Einstein did not appreciate the

 Einstein did not appreciate the   function effectively related to inappropriate use of addition and future generations, there are theoretical shortcomings of its own is also an important reason for
.
Keywords Einstein
Engels Engels Dialectics of Nature Department of brilliant books. it China, the Soviet Union, Japan and even
world's natural scientists and philosophers have had a profound impact. Sakata Japanese physicist Chang had written a special article written
respected its have all benefited from the > Eduard Bernstein (Eduard Bernsein) to Mr. Engels Science
on the content of a manuscript to me, entrusted me to express their views, to see whether the manuscript should be printed.
my comments are as follows: If this is not coming from a manuscript as a historical figure of interesting, that
What I would not recommend it went to press, because no matter physics from a contemporary point of view, or from the physical
History's side, the contents of this manuscript have no special interest. However, I can set
think: If we consider this work to clarify the meaning of Engels's thought is an interesting document,
it is published. [1]
Eduard Bernstein sent the manuscript to me all the ideas, and my evaluation of all manuscripts and
said. I firmly believe, if I can see Engels in such a long time, his attempt this
a cautious view was hit with such great importance, he will find funny. [2]
Einstein in the 70s this evaluation Such criticism of China by:
of Engels, the development of modern natural science
great significance; really [3]
simple evaluation of Einstein as a appropriate, so Xu Liangying in the Siegel set of the impact of natural philosophy
traditional sound, take alienated subjective attitude of dialectics, which even had the honor to read Engels, great value, which is totally understandable. [4]
this analysis, is actually based on the following two three-step reasoning:
(reason 1) the major premise: alienation, alienated is an inference derived from the following:
(reason 2) premise: by the German natural scientists opposed to the philosophical tradition of Hegel will inevitably lead to sparse
far Dialectics
minor premise: that Einstein has been kinds of
Conclusion: Einstein alienated two premises is worth further research. First of all, there is no evidence that Einstein
to Germany by the impact of natural scientists (ie the minor premise does not hold). from the of more than scientists from the philosopher.
Second, even if the minor premise was established, the premise may not be established. For those who do not own minds, no special
scientists parade there will be drift parrot situation. But Einstein is a treasure
independent views of the scientists, who from an early age about the formation of a habit of independent thinking in Einstein .1930
This paper made a confession:
people clearly find mutual understanding with other people is limited and coordinated, but not enough to regret
. This man is no doubt a bit of his innocence lost and unconcern; but
the other hand, he is largely independent of the opinions, habits, and judgments. [5]
student teacher Miss Einstein Bo even said of his:
you are a smart person, but you have a drawback, you do not want anyone to tell you a little something. If you listen to anyone
. [6]
so love for Stan alienated dialectics simply put it as the influence by the German natural scientist it is inappropriate
's.
third, the German natural scientists are not necessarily targeted against the dialectics of Hegel. Historically,
19th century German natural scientists opposed Hegel's philosophy of nature is not so much to target dialectics, not
as it is against their idealistic philosophy and tried to cover all natural scientific results of Philosophy and the arrogance of corporate
map :
natural science polemics against Hegel, in their correct understanding of the scope of Hegel and
words, they are opposed to target only two points, that is the starting point of idealism and inconsistent with the facts architecture of any
. [7]
Helmholtz also a good description of the:
... ... Hegel's 'identity philosophy' ... ... Starting from a hypothesis, phenomenon that not only the spirit,
is the real world - natural and human - is also the creative mind of a thought activities Results
fruit, ... ... Under this assumption, the human mind, even without the guidance of experienced outside , it seems that the idea
conjecture Creator, and through his own internal activities, to re-discover these ideas, construct other scientific achievements. But ... ... there is no evidence that he is based on the It is at this point a complete breakdown
. His natural systems, at least in the eyes of the natural philosopher, but the absolute arrogance. and he
generation of famous scientists, no one support him claims. ... ... For all its
Hegelian system are subject to his own academic presumptuous delusion stooped ... .... [8] (emphasis added to those cited)
the expense of the basic facts set The over-rely on speculation, Hegel made a lot of natural scientists
seems unforgivable mistake: for example, in chemistry, Hegel rejected atomism, trying to maintain Aristotle's four elements
Germany On; in optics, he rejects Newton's white compound, said shade and support complex
Goethe said. Perhaps it is this, the majority of natural scientists in the abandoned Hegelian idealist system also throw
abandoned its Einstein is a good distinction between
dirty water with the baby, be good at drawing from a variety of nutrients in the philosophy the philosopher:
he gratefully accepted the concept of epistemology; However, the fact that his experience outside the provisions of conditions,
not allow him to build his concept in the world too rigidly adhere to an epistemological system of the time. Thus, a system from an epistemological
who seems like he must be an unscrupulous opportunist; to him seeks to describe
described the role of an independent outside world in terms of perception, he as a realist; to his idea of the concept and
the free spirit of the poet as the invention (not something given from experience in
to logically derived) such, he, as an idealist; to his concepts and theories that his only experience in their relationship feeling
provide a logical that can stand within the limits of the foot is concerned, he
commentators as a positive. to his view that the logical simplicity of his work is an indispensable tool
effective theory, he can even like a Platonic or those who Pythagoreanism. [9]
Therefore, if the dialectic is really valuable, then the scientist Albert Einstein did not like because of the general rejection of Hegel's idealism must
system and speculative throw away with the dialectic. In fact, with Sartre, Schmidt, Lu
Kutch, Russell, Carnap 1, and comparing them, Einstein did not rejected the or
attention - whether from the history of modern physics, or from the physics point of view, this manuscript have no special interest in
flavor - because the view is not limited to the Einstein one, a famous Japanese physics Mo Valley, home of three men and a more intense look
Law:
whenever off all the controversy about the dialectics of nature, I always feel how
dialectics of nature is so little foundation, no power to anything else? < br> In contrast to Kant's
need to point out that the evaluation of three men armed valley is not entirely for the Engels, Seoul's philosophy that no one vulgar, but why Engels was vulgar philosophy it? If Xu Liangying first
students in the face of Albert Einstein and the will look for the reasons
eyeing the former, then I tend more to seek answers to the latter depth.
1 Such assessment has:
Marx and I can say is from German idealist philosophy, a conscious dialectic to save and put it into
materialist view of nature and history only. [11 ]
Engels is how to do this task?
If we reverse things, then everything will become simple, appears in the extreme idealist philosophy
mysterious immediately becomes the law of dialectics simple and clear, if the daylight. [12]
In other words, Engels, Hegel, that as long as the starting point for change - rather than starting from the natural fat from the concept of a
- will be able to get rid of the stereotype so that the dialectic of idealism a materialistic form.
view this proved too simple. materialism or idealism is not simply to recognize the spirit is primary, or first-
can ascertain, the dialectical law of thinking first, or the law of nature is not the crux of the problem by
. natural scientists dislike of Hegel's idealist system is due to the natural science
Hegel attempts to attributed to the results of dialectics and all-encompassing on the arbitrary use of the dialectical law. Therefore, the subjective arbitrariness
Hegelian idealism is the target of public criticism. In other words, natural scientists are opposed to the idealist in addition
ontological there methodological. The latter is precisely Engels failed to recognize the. Engels subjective
trying to Seoul will be thinking law
a philosophical proposition, this theory is nothing wrong. But Engels is trying to learn as a family
argument to deduce that the evolution of the universe. In the absence of any experimental basis of facts, Engels does not
Debu again by means of of defective knowledge to help. [13]
philosophy of modern natural science, where the adoption of motion must be eternal principle: it does not this principle can not continue to
. [14]
movement can not be destroyed of not only from the volume, but must also be understood qualitatively. [15]
Here we must turn to God or to, or have to make the following conclusion: the island-shaped
into our solar system universe hot material, is the natural way, that is matter in motion days
natural movement of the movement has generated, and therefore the conditions of transformation must come from the material produced renewable
. [16]
material although at some point the inevitability of some iron to the highest on earth to destroy the essence -
- thinking with the spirit of a place in another time and another one the same some Youyi the necessity of iron
it re-emerge. [17] (emphasis added those who were cited, the following are the same)
this idealistic way of subjective and arbitrary Engels finally into the trap of the cycle:
this movement of material in which an eternal loop, a not for our planet
in time for the unit of measurement to complete the cycle of its orbit, in this cycle, ... ..., in this
cycle in the ... ... [18]
Again, in order to get rid of Newton's ; God God still makes sense
of:
Engels, if someone had asked: Why exactly (dialectics are) the rule rather than the three laws of
ten, or more than one? Why is the law of thought What else
not it? these laws come from? and whether there is a more general principle of these laws can be inferred,
to replace things that have appeared accidental? Is there some way in organic synthesis
them together and give them to some kind of order? he might shrug replied: 'like Newton's' non-fiction hypothesis from
the same. In this way, the result is self-contradictory : Engels criticized Hegel imposed the laws of thinking
things, but he'd just done. Science can prove that he expected he would be the field of social
found Dialectical Reason 3, which was transplanted to nature, this is a hard pull pull students. [20]
In fact, as long as the dialectics also persist in the a priori, whether this is a priori present in the mind (where the Black Eagle
) still exists in nature (in Engels), this The materialist is not complete, but also make it the main remnants of some old materialism
justice (naturalistic) traces, although Engels also think:
naturalistic view of history that the only role in the human nature, but nature everywhere decides
the historical development of people forget it counterproductive in nature, changing the natural world, creating new
for their own living conditions. [21]
but this reaction is just outside of the physical world transformation. Since the universal law that exists in nature
, then the people in mind can only reflect it, reaction only in practice, and forget the people
in thinking can also transform the material , Einstein emphasized the notion of free invention:
... ... the concepts and principles of the invention are free of human reason, neither can the nature of this intellectual
, nor any other prior way to prove they are correct. [22]
Thus, Einstein stressed:
... ... in any case not mathematical concepts derived from experience. Of course, experience is always the number of school construction
the sole criterion of physical utility. [23]
here, the facts of experience and freedom to create the necessary tension to maintain. On the contrary, due to binding
old materialism, Engels's materialism to illustrate the nature of mathematical concepts but had taken great pains to br> Some commentators have pointed out that Engels, ,
from inorganic to organic methods in the order instructions. Engels argued that nature itself is to take sides in this order
style evolved, so his explanation is to explain in accordance with things as things to materialistic
method 7.
form specific to the sport, Engels argued that the location of mechanical motion (attraction and repulsion) is the simplest most basic form of movement
, then contains the mechanical movement of chemical movement, and finally advanced Organic
campaign. Therefore, scientific classification should also be results.
course, we can say that man evolved from apes, first whether the vertebrates after the mammals, but the chemical movement must be by mechanical movement evolved
it? the order ; the natural first conclusion. so than natural science
go further mechanistic home, Engels tried to find him (also his view that the inherent nature) the most basic form of transport
move - attraction and repulsion - to explain all movement (br> of the same form of exercise is the main target of the natural sciences. specific, or simply understand the Engels specific
not because it contains more than individual examples, but because generally contains
from the general to the whole logic of the individual structure, the structure is provided by a variety of abstract (concepts, categories) to build and into three-dimensional model
block, which is a specific 8. Engels, concrete - abstract - concrete line of research
study, but the two are fundamentally different method of Engels rather a ; theory + examples Because of this method is also different from the final result is far from the objective 11 (see below
table):
Marx and Engels, research methods and results compared
methods of Marx and Engels
rising from the abstract to the concrete from abstract to the concrete
analog concrete abstract abstract abstract abstract
(discovered the economic laws of capitalist society further illustrates the general law of materialist dialectics, Lenin
this Seoul is not the correct use of dialectics, because to a lot of accidental things down to
the general principles of dialectics, this is not dialectics. ... ... in the social phenomena, there is no indiscriminate pumping
than the individual facts and play some more examples the method generally more untenable, and a list of general example is not strenuous
cents. but this is no meaning or completely counterproductive, because in the specific historical circumstances
, everything has its individual situation. If the sum of all the facts, from the fact that the link
to grasp the facts, then, the fact is not only 'things speak louder than words', but what evidence do
chisel, if not from all the sum of the knowledge of the facts not from the contact, but the fragments will be singled out and with the
, then the facts can only be a child's play, or even child's play is not as ... .... [28]
But Engels, Lenin adopted a tolerant attitude, he thought Engels examples
needs to be popular. Yet it is the needs of this popular, making the > because the popular thing to clarify the role of the basic principles may be some, but kind of like Einstein this
the most difficult fighting in the forefront of theoretical physics of professional scientists, the popular will than good. justice, may be used to people outside of the Enlightenment natural scientists, and natural scientists will be sarcastic and cynical
it aside. to be weak in terms of who was
more. either Lenin or the weapons of three men and their criticism of the valley is not for Engels himself, but Engels , and this point is that we must
recognized.
Significantly, Engels I am not totally aware of the limitations of analog or
of example methods in the than a method embodied in the br> in history, science has not yet developed, the philosophy of science the role once played. But when modern science gradually gained Branch
its independent status, the philosophy gradually lost as natural philosophy (understanding of nature)
the function, and to focus awareness of betting on the understanding of nature, namely, the understanding of science. no
of Locke, Berkeley or Hume, Kant, they are accepting the premise of scientific results have been Next,
use of scientific understanding of philosophical thinking to ask how could this epistemology.
Engels valuable is that when most scientists and philosophers have been carried away by the victory of science
, it alone eye to note that due to a one-sided development of science led to the mechanical view of nature and patterns of thought.
Unfortunately, Engels, not scientists, his critique of science is not so much within the natural sciences for the content itself
as it is pointing to individual scientists and groups. Engels criticized the logic of science itself is not the foundation and basic concepts
contradiction, but the limited ability of scientists and philosophical knowledge of the low literacy:
Ryle I have for many years have not seen this conflict, his students is even worse. It was only
used in the natural sciences division has been dominated to that, it makes everyone more or less to limited
their profession, only a few people have not been his ability to take away the overall system concept. [30]
Thus, Engels concern of science itself is bound to greatly diminished. It is for this reason, love for
Stan is more focused on later in Engels Mach (March, Enst ,1838-1916), Poincare (Poincare,
Jules Henri ,1854-1912) and others, philosophy, and refused to Engels, .
's philosophy because the former directed the foundation and core of physics.
if Engels could from the perspective of dialectics, such as Mach, Poincare, who, like the basic physics
of the concepts (such as time and space) to be philosophical criticism and review, then the Einstein Never regard to its method of dialectical
turn a blind eye. In fact, it is not impossible, Hegel on the first in its > identifiable manner it:
that people must not be any space is an independent non-compliance to the existing space, contrast, space is always
substantial space, must not and fulfilling things in which separate. [ ,],[
people criticized Einstein's special theory of relativity is not afraid to come out in 1905. The problem is that the grant
Engels only stay in the sub-surface, it is actually a philosophical critique of science to the macroscopic microscopic.
a critical scientific philosophy can only see the trees, but this is far from the primary, because its essence is learning to use a feature
to criticize the other subjects discipline do not have the characteristics of , just as long thin not fat fat, like criticism,
not achieving its purpose, it will exacerbate hostility of both sides.
more serious is that the projection in this critical way, the Engels unconsciously higher and higher above the
scientific philosophy, always show the superior philosophy and foresight, so that the philosophy of science reduced to a footnote and say
out:
initial, naive point of view, later than usual, and metaphysics more correct view. For example
Bacon (after he had Boyle, Newton, and almost all the British) have long said that heat is motion
(Boyle said even the molecular motion). but until the eighteenth century, Caloriue [hot prime] is only in France, the
, and on the mainland were more or less accepted. [32]
conservation of energy. invariance of the amount of movement has been Descartes pointed out, and are using and are
in (Crawford Xu Adams, Robert Meyer?) almost the same words. and exercise in the form of transformation is directly
to 1842 was discovered, and new things It is this point, not the amount of invariance of the laws.
[33]
natural scientists who could have been from a philosophical achievements in the natural sciences see: In all these philosophy
Even if some sort of hidden in their own fields than they are clever things (Lai Buni
Heights - founder of the mathematical infinite, and his comparison, the induction of the donkey appears to be a
Newton plagiarist and saboteurs; Kant - Laplace theory of the origin of objects before; Okun - the adoption of the theory of evolution in Germany, the first person
; Hegel - his natural science) [... ... ]
general and reasonable classification, the success of materialism than all together, even greater nonsense). [34]
in philosophy has made hundreds of years ago, often already philosophy of life was abandoned
questions, often in the study where the theory of natural scientists appear as a new wisdom, and in a climate when
things even become fashionable. [35]
sports immortal has been expressed in the Cartesian proposition, ... ... Here is the philosopher's theory until after two centuries in
confirmed by natural scientists. [36]
This has basically no longer a philosophy, but only world view, It should not be in a particular scientific
science, but should be confirmed in scientific reality and manifested .14 [37]
In fact, from the beginning, Engels also concern the natural sciences dialectics of law is mainly to confirm that,
and not for the study of natural science itself. Engels July 14, 1958 To write a letter of Marx
Road:
Please Hegel has promised me things, but only recently discovered the whole; I want to know,
old man all these things (referring to Hegel - cited by injection) is not foreseen that.
no doubt, if he Now write a Hegel was pleased that another result is a variety of forces in physics the relationship between ... ... This is not difficult to
Road, the provisions on how to reflect on each other substances into a wonderful example of it? ... ... Hegel < br> on the quantitative and qualitative leap in the series such a set is very appropriate here. [38]
this is evidence of a philosophy, and Engels did not meet the intended purpose. Engels tried to use science
prove their philosophy to allow scientists to consciously accept the clever, the result is: the science was reduced to a footnote at the same time
philosophy, philosophy has become a scientific catalog. philosophical features into the classification of the facts of experience < br> Finishing 15:
experience nature and science has accumulated such a huge knowledge of the exact amount of material, so that in every field of research
systematic study based on the intrinsic link to order these materials is necessary, just as
can not avoid, ... ... of experience in the method useless here, and here there is only theoretical thinking can help
the .16 [39]
the end, neither of Dialectics of Nature into non-scientific philosophy of the system of replacing it).
, of course, it should be noted that since Hegel's philosophical system was constructed after its huge, due to scientific advancements,
pure philosophy, the continued loss of its territory is inevitable. Philosophy research methods and subjects are beginning to steal
stealing turn (philosophy of language, philosophy of science, etc.), in such a case, Engels, (not finished, of course, the lack of time and Engels
related to improper selection is not without its target relations). > This article points out only to illustrate its limitations, and their descendants (including our own) use of natural dialectics
misconduct does not bring all the crime ...