswhichareequallywellknown。

TheonlychapterinwhichIhaveallowedmyselfsomeadditionalelucidationisthesecondofPartIII，“Theoretical“。ThischapterdealssimplyandsolelywiththeexpositionofapivotalpointinthemodeofoutlookforwhichIstand，andmyadversarycannotthereforecomplainifIattempttostateitinamorepopularformandtomakeitmorecoherent。

Andtherewasinfactanextraneousreasonfordoingthis。Ihadrevisedthreechaptersofthebook(thefirstchapteroftheIntroductionandthefirstandsecondofPartIII)formyfriendLafarguewithaviewtotheirtranslationintoFrench[13]andpublicationasaseparatepamphletandaftertheFrencheditionhadservedasthebasisforItalianandPolisheditions，aGermaneditionwasissuedbymeunderthetitle:DieEntwicklungdesSozialismusvonderUtopiezurWissenschaft。Thisranthroughthreeeditionswithinafewmonths，andalsoappearedinRussian[14]andDanishtranslations。Inalltheseeditionsitwasonlythechapterinquestionwhichhadbeenamplified，anditwouldhavebeenpedantic，intheneweditionoftheoriginalwork，tohavetiedmyselfdowntoitsoriginaltextinsteadofthelatertextwhichhadbecomeknowninternationally。

WhateverelseIshouldhavelikedtoalterrelatesinthemaintotwopoints。First，tothehistoryofprimitivesociety，thekeytowhichwasprovidedbyMorganonlyin1877。ButasIhavesincethenhadtheopportunity，inmywork:DerUrsprungderFamilie，desPrivateigenthumsunddesStoats(Zurich，1884)toworkupthematerialwhichinthemeantimehadbecomeavailabletome，areferencetothislaterworkmeetsthecase。

Thesecondpointconcernsthesectiondealingwiththeoreticalnaturalscience。Thereismuchthatisclumsyinmyexpositionandmuchofitcouldbeexpressedtodayinaclearerandmoredefiniteform。Ihavenotallowedmyselftherighttoimprovethissection，andforthatveryreasonamunderanobligationtocriticisemyselfhereinstead。

MarxandIwereprettywelltheonlypeopletorescueconsciousdialecticsfromGermanidealistphilosophyandapplyitinthematerialistconceptionofnatureandhistory。Butaknowledgeofmathematicsandnaturalscienceisessentialtoaconceptionofnaturewhichisdialecticalandatthesametimematerialist。Marxwaswellversedinmathematics，butwecouldkeepupwithnaturalscienceonlypiecemeal，intermittentlyandsporadically。Forthisreason，whenIretiredfrombusinessandtransferredmyhometoLondon，[15]thusenablingmyselftogivethenecessarytimetoit，Iwentthroughascompleteaspossiblea“moulting“，asLiebigcallsit，[16]inmathematicsandthenaturalsciences，andspentthebestpartofeightyearsonit。

Iwasrightinthemiddleofthis“moulting“processwhenithappenedthatIhadtooccupymyselfwithHerrDühring’sso-callednaturalphilosophy。

ItwasthereforeonlytoonaturalthatindealingwiththissubjectIwassometimesunabletofindthecorrecttechnicalexpression，andingeneralmovedwithconsiderableclumsinessinthefieldoftheoreticalnaturalscience。Ontheotherhand，mylackofassuranceinthisfield，whichI

hadnotyetovercome，mademecautious，andIcannotbechargedwithrealblundersinrelationtothefactsknownatthattimeorwithincorrectpresentationofrecognisedtheories。InthisconnectiontherewasonlyoneunrecognisedgeniusofamathematicianawhocomplainedinalettertoMarx[17]thatIhadmadeawantonattackuponthehonourof。

Itgoeswithoutsayingthatmyrecapitulationofmathematicsandthenaturalscienceswasundertakeninordertoconvincemyselfalsoindetail——ofwhatingeneralIwasnotindoubt——thatinnature，amidthewelterofinnumerablechanges，thesamedialecticallawsofmotionforcetheirwaythroughasthosewhichinhistorygoverntheapparentfortuitousnessofevents;thesamelawswhichsimilarlyformthethreadrunningthroughthehistoryofthedevelopmentofhumanthoughtandgraduallyrisetoconsciousnessinthinkingman;thelawswhichHegelfirstdevelopedinall-embracingbutmysticform，andwhichwemadeitoneofouraimstostripofthismysticformandtobringclearlybeforethemindintheircompletesimplicityanduniversality。Itgoeswithoutsayingthattheoldphilosophyofnature——inspiteofitsrealvalueandthemanyfruitfulseedsitcontained*1——wasunabletosatisfyus。Asismorefullybroughtoutinthisbook，naturalphilosophy，particularlyintheHegelianform，erredbecauseitdidnotconcedetonatureanydevelopmentintime，any“succession“，butonly“co-existence“。ThiswasontheonehandgroundedintheHegeliansystemitself，whichascribedhistoricalevolutiononlytothe“spirit“，butontheotherhandwasalsoduetothewholestateofthenaturalsciencesinthatperiod。InthisHegelfellfarbehindKant，whosenebulartheoryhadalreadyindicatedtheoriginofthesolarsystem，’

andwhosediscoveryoftheretardationoftheearth’srotationbythetidesalsohadproclaimedthedoomofthatsystem。Andfinally，tometherecouldbenoquestionofbuildingthelawsofdialecticsintonature，butofdiscoveringtheminitandevolvingthemfromit。

Buttodothissystematicallyandineachseparatedepartment，isagigantictask。Notonlyisthedomaintobemasteredalmostboundless;

naturalscienceinthisentiredomainisitselfundergoingsuchamightyprocessofbeingrevolutionisedthatevenpeoplewhocandevotethewholeoftheirsparetimetoitcanhardlykeeppace。SinceKarlMarx’sdeath，however，mytimehasbeenrequisitionedformoreurgentduties，andIhavethereforebeencompelledtolayasidemywork。ForthepresentImustcontentmyselfwiththeindicationsgiveninthisbook，andmustwaittofindsomelateropportunitytoputtogetherandpublishtheresultswhichIhavearrivedat，perhapsinconjunctionwiththeextremelyimportantmathematicalmanuscriptsleftbyMarx。[18]

Yettheadvanceoftheoreticalnaturalsciencemaypossiblymakemyworktoagreatextentorevenaltogethersuperfluous。Fortherevolutionwhichisbeingforcedontheoreticalnaturalsciencebythemereneedtosetinorderthepurelyempiricaldiscoveriesgreatmassesofwhichhavebeenpiledup，isofsuchakindthatitmustbringthedialecticalcharacterofnaturalprocessesmoreandmoretotheconsciousnessevenofthoseempiricistswhoaremostopposedtoit。Theoldrigidantagonisms，thesharp，impassabledividinglinesaremoreandmoredisappearing。Sinceeventhelast“true“

gaseshavebeenliquefied，andsinceithasbeenprovedthatabodycanbebroughtintoaconditioninwhichtheliquidandthegaseousformsareindistinguishable，theaggregatestateshavelostthelastrelicsoftheirformerabsolutecharacter。[19]Withthethesisofthekinetictheoryofgases，thatinperfectgasesatequaltemperaturesthesquaresofthespeedswithwhichtheindividualgasmoleculesmoveareininverseratiototheirmolecularweightsheatalsotakesitsplacedirectlyamongtheformsofmotionwhichcanbeimmediatelymeasuredassuch。Whereasonlytenyearsagothegreatbasiclawofmotion，thenrecentlydiscovered，wasasyetconceivedmerelyasalawoftheconservationofenergy，asthemereexpressionoftheindestructibilityanduncreatabilityofmotion，thatis，merelyinitsquantitativeaspect，thisnarrownegativeconceptionisbeingmoreandmoresupplantedbythepositiveideaofthetransformationofenergy，inwhichforthefirsttimethequalitativecontentoftheprocesscomesintoitsown，andthelastvestigeofanextramundanecreatorisobliterated。Thatthequantityofmotion(so-calledenergy)

remainsunalteredwhenitistransformedfromkineticenergy(so-calledmechanicalforce)intoelectricity，heat，potentialenergy，etc。，andviceversa，nolongerneedstobepreachedassomethingnew;itservesasthealreadysecuredbasisforthenowmuchmorepregnantinvestigationintotheveryprocessoftransformation，thegreatbasicprocess，knowledgeofwhichcomprisesallknowledgeofnature。Andsincebiologyhasbeenpursuedinthelightofthetheoryofevolution，onerigidboundarylineofclassificationafteranotherhasbeensweptawayinthedomainoforganicnature。Thealmostunclassifiableintermediatelinksaregrowingdailymorenumerous，closerinvestigationthrowsorganismsoutofoneclassintoanother，anddistinguishingcharacteristicswhichalmostbecamearticlesoffaitharelosingtheirabsolutevalidity;wenowhavemammalsthatlayeggs，and，ifthereportisconfirmed，alsobirdsthatwalkonallfours。

YearsagoVirchowwascompelled，followingonthediscoveryofthecell，todissolvetheunityoftheindividualanimalbeingintoafederationofcell-states——thusactingmoreprogressivelyratherthanscientificallyanddialectically[20]——andnowtheconceptionofanimal(thereforealsohuman)individualityisbecomingfarmorecomplexowingtothediscoveryofthewhitebloodcorpuscleswhichcreepaboutamoeba-likewithinthebodiesofthehigheranimals。Itishoweverpreciselythepolarantagonismsputforwardasirreconcilableandinsoluble，theforciblyfixedlinesofdemarcationandclassdistinctions，whichhavegivenmoderntheoreticalnaturalscienceitsrestricted，metaphysicalcharacter。

Therecognitionthattheseantagonismsanddistinctions，thoughtobefoundinnature，areonlyofrelativevalidity，andthatontheotherhandtheirimaginedrigidityandabsolutevalidityhavebeenintroducedintonatureonlybyourreflectiveminds——thisrecognitionisthekernelofthedialecticalconceptionofnature。Itispossibletoarriveatthisrecognitionbecausetheaccumulatingfactsofnaturalsciencecompelustodoso;butonearrivesatitmoreeasilyifoneapproachesthedialecticalcharacterofthesefactsequippedwithanunderstandingofthelawsofdialecticalthought。

Inanycasenaturalsciencehasnowadvancedsofarthatitcannolongerescapedialecticalgeneralisation。Howeveritwillmakethisprocesseasierforitselfifitdoesnotlosesightofthefactthattheresultsinwhichitsexperiencesaresummarisedareconcepts，thattheartofworkingwithconceptsisnotinbornandalsoisnotgivenwithordinaryeverydayconsciousness，butrequiresrealthought，andthatthisthoughtsimilarlyhasalongempiricalhistory，notmoreandnotlessthanempiricalnaturalscience。Onlybylearningtoassimilatetheresultsofthedevelopmentofphilosophyduringthepasttwoandahalfthousandyearswillitriditselfontheonehandofanynaturalphilosophystandingapartfromit，outsideitandaboveit，andontheotherhandalsoofitsownlimitedmethodofthought，whichisitsinheritancefromEnglishempiricism。

London，September23，1885

PREFACE

IIIThefollowingneweditionisareprintoftheformer，exceptforafewveryunimportantstylisticchanges。Itisonlyinonechapter——thetenthofPartII:“FromKritischeGeschichte“thatIhaveallowedmyselftomakesubstantialadditions，onthefollowinggrounds。

Asalreadystatedintheprefacetothesecondedition，thischapterwasinallessentialstheworkofMarx。IwasforcedtomakeconsiderablecutsinMarx’smanuscript，whichinitsfirstwordinghadbeenintendedasanarticleforajournal;andIhadtocutpreciselythosepartsofitinwhichthecritiqueofDühring’spropositionswasovershadowedbyMarx’sownrevelationsfromthehistoryofeconomics。Butthisisjustthesectionofthemanuscriptwhichiseventodayofthegreatestandmostpermanentinterest。IconsidermyselfunderanobligationtogiveinasfullandfaithfulaformaspossiblethepassagesinwhichMarxassignstopeoplelikePetty，North，LockeandHumetheirappropriateplaceinthegenesisofclassicalpoliticaleconomy;andevenmorehisexplanationofQuesnay’seconomicTableau，whichhasremainedaninsolubleriddleofthesphinxtoallmodernpoliticaleconomy。Ontheotherhand，whereverthethreadoftheargumentmakesthispossible，IhaveomittedpassageswhichreferexclusivelytoHerrDühring’swritings。

FortherestImaywellbeperfectlysatisfiedwiththedegreetowhich，sincethepreviouseditionofthisbookwasissued，theviewsmaintainedinithavepenetratedintothesocialconsciousnessofscientificcirclesandoftheworkingclassineverycivilisedcountryoftheworld。

LondonMay23，1894

F。Engels1877:Anti-Duhring——“Philosophy“

CONTENTS:

IntroductionChapter1:GeneralChapter2:WhatHerrDühringpromisesPartI:PhilosophyChapter3:Classification。ApriorismChapter4:WorldSchematismChapter5:PhilosophyofNature。TimeandSpaceChapter6:PhilosophyofNature。Cosmogony，Physics，Chemistry。

Chapter7:PhilosophyofNature。TheOrganicWorld。

Chapter8:PhilosophyofNature。TheOrganicWorld。(Conclusion)

Chapter9:MoralityandLaw。EternalTruths。

Chapter10:MoralityandLaw。Equality。

Chapter11:MoralityandLaw。FreedomandNecessity。

Chapter12:Dialectics。QuantityandQuality。

Chapter13:Dialectics。NegationoftheNegation。

Chapter14:Conclusion。

INTRODUCTIONI。

GENERALTModernsocialismis，initsessence，thedirectproductoftherecognition，ontheonehand，oftheclassantagonismsexistinginthesocietyoftodaybetweenproprietorsandnon-proprietors，betweencapitalistsandwage-workers;ontheotherhand，oftheanarchyexistinginproduction。But，initstheoreticalform，modernsocialismoriginallyappearsostensiblyasamorelogicalextensionoftheprincipleslaiddownbythegreatFrenchphilosophersoftheeighteenthcentury。Likeeverynewtheory，modernsocialismhad，atfirst，toconnectitselfwiththeintellectualstock-in-tradereadytoitshand，howeverdeeplyitsrootslayineconomicfacts。

Thegreatmen，whoinFrancepreparedmen’smindsforthecomingrevolution，werethemselvesextremerevolutionists。Theyrecognisednoexternalauthorityofanykindwhatever。Religion，naturalscience，society，politicalinstitutions——everythingwassubjectedtothemostunsparingcriticism;everythingmustjustifyitsexistencebeforethejudgment-seatofreasonorgiveupexistence。Reasonbecamethesolemeasureofeverything。

Itwasthetimewhen，asHegelsays，theworldstooduponitshead;firstinthesensethatthehumanhead，andtheprinciplesarrivedatbyitsthought，claimedtobethebasisofallhumanactionandassociation;butbyandby，also，inthewidersensethattherealitywhichwasincontradictiontotheseprincipleshad，infact，tobeturnedupsidedown。Everyformofsocietyandgovernmentthenexisting，everyoldtraditionalnotionwasflungintothelumberroomasirrational;theworldhadhithertoalloweditselftobeledsolelybyprejudices;everythinginthepastdeservedonlypityandcontempt。Now，forthefirsttime，appearedthelightofday，henceforthsuperstition，injustice，privilege，oppression，weretobesupersededbyeternaltruth，eternalRight，equalitybasedonnatureandtheinalienablerightsofman。

Weknowtodaythatthiskingdomofreasonwasnothingmorethantheidealisedkingdomofthebourgeoisie;thatthiseternalRightfounditsrealisationinbourgeoisjustice;thatthisequalityreduceditselftobourgeoisequalitybeforethelaw;thatbourgeoispropertywasproclaimedasoneoftheessentialrightsofman;andthatthegovernmentofreason，theContratSocialofRousseau，[21]cameintobeing，andonlycouldcomeintobeing，asademocraticbourgeoisrepublic。

Thegreatthinkersoftheeighteenthcenturycould，nomorethantheirpredecessors，gobeyondthelimitsimposeduponthembytheirepoch。

But，sidebysidewiththeantagonismofthefeudalnobilityandtheburghers，wasthegeneralantagonismofexploitersandexploited，ofrichidlersandpoorworkers。Itwasthisverycircumstancethatmadeitpossiblefortherepresentativesofthebourgeoisietoputthemselvesforwardasrepresentingnotonespecialclass，butthewholeofsufferinghumanity。

Stillfurther。Fromitsoriginthebourgeoisiewassaddledwithitsantithesis:

capitalistscannotexistwithoutwage-workers，and，inthesameproportionasthemediaevalburgheroftheguilddevelopedintothemodernbourgeois，theguildjourneymanandtheday-labourer，outsidetheguilds，developedintotheproletarian。Andalthough，uponthewhole，thebourgeoisie，intheirstrugglewiththenobility，couldclaimtorepresentatthesametimetheinterestsofthedifferentworkingclassesofthatperiod，yetineverygreatbourgeoismovementtherewereindependentoutburstsofthatclasswhichwastheforerunner，moreorlessdeveloped，ofthemodernproletariat。

Forexample，atthetimeoftheGermanReformationandthePeasantWar，ThomasMünzer;inthegreatEnglishRevolution，theLevellers[22];

inthegreatFrenchRevolution，Babeuf。Thereweretheoreticalenunciationscorrespondingwiththeserevolutionaryuprisingsofaclassnotyetdeveloped;

inthesixteenthandseventeenthcenturiesutopianpicturesofidealsocialconditions[23];intheeighteenth，actualcommunistictheories(MorellyandMably)。Thedemandforequalitywasnolongerlimitedtopoliticalrights;itwasextendedalsotothesocialconditionsofindividuals。

Itwasnotsimplyclassprivilegesthatweretobeabolished，butclassdistinctionsthemselves。Acommunism，ascetic，Spartan，wasthefirstformofthenewteaching。Thencamethethreegreatutopians:Saint-Simon，towhomthemiddle-classmovement，sidebysidewiththeproletarian，stillhadacertainsignificance;Fourier，andOwen，whointhecountrywherecapitalistproductionwasmostdeveloped，andundertheinfluenceoftheantagonismsbegottenofthis，workedouthisproposalsfortheremovalofclassdistinctionssystematicallyandindirectrelationtoFrenchmaterialism。

Onethingiscommontoallthree。Notoneofthemappearsasarepresentativeoftheinterestsofthatproletariatwhichhistoricaldevelopmenthad，inthemeantime，produced。LiketheFrenchphilosophers，theydonotclaimtoemancipateaparticularclass，butallhumanity。Likethem，theywishtobringinthekingdomofreasonandeternaljustice，butthiskingdom，astheyseeit，isasfarasheavenfromearth，fromthatoftheFrenchphilosophers。

Forthebourgeoisworld，basedupontheprinciplesofthesephilosophers，isquiteasirrationalandunjust，and，therefore，findsitswaytothedust-holequiteasreadilyasfeudalismandalltheearlierstagesofsociety。

Ifpurereasonandjusticehavenot，hitherto，ruledtheworld，thishasbeenthecaseonlybecausemenhavenotrightlyunderstoodthem。Whatwaswantedwastheindividualmanofgenius，whohasnowarisenandwhounderstandsthetruth。Thathehasnowarisen，thatthetruthhasnowbeenclearlyunderstood，isnotaninevitableevent，followingofnecessityinthechainofhistoricaldevelopment，butamerehappyaccident。Hemightjustaswellhavebeenborn500yearsearlier，andmightthenhavesparedhumanity500yearsoferror，strife，andsuffering。

ThismodeofoutlookisessentiallythatofallEnglishandFrenchandofthefirstGermansocialists，includingWeitling。Socialismistheexpressionofabsolutetruth，reasonandjusticeandhasonlytobediscoveredtoconqueralltheworldbyvirtueofitsownpower。Andasabsolutetruthisindependentoftime，space，andofthehistoricaldevelopmentofman，。

itisamereaccidentwhenandwhereitisdiscovered。Withallthis，absolutetruth，reason，andjusticearedifferentwiththefounderofeachdifferentschool。Andaseachone’sspecialkindofabsolutetruth，reason，andjusticeisagainconditionedbyhissubjectiveunderstanding，hisconditionsofexistence，themeasureofhisknowledgeandhisintellectualtraining，thereisnootherendingpossibleinthisconflictofabsolutetruthsthanthattheyshallbemutuallyexclusiveoneoftheother。Hence，fromthisnothingcouldcomebutakindofeclectic，averagesocialism，which，asamatteroffact，hasuptothepresenttimedominatedthemindsofmostofthesocialistworkersinFranceandEngland。Hence，amish-mashallowingofthemostmanifoldshadesofopinion;amish-mashoflessstrikingcriticalstatements，economictheoriespicturesoffuturesocietybythefoundersofdifferentsects，amish-mashwhichisthemoreeasilybrewedthemorethedefinitesharpedgesoftheindividualconstituentsarerubbeddowninthestreamofdebate，likeroundedpebblesinabrook。

Tomakeascienceofsocialism，ithadfirsttobeplaceduponarealbasis。

Inthemeantime，alongwithandaftertheFrenchphilosophyoftheeighteenthcenturyhadarisenthenewGermanphilosophy，culminatinginHegel。Itsgreatestmeritwasthetakingupagainofdialecticsasthehighestformofreasoning。TheoldGreekphilosopherswereallbornnaturaldialecticians，andAristotle，themostencyclopaedicintellectofthem，hadalreadyanalysedthemostessentialformsofdialecticthought。Thenewerphilosophyontheotherhand，althoughinitalsodialecticshadbrilliantexponents(e。g。，DescartesandSpinoza)，had，especiallythroughEnglishinfluence，becomemoreandmorerigidlyfixedintheso-calledmetaphysicalmodeofreasoning，bywhichalsotheFrenchoftheeighteenthcenturywerealmostwhollydominatedatalleventsintheirspecialphilosophicalwork。Outsidephilosophyintherestrictedsense，theFrenchneverthelessproducedmasterpiecesofdialectic。WeneedonlycalltomindDiderot’sLeneveudeRameau[24]andRousseau’sDiscourssurl’origineetlesfondemensdel’inégalité

parmileshommes。Wegivehere，inbrief，theessentialcharacterofthesetwomodesofthought。Weshallhavetoreturntothemlateringreaterdetail。

Whenweconsiderandreflectuponnatureatlargeorthehistoryofmankindorourownintellectualactivity，atfirstweseethepictureofanendlessentanglementofrelationsandreactionsinwhichnothingremainswhat，whereandasitwas，buteverythingmoves，changes，comesintobeingandpassesaway。Thisprimitive，naivebutintrinsicallycorrectconceptionoftheworldisthatofancientGreekphilosophy，andwasfirstclearlyformulatedbyHeraclitus:everythingisandisnot，foreverythingisfluid，isconstantlychanging，constantlycomingintobeingandpassingaway。

Butthisconception，correctlyasitexpressesthegeneralcharacterofthepictureofappearancesasawhole，doesnotsufficetoexplainthedetailsofwhichthispictureismadeup，andsolongaswedonotunderstandthese，wehavenotaclearideaofthewholepicture。Inordertounderstandthesedetailswemustdetachthemfromtheirnaturalorhistoricalconnectionandexamineeachoneseparately，itsnature，specialcauses，effects，etc。

Thisis，primarily，thetaskofnaturalscienceandhistoricalresearch:

branchesofsciencewhichtheGreeksofclassicaltimesonverygoodgrounds，relegatedtoasubordinateposition，becausetheyhadfirstofalltocollectthematerial。ThebeginningsoftheexactnaturalscienceswerefirstworkedoutbytheGreeksoftheAlexandrianperiod，[25]andlateron，intheMiddleAges，bytheArabs。Realnaturalsciencedatesfromthesecondhalfofthefifteenthcentury，andthenceonwardithasadvancedwithconstantlyincreasingrapidity。Theanalysisofnatureintoitsindividualparts，thegroupingofthedifferentnaturalprocessesandobjectsindefiniteclasses，thestudyoftheinternalanatomyoforganicbodiesintheirmanifoldforms——thesewerethefundamentalconditionsofthegiganticstridesinourknowledgeofnaturethathavebeenmadeduringthelastfourhundredyears。Butthismethodofworkhasalsoleftusaslegacythehabitofobservingnaturalobjectsandprocessesinisolation，apartfromtheirconnectionwiththevastwhole;ofobservingtheminrepose，notinmotion;asconstants，notasessentiallyvariables，intheirdeath，notintheirlife。AndwhenthiswayoflookingatthingswastransferredbyBaconandLockefromnaturalsciencetophilosophy，itbegotthenarrow，metaphysicalmodeofthoughtpeculiartotheprecedingcenturies。

Tothemetaphysician，thingsandtheirmentalreflexes，ideas，areisolated，aretobeconsideredoneaftertheotherandapartfromeachother，areobjectsofinvestigationfixed，rigid，givenonceforall。Hethinksinabsolutelyirreconcilableantitheses。“Hiscommunicationis’yea，yea;nay，nay’;forwhatsoeverismorethanthesecomethofevil。”[Matthew5:37——Ed。]Forhimathingeitherexistsordoesnotexist;athingcannotatthesametimebeitselfandsomethingelse。Positiveandnegativeabsolutelyexcludeoneanother，causeandeffectstandinarigidantithesisonetotheother。

Atfirstsightthismodeofthinkingseemstousveryluminous，becauseitisthatofso-calledsoundcommonsense。Onlysoundcommonsense，respectablefellowthatheis，inthehomelyrealmofhisownfourwalls，hasverywonderfuladventuresdirectlyheventuresoutintothewideworldofresearch。Andthemetaphysicalmodeofthought，justifiableandevennecessaryasitisinanumberofdomainswhoseextentvariesaccordingtothenatureoftheparticularobjectofinvestigation，soonerorlaterreachesalimit，beyondwhichitbecomesone-sided，restricted，abstract，lostininsolublecontradictions。Inthecontemplationofindividualthingsitforgetstheconnectionbetweenthem;inthecontemplationoftheirexistence，itforgetsthebeginningandendofthatexistence;oftheirrepose，itforgetstheirmotion。Itcannotseethewoodforthetrees。

Foreverydaypurposesweknowandcansay，e。g。，whetherananimalisaliveornot。But，uponcloserinquiry，wefindthatthisis，inmanycases，averycomplexquestion，asthejuristsknowverywell。Theyhavecudgelledtheirbrainsinvaintodiscoverarationallimitbeyondwhichthekillingofthechildinitsmother’swombismurder。Itisjustasimpossibletodetermineabsolutelythemomentofdeath，forphysiologyprovesthatdeathisnotaninstantaneousmomentaryphenomenon，butaveryprotractedprocess。

Inlikemanner，everyorganicbeingiseverymomentthesameandnotthesame，everymomentitassimilatesmattersuppliedfromwithout，andgetsridofothermatter;everymomentsomecellsofitsbodydieandothersbuildthemselvesanew;inalongerorshortertimethematterofitsbodyiscompletelyrenewed，andisreplacedbyotheratomsofmatter，sothateveryorganicbeingisalwaysitself，andyetsomethingotherthanitself。

Further，wefinduponcloserinvestigationthatthetwopolesofanantithesispositiveandnegative，e。g。，areasinseparableastheyareopposedandthatdespitealltheiropposition，theymutuallyinterpenetrate。

Andwefind，inlikemanner，thatcauseandeffectareconceptionswhichonlyholdgoodintheirapplicationtoindividualcases;butassoonasweconsidertheindividualcasesintheirgeneralconnectionwiththeuniverseasawhole，theyrunintoeachother，andtheybecomeconfoundedwhenwecontemplatethatuniversalactionandreactioninwhichcausesandeffectsareeternallychangingplaces，sothatwhatiseffecthereandnowwillbecausethereandthen，andviceversa。

Noneoftheseprocessesandmodesofthoughtentersintotheframeworkofmetaphysicalreasoning。Dialectics，ontheotherhand，comprehendsthingsandtheirrepresentations，ideas，intheiressentialconnection，concatenation，motion，origin，andending。Suchprocessesasthosementionedaboveare，therefore，somanycorroborationsofitsownmethodofprocedure。

Natureistheproofofdialectics，anditmustbesaidformodernsciencethatithasfurnishedthisproofwithveryrichmaterialsincreasingdaily，andthushasshownthat，inthelastresort，natureworksdialecticallyandnotmetaphysically。Butthenaturalistswhohavelearnedtothinkdialecticallyarefewandfarbetween，andthisconflictoftheresultsofdiscoverywithpreconceivedmodesofthinkingexplainstheendlessconfusionnowreigningintheoreticalnaturalscience，thedespairofteachersaswellaslearners，ofauthorsandreadersalike。

Anexactrepresentationoftheuniverse，ofitsevolution，ofthedevelopmentofmankind，andofthereflectionofthisevolutioninthemindsofmen，canthereforeonlybeobtainedbythemethodsofdialecticswithitsconstantregardtotheinnumerableactionsandreactionsoflifeanddeath，ofprogressiveorretrogressivechanges。AndinthisspiritthenewGermanphilosophyhasworked。KantbeganhiscareerbyresolvingthestablesolarsystemofNewtonanditseternalduration，afterthefamousinitialimpulsehadoncebeengiven，intotheresultofahistoricprocess，theformationofthesunandalltheplanetsoutofarotatingnebulousmass。Fromthisheatthesametimedrewtheconclusionthat，giventhisoriginofthesolarsystem，itsfuturedeathfollowedofnecessity。HistheoryhalfacenturylaterwasestablishedmathematicallybyLaplace，andhalfacenturyafterthatthespectroscopeprovedtheexistenceinspaceofsuchincandescentmassesofgasinvariousstagesofcondensation。[26]

ThisnewGermanphilosophyculminatedintheHegeliansystem。

Inthissystem——andhereinisitsgreatmerit——forthefirsttimethewholeworld，natural，historical，intellectual，isrepresentedasaprocess，i。e。，asinconstantmotion，changetransformation，development;andtheattemptismadetotraceouttheinternalconnectionthatmakesacontinuouswholeofallthismovementanddevelopment。Fromthispointofviewthehistoryofmankindnolongerappearedasawildwhirlofsenselessdeedsofviolence，allequallycondemnableatthejudgment-seatofmaturephilosophicreasonandwhicharebestforgottenasquicklyaspossible，butastheprocessofevolutionofmanhimself。Itwasnowthetaskoftheintellecttofollowthegradualmarchofthisprocessthroughallitsdeviousways，andtotraceouttheinnerlawrunningthroughallitsapparentlyaccidentalphenomena。

ThatHegeldidnotsolvetheproblemishereimmaterial。Hisepoch-makingmeritwasthathepropoundedtheproblem。Thisproblemisonethatnosingleindividualwilleverbeabletosolve。AlthoughHegelwas——withSaint-Simon——themostencyclopaedicmindofhistime，yethewaslimited，first，bythenecessarilylimitedextentofhisownknowledgeand，second，bythelimitedextentanddepthoftheknowledgeandconceptionsofhisage。

Totheselimitsathirdmustbeadded。Hegelwasanidealist。Tohimthethoughtswithinhisbrainwerenotthemoreorlessabstractpicturesofactualthingsandprocesses，but，conversely，thingsandtheirevolutionwereonlytherealisedpicturesofthe“Idea“，existingsomewherefrometernitybeforetheworldwas。Thiswayofthinkingturnedeverythingupsidedown，andcompletelyreversedtheactualconnectionofthingsintheworld。

CorrectlyandingeniouslyasmanyindividualgroupsoffactsweregraspedbyHegel，yet，forthereasonsjustgiven，thereismuchthatisbotched，artificial，laboured，inaword，wronginpointofdetail。TheHegeliansystem，initself，wasacolossalmiscarriage——butitwasalsothelastofitskind。Itwassuffering，infact，fromaninternalandincurablecontradiction。Upontheonehand，itsessentialpropositionwastheconceptionthathumanhistoryisaprocessofevolution，which，byitsverynature，cannotfinditsintellectualfinalterminthediscoveryofanyso-calledabsolutetruth。But，ontheotherhand，itlaidclaimtobeingtheveryessenceofthisabsolutetruth。Asystemofnaturalandhistoricalknowledge，embracingeverything，andfinalforalltime，isacontradictiontothefundamentallawsofdialecticreasoning。Thislaw，indeed，bynomeansexcludes，but，onthecontrary，includestheideathatthesystematicknowledgeoftheexternaluniversecanmakegiantstridesfromagetoage。

TheperceptionofthefundamentalcontradictioninGermanidealismlednecessarilybacktomaterialism，but，notabene，nottothesimplymetaphysical，exclusivelymechanicalmaterialismoftheeighteenthcentury。Incontrasttothenaivelyrevolutionary，simplerejectionofallprevioushistory，modernmaterialismseesinthelattertheprocessofevolutionofhumanity，itbeingitstasktodiscoverthelawsofmotionthereof。WiththeFrenchoftheeighteenthcentury，andwithHegel，theconceptionobtainedofnatureasawhole，movinginnarrowcircles，andforeverimmutable，withitseternalcelestialbodies，asNewton，andunalterableorganicspecies，asLinnaeus，taught。Modernmaterialismembracesthemorerecentdiscoveriesofnaturalscience，accordingtowhichnaturealsohasitshistoryintime，thecelestialbodies，liketheorganicspeciesthat，underfavourableconditions，peoplethem，beingbornandperishing。Andevenifnature，asawhole，muststillbesaidtomoveinrecurrentcycles，thesecyclesassumeinfinitelylargerdimensions。Inbothcasesmodernmaterialismisessentiallydialectic，andnolongerneedsanyphilosophystandingabovetheothersciences。Assoonaseachspecialscienceisboundtomakeclearitspositioninthegreattotalityofthingsandofourknowledgeofthings，aspecialsciencedealingwiththistotalityissuperfluous。

Thatwhichstillsurvives，independently，ofallearlierphilosophyisthescienceofthoughtanditslaws——formallogicanddialectics。Everythingelseissubsumedinthepositivescienceofnatureandhistory。

Whilst，however，therevolutionintheconceptionofnaturecouldonlybemadeinproportiontothecorrespondingpositivematerialsfurnishedbyresearch，alreadymuchearliercertainhistoricalfactshadoccurredwhichledtoadecisivechangeintheconceptionofhistory。In1831，thefirstworking-classrisingtookplaceinLyons;between1838and1842，thefirstnationalworking-classmovement，thatoftheEnglishChartists，reacheditsheight。TheclassstrugglebetweenproletariatandbourgeoisiecametothefrontinthehistoryofthemostadvancedcountriesinEurope，inproportiontothedevelopment，upontheonehand，ofmodernindustry[grosseIndustrie]，upontheother，ofthenewly-acquiredpoliticalsupremacyofthebourgeoisie。Factsmoreandmorestrenuouslygavethelietotheteachingsofbourgeoiseconomyastotheidentityoftheinterestsofcapitalandlabour，astotheuniversalharmonyanduniversalprosperitythatwouldbetheconsequenceofunbridledcompetition。Allthesethingscouldnolongerbeignored，anymorethantheFrenchandEnglishsocialism，whichwastheirtheoretical，thoughveryimperfect，expression。Buttheoldidealistconceptionofhistory，whichwasnotyetdislodgedknewnothingofclassstrugglesbaseduponeconomicinterests，knewnothingofeconomicinterests;productionandalleconomicrelationsappearedinitonlyasincidental，subordinateelementsinthe“historyofcivilisation“。

Thenewfactsmadeimperativeanewexaminationofallpasthistory。

Thenitwasseenthatallpasthistorywasthehistoryofclassstruggles[27];thatthesewarringclassesofsocietyarealwaystheproductsofthemodesofproductionandofexchange——inaword，oftheeconomicconditionsoftheirtime;thattheeconomicstructureofsocietyalwaysfurnishestherealbasis，startingfromwhichwecanaloneworkouttheultimateexplanationofthewholesuperstructureofjuridicalandpoliticalinstitutionsaswellasofthereligious，philosophical，andotherideasofagivenhistoricalperiod。

Butnowidealismwasdrivenfromitslastrefuge，thephilosophyofhistory;

nowamaterialistictreatmentofhistorywaspropounded，andamethodfoundofexplainingman’s“knowing“byhis“being“，insteadof，asheretofore，his“being“byhis“knowing“。

ButthesocialismofearlierdayswasasincompatiblewiththismaterialisticconceptionastheconceptionofnatureoftheFrenchmaterialistswaswithdialecticsandmodernnaturalscience。Thesocialismofearlierdayscertainlycriticisedtheexistingcapitalisticmodeofproductionanditsconsequences。Butitcouldnotexplainthem，and，therefore，couldnotgetthemasteryofthem。Itcouldonlysimplyrejectthemasbad。Butforthisitwasnecessary(1)topresentthecapitalisticmethodofproductioninitshistoricalconnectionanditsinevitablenessduringaparticularhistoricalperiod，andtherefore，also，topresentitsinevitabledownfall;

and(2)tolaybareitsessentialcharacter，whichwasstillasecret，asitscriticshadhithertoattackeditsevilconsequencesratherthantheprocessofthethingitself。Thiswasdonebythediscoveryofsurplus-value。Itwasshownthattheappropriationofunpaidlabouristhebasisofthecapitalistmodeofproductionandoftheexploitationoftheworkerthatoccursunderit，thatevenifthecapitalistbuysthelabour-powerofhislaboureratitsfullvalueasacommodityonthemarket，heyetextractsmorevaluefromitthanhepaidfor;andthatintheultimateanalysisthissurplus-valueformsthosesumsofvaluefromwhichareheapeduptheconstantlyincreasingmassesofcapitalinthehandsofthepossessingclasses。Thegenesisofcapitalistproductionandtheproductionofcapitalwerebothexplained。

Thesetwogreatdiscoveries，thematerialisticconceptionofhistoryandtherevelationofthesecretofcapitalisticproductionthroughsurplus-value，weowetoMarx。Withthesediscoveriessocialismbecameascience。

Thenextthingwastoworkoutallitsdetailsandrelations。

This，approximately，washowthingsstoodinthefieldsoftheoreticalsocialismandextinctphilosophy，whenHerrEugenDühring，notwithoutconsiderabledin，sprangontothestageandannouncedthathehadaccomplishedacompleterevolutioninphilosophy，politicaleconomyandsocialism。

LetusseewhatHerrDühringpromisesusandhowhefulfillshispromises。

II。

WHATHERRDÜHRINGPROMISESThewritingsofHerrDühringwithwhichwearehereprimarilyconcernedarehisKursusderPhilosophie，hisKursusderNational-undSozialökonomie，andhisKritischeGeschichtederNationalökonomieunddesSozialismus。[28]Thefirst-namedworkistheonewhichparticularlyclaimsourattentionhere。

OntheveryfirstpageHerrDühringintroduceshimselfas“themanwhoclaimstorepresentthispower“(philosophy)“inhisageandforitsimmediatelyforeseeabledevelopment“{D。Ph。1}。

Hethusproclaimshimselftobetheonlytruephilosopheroftodayandofthe“foreseeable“future。Whoeverdepartsfromhimdepartsfromtruth。

Manypeople，evenbeforeHerrDühring，havethoughtsomethingofthiskindaboutthemselves，but——exceptforRichardWagner——heisprobablythefirstwhohascalmlyblurteditout。Andthetruthtowhichherefersis“afinalandultimatetruth“{2}。

HerrDühring’sphilosophyis“thenaturalsystemorthephilosophyofreality……Initrealityissoconceivedastoexcludeanytendencytoavisionaryandsubjectivelylimitedconceptionoftheworld“{13}

ThisphilosophyisthereforeofsuchanaturethatitliftsHerrDühringabovethelimitshehimselfcanhardlydenyofhispersonal，subjectivelimitations。Andthisisinfactnecessaryifheistobeinapositiontolaydownfinalandultimatetruths，althoughsofarwedonotseehowthismiracleshouldcometopass。

This“naturalsystemofknowledgewhichinitselfisofvaluetothemind“{508}has，“withouttheslightestdetractionfromtheprofundityofthought，securelyestablishedthebasicformsofbeing“{556-57}。

Fromits“reallycriticalstandpoint“{404}itprovides“theelementsofaphilosophywhichisrealandthereforedirectedtotherealityofnatureandoflife，aphilosophywhichcannotallowthevalidityofanymerelyapparenthorizon，butinitspowerfullyrevolutionisingmovementunfoldsallearthsandheavensofouterandinnernature“{430}。Itisa“newmodeofthought“{543}，anditsresultsare“fromthegrounduporiginalconclusionsandviews……system-creatingideas{525}……establishedtruths“

{527}。Initwehavebeforeus“aworkwhichmustfinditsstrengthinconcentratedinitiative“{38}——whateverthatmaymean;an“investigationgoingtotheroots{200}……adeep-rootedscience{219}……astrictlyscientificconceptionofthingsandmen{387}……

anall-roundpenetratingworkofthought{D。C。III}……acreativeevolvingofpremisesandconclusionscontrollablebythought{6}……theabsolutelyfundamental“{150}。

Intheeconomicandpoliticalspherehegivesusnotonly“historicalandsystematicallycomprehensiveworks“{532}，ofwhichthehistoricalonesare，toboot，notablefor“myhistoricaldepictioninthegrandstyle“{D。K。G。556}，whilethosedealingwithpoliticaleconomyhavebroughtabout“creativeturns“{462}，butheevenfinisheswithafullyworked-outsocialistplanofhisownforthesocietyofthefuture，aplanwhichisthe“practicalfruitofacleartheorygoingtotheultimaterootsofthings“{D。C。555-56}

and，liketheDühringphilosophy，isconsequentlyinfallibleandofferstheonlywaytosalvation;for“onlyinthatsocialiststructurewhichIhavesketchedinmyCursusderNational-undSocialökonomiecanatrueOwntaketheplaceofownershipwhichismerelyapparentandtransitoryorevenbasedonviolence“{D。Ph。242}。Andthefuturehastofollowthesedirections。

ThisbouquetofglorificationsofHerrDühringbyHerrDühringcouldeasilybeenlargedtenfold。Itmayalreadyhavecreatedsomedoubtinthemindofthereaderastowhetheritisreallyaphilosopherwithwhomheisdealing，ora——butwemustbegthereadertoreservejudgmentuntilhehasgottoknowtheabove-mentioned“deep-rootedness“atcloserquarters。Wehavegiventheaboveanthologyonlyforthepurposeofshowingthatwehavebeforeusnotanyordinaryphilosopherandsocialist，whomerelyexpresseshisideasandleavesittothefuturetojudgetheirworth，butquiteanextraordinarycreature，whoclaimstobenotlessinfalliblethanthePope，andwhosedoctrineistheonlywaytosalvationandsimplymustbeacceptedbyanyonewhodoesnotwanttofallintothemostabominableheresy。Whatwearehereconfrontedwithiscertainlynotoneofthoseworksinwhichallsocialistliterature，recentlyalsoGerman，hasabounded——worksinwhichpeopleofvariouscalibres，inthemoststraightforwardwayintheworld，trytoclearupintheirmindsproblemsforthesolutionofwhichtheymaybemoreorlessshortofmaterial;worksinwhich，whatevertheirscientificandliteraryshortcomings，thesocialistgoodwillisalwaysdeservingofrecognition。Onthecontrary，HerrDühringoffersusprincipleswhichhedeclaresarefinalandultimatetruthsandthereforeanyviewsconflictingwiththesearefalsefromtheoutset;heisinpossessionnotonlyoftheexclusivetruthbutalsoofthesolestrictlyscientificmethodofinvestigation，incontrastwithwhichallothersareunscientific。

Eitherheisright——andinthiscasewehavebeforeusthegreatestgeniusofalltime，thefirstsuperhuman，becauseinfallible，man。Orheiswrong，andinthatcase，whateverourjudgmentmaybe，benevolentconsiderationshownforanygoodintentionshemaypossiblyhavehadwouldneverthelessbethemostdeadlyinsulttoHerrDühring。

Whenamanisinpossessionofthefinalandultimatetruthandoftheonlystrictlyscientificmethod，itisonlynaturalthatheshouldhaveacertaincontemptfortherestoferringandunscientifichumanity。

WemustthereforenotbesurprisedthatHerrDühringshouldspeakofhispredecessorswithextremedisdain，andthatthereareonlyafewgreatmen，thusstyledbywayofexceptionbyhimself，whofindmercyatthebarofhis“deep-rootedness“。

Letushearfirstwhathehastosayaboutthephilosophers:

“Leibniz，devoidofanynoblersentiments……thatbestofallcourt-philosophisers“{D。Ph。346}。

Kantisstilljustabouttolerated;butafterhimeverythinggotintoamuddle{197}:

therefollowedthe“wildravingsandequallychildishandwindystupiditiesoftheimmediatelysucceedingepigoni，namely，aFichteandaSchelling{227}……monstrouscaricaturesofignorantnaturalphilosophising{56}……thepost-Kantianmonstrosities“and“thedeliriousfantasies“{449}

crownedby“aHegel“{197}。Thelast-nameduseda“Hegeljargon“

{D。K。C。491}andspreadthe“Hegelpestilence“{D。Ph。486}bymeansofhis“moreovereveninformunscientificdemeanour“andhis“crudities“

{D。K。G。235}。

Thenaturalscientistsfarenobetter，butasonlyDarwiniscitedbynamewemustconfineourselvestohim:

“Darwiniansemi-poetryanddexterityinmetamorphosis，withtheircoarselysentientnarrownessofcomprehensionandbluntedpowerofdifferentiation{D。Ph。142}……InourviewwhatisspecifictoDarwinism，fromwhichofcoursetheLamarckianformulationsmustbeexcluded，isapieceofbrutalitydirectedagainsthumanity。”{117}。

Butthesocialistscomeoffworstofall。WiththeexceptionatanyrateofLouisBlanc——themostinsignificantofthemall——theyareallandsundrysinnersandfallshortofthereputationwhichtheyshouldhavebefore(orbehind)HerrDühring。Andnotonlyinregardtotruthandscientificmethod——no，alsoinregardtotheircharacter。ExceptforBabeufandafewCommunardsof1871noneofthemare“men“{D。K。G。239}。

Thethreeutopiansarecalled“socialalchemists“{237}。Astothem，acertainindulgenceisshowntoSaint-Simon，insofarasheismerelychargedwith“exaltationofmind“{252}，andthereisacompassionatesuggestionthathesufferedfromreligiousmania。WithFourier，however，HerrDühringcompletelylosespatience。ForFourier“revealedeveryelementofinsanity……ideaswhichonewouldnormallyhavemostexpectedtofindinmadhouses{276}……thewildestdreams……

productsofdelirium……”{283}。“TheunspeakablysillyFourier“{222}，this“infantilemind“{284}，this“idiot“{286}，iswithalnotevenasocialist;

hisphalanstery[29]isabsolutelynotapieceofrationalsocialism，but“acaricatureconstructedonthepatternofeverydaycommerce“{283}。

Andfinally:

“Anyonewhodoesnotfindthoseeffusions“(ofFourier’s，concerningNewton)“……sufficienttoconvincehimselfthatinFourier’snameandinthewholeofFourierismitisonlythefirstsyllable“(fou——

crazy)“thathasanytruthinit，shouldhimselfbeclassedundersomecategoryofidiots“{286}。

Finally，RobertOwen“hadfeebleandpaltryideas{295}……hisreasoning，socrudeinethics{296}……afewcommonplaceswhichdegeneratedintoperversions……nonsensicalandcrudewayoflookingatthings{297}……thecourseofOwen’sideasishardlyworthsubjectingtomoreseriouscriticism{298}……hisvanity“{299-300}——andsoon。

WithextremewitHerrDühringcharacterisestheutopiansbyreferencetotheirnames，asfollows:Saint-Simon——saint(holy)，Fourier——fou(crazy)，Enfantin——enfant(childish){303};heonlyneedstoadd:Owen——owoe！andaveryimportantperiodinthehistoryofsocialismhasinfourwordsbeenroundlycondemned;andanyonewhohasanydoubtsaboutit“shouldhimselfbeclassedundersomecategoryofidiots“。

AsforDühring’sopinionofthelatersocialists，weshall，forthesakeofbrevity，citehimonlyonLassalleandMarx:

Lassalle:“Pedantic，hair-splittingeffortstopopularise……

rampantscholasticism……amonstroushashofgeneraltheoriesandpaltrytrash{509}……Hegel-superstition，senselessandformless……ahorrifyingexample{511}……peculiarlylimited{513}……pompousdisplayofthemostpaltrytrifles{514}……ourJewishhero{515}……pamphleteer{519}……

common{520}……inherentinstabilityinhisviewoflifeandoftheworld“

{529}。

Marx:“Narrownessofconception……hisworksandachievementsinandbythemselves，thatis，regardedfromapurelytheoreticalstandpoint，arewithoutanypermanentsignificanceinourdomain“(thecriticalhistoryofsocialism)，“andinthegeneralhistoryofintellectualtendenciestheyaretobecitedatmostassymptomsoftheinfluenceofonebranchofmodernsectarianscholastics{D。K。G。495}……impotenceofthefacultiesofconcentrationandsystematisation……deformityofthoughtandstyle，undignifiedaffectationoflanguage……anglicisedvanity……duping{497}……barrenconceptionswhichinfactareonlybastardsofhistoricalandlogicalfantasy……deceptivetwisting{498}……personalvanity{499}……vilemannerisms……snotty……buffoonerypretendingtobewitty……Chineseerudition{506}……philosophicalandscientificbackwardness“{507}。

Andsoon，andsoforth——forthisison}yasmallsuperficiallyculledbouquetoutoftheDühringrosegarden。Itmustbeunderstoodthat，atthemoment，wearenotintheleastconcernedwhethertheseamiableexpressionsofabuse——which，ifhehadanyeducation，shouldforbidHerrDühringfromfindinganythingvileandsnotty——arealsofinalandultimatetruths。And——forthemoment——wewillguardagainstvoicinganydoubtastotheirdeep-rootedness，aswemightotherwisebeprohibitedevenfromtryingtofindthecategoryofidiotstowhichwebelong。Weonlythoughtitwasourdutytogive，ontheonehand，anexampleofwhatHerrDühringcalls“theselectlanguageoftheconsiderateand，intherealsenseoftheword，moderatemodeofexpression“{D。Ph。260}，andontheotherhand，tomakeitclearthattoHerrDühringtheworthlessnessofhispredecessorsisanolessestablishedfactthanhisowninfallibility。

Whereuponwesinktothegroundindeepestreverencebeforethemightiestgeniusofalltime——ifthatishowthingsreallystand。