(p. 269) The reason why idealism has deepened, developed and had the capacity to struggle against materialism, must be sought in the process of knowledge of humankind. When humankind employs concepts to think, there exists the possibility of drifting into idealism. Humankind cannot but use concepts when thinking and this facilitates the division of our knowledge into two aspects; the one deals with individual and particular things, the other incorporates generalized concepts (such as the judgement that “Yan’an is a city”). The particular and the general are actually indivisibly connected, for to divide them is to depart from objective truth. Objective truth is expressed in the unity of the general and particular; without the particular, the general could not exist; and without the general, there could be no particular. To separate the general from the particular, that is, to treat the general as an objective entity and to regard the particular only as a form of existence of the general, is the method adopted by all idealists. All [p. 191] idealists substitute consciousness, spirit or concepts for objective entities which exist independently of human consciousness. Commencing from this premise, idealism stresses the dynamic role of human consciousness in social practice; it cannot point out the materialist truth that consciousness is limited by matter, maintaining instead that only consciousness is dynamic and that matter is nothing but an inert ensemble of objects. In addition, driven by inherent class characteristics, idealists utilize every possible means to exaggerate the dynamic role of consciousness, one-sidedly developing and limitlessly expanding it so that it becomes the dominant aspect of intelligence. They conceal the other aspect, leaving it subordinate. This artificially expanded role for consciousness is established as a general world view to the extent of transforming it into a god or an idol. Idealism in economics greatly overstates one non-essential aspect of exchange by elevating the principle of supply and demand to the extent that it becomes the basic principle of capitalism. Many people have observed the active role that science plays in the life of society; but they fail to realise this role is determined and limited by definite social relations of production, and come to the conclusion that science is the motive force of society. Idealist historians perceive heroes as the creators of history, idealist statesmen see politics as an omnipotent entity, idealist military strategists wage all-out war regardless of the costs, idealist revolutionaries advocate Blanquism, and there are those who advocate revival of the national character and restoration of the old morality;[2-180] all are the result of an excessive exaggeration of the dynamic role of the subjective. Our thought cannot reflect a phenomenon in its entirety at one stroke, but is constituted of knowledge which, in a dialectical process, approximates reality, and is lively and (p. 270) infinitely variegated. Idealism is founded on the specific properties of thought and has exaggerated this individual aspect; it is thus unable to achieve a correct reflection of this process and only succeeds in distorting it. Lenin said: “Human knowledge is not a straight line, but a curve. Any segment of this curve can be transformed into an independent, complete, straight line and this straight line may lead to confusion. Rectilinearity and one-sideness, to see the trees and not the wood, woodenness and petrification, subjectivism and subjective blindness – voilà the epistemological roots of idealism”. “Philosophical idealism is a one-sided, exaggeration of one of the fragments or aspects of knowledge until it becomes a deified absolute, divorced from matter, from nature. Idealism is thus a religious doctrine. This is very true.”[2-181]
[p. 192] Pre-Marxist materialism (mechanistic materialism) did not emphasise the dynamic role of thought in knowledge, attributing it only with a passive role, and perceiving it as a mirror which reflected nature. Mechanistic materialism adopted an unreasonable attitude towards idealism, ignoring the causes of its epistemology, and consequently was incapable of overcoming it.
Only dialectical materialism has correctly pointed out the dynamic role of thought while at the same time pointing out the limitations which matter imposes on thought, has pointed out that thought emerges from social practice, and at the same time that it actively guides practice. Only the dialectical theory of the “unity of thought and action” can thoroughly overcome idealism.