The Path and Method of Mao Zedong’s Creation of the “Practice” Philosophical System

The “practice” philosophical system created by Mao Zedong is the most central content of Mao Zedong Thought. As early as his youth, Mao Zedong conceived the ideal of “reforming philosophy, reforming ethics, and fundamentally transforming the thought of the entire nation” [1]1 The “Second Revolutionary Civil War” refers to the Agrarian Revolutionary War (1927-1937), also known as the Ten-Year Civil War, during which the CPC led peasant uprisings and established rural base areas against the Kuomintang regime.(P86). That this ideal became a reality lay in his writing of the philosophical masterpieces *On Practice* and *On Contradiction* in the late 1930s, thereby creating the “practice” philosophical system. With this system he armed the Chinese Communists, won over the broad masses of the Chinese people, and achieved great victory in the Chinese revolution. This philosophical legacy of his remains to this day a spiritual treasure for the Chinese Communists and the Chinese people, precisely as Xi Jinping has argued: “Com

毛泽东创立的“实践论”哲学体系，是毛泽东思想最核心的内容。早在青年时代，毛泽东就萌发了“改造哲学，改造伦理学，根本上变换全国之思想”[1](P86)的理想。而这一理想成为现实，则在于他在20世纪30年代后期撰写出哲学名篇《实践论》和《矛盾论》，创立了“实践论”哲学体系，以此武装了中国共产党人，掌握了中国广大人民群众，取得了中国革命的伟大胜利。他的这一哲学遗产至今仍然是中国共产党人和中国人民的精神瑰宝，诚如习近平所论：“毛泽东同志就是一位伟大的哲学家、思想家、社会科学家，他撰写的《矛盾论》、《实践论》等哲学名篇至今仍具有重要指导意义”。[2]那么，毛泽东是如何创立这一哲学体系的呢？其中经历了哪些探索的历程、包括了哪些逻辑的环节、运用了什么样的研究方法呢？这些无疑是我们今天承继毛泽东的哲学遗产、继续推进马克思主义哲学中国化所需要认真了解的。本文即从梳理这一探索历程的诸逻辑环节入手，来说明毛泽东创立“实践论”哲学体系的路径与方法。

I. Discovering the Significance of Dialectical Materialism from the Major Problems Raised by the Practice of the Chinese Revolution

一、从中国革命实践提出的重大问题中发现辩证唯物主义的意义

When Mao Zedong was studying at the Hunan First Normal School, he studied and delved into philosophy under the guidance of the famous philosopher Yang Changji, laying a solid philosophical foundation. This became an important condition for his later creation of the “On Practice” philosophical system. However, the background and reasons for the creation of the “On Practice” philosophical system did not stem directly from Mao Zedong’s philosophical cultivation and interests, but rather from his discovery, through the major problems raised by the practice of the Chinese revolution, of the great significance of dialectical materialism for the Chinese Communists.

毛泽东在湖南第一师范学校读书时，就在著名哲学家杨昌济指导下学习哲学、钻研哲学，打下了很好的哲学基础，这成为他以后创立“实践论”哲学体系的重要条件。但“实践论”哲学体系创立的背景和缘由，并不是直接出于毛泽东的哲学素养和哲学爱好，而在于他从中国革命实践提出的重大问题中，发现了辩证唯物主义之于中国共产党人的重要意义。

Mao Zedong himself later explained this point. At the turn of 1959 and 1960, when discussing the need for Marxism to adapt to changes in the times and make new developments, he criticized a view that then existed within the Party. This view held that to study Marxist philosophy, it was sufficient to read Engels’ *Anti-Dühring* and Lenin’s *Materialism and Empirio-Criticism*, and that other books were unnecessary. Mao Zedong explicitly stated that this view was wrong, pointing out: “The books of these ancestors, Marx and the others, must be read, and their basic principles must be observed. This is the first point. However, any Communist Party in any country, any intellectual circle in any country, must create new theories, write new works, and produce its own theoreticians to serve current politics. Relying solely on the ancestors will not do.” [3]3 “Soviet movement” refers to the establishment of Soviet-style (council-based) political power structures in the rural revolutionary base areas led by the CPC from the late 1920s to the 1930s.(P109) From this, he linked the historical reality of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context and discussed the background and reasons for writing *On Practice* and *On Contradiction*, believing that: “We wrote *On Practice* and *On Contradiction* at the end of the Second Revolutionary Civil War and the beginning of the War of Resistance Against Japan. These were written because they were necessary to meet the needs of the time and could not be avoided.” [3]3 “Soviet movement” refers to the establishment of Soviet-style (council-based) political power structures in the rural revolutionary base areas led by the CPC from the late 1920s to the 1930s.(P109) What is referred to here as “necessary to meet the needs of the time and could not be avoided” means that the creation of the “On Practice” philosophical system lay in answering and resolving the major problems raised by the practice of the Chinese revolution; its background and reasons should be sought in the practical needs of the Chinese revolutionary practice.

这一点，毛泽东后来自己有过说明。1959年与1960年之交，他在谈到马克思主义需要适应时代变化而作出新的发展时，就批评了当时党内存在的一种观点，这种观点认为学习马克思主义哲学，只要读恩格斯的《反杜林论》和列宁的《唯物主义和经验批判主义》就够了，其他的书可以不必读。毛泽东明确表示这种观点是错误的，指出：“马克思这些老祖宗的书，必须读，他们的基本原理必须遵守，这是第一。但是，任何国家的共产党，任何国家的思想界，都要创造新的理论，写出新的著作，产生自己的理论家，来为当前的政治服务，单靠老祖宗是不行的。”[3](P109)他由此联系马克思主义哲学中国化的历史实际，谈了撰写《实践论》和《矛盾论》的背景和缘由，认为：“我们在第二次国内战争末期和抗战初期写了《实践论》、《矛盾论》，这些都是适应于当时的需要而不能不写的。”[3](P109)这里所说的“适应于当时的需要而不能不写的”，就是指“实践论”哲学体系的创立，在于回答和解决中国革命实践提出的重大问题，其背景和缘由应当在中国革命实践的现实需要中去找。

This major problem raised by the practice of the Chinese revolution was the relationship between the universal truth of Marxism and the concrete reality of China. Because this problem was not explicitly raised and deeply considered by the founders of Marxism, and no ready-made answer was given in the classic works of Marxism, the Chinese Communists did not become aware of the existence of this problem from the very beginning, let alone understand its importance from the outset. The answer and resolution of this problem went through a long period of exploration. Even Mao Zedong encountered difficulties on this issue and underwent an ideological process of arduous exploration.

这个中国革命实践所提出的重大问题，就是马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际的关系问题。由于这个问题不是马克思主义创始人就已经明确提出和深入思考的，在马克思主义经典著作中没有给出现成的答案，因此中国共产党人并不是一开始就意识到这个问题的存在，更不是一开始就懂得这个问题的重要性，对于这个问题的回答和解决，则经历了一段长时期的探索过程。即使是毛泽东，在这个问题上也曾遭遇困境，也曾经历了一个艰苦探索的思想历程。

From the time he participated in the founding activities of the Chinese Communist Party, Mao Zedong attached importance to the significance of Marxist philosophy for the Party. Between 1920 and 1921, through correspondence between China and France, he and his close friend Cai Hesen focused on discussing the issue of founding the Chinese Communist Party. One of the topics was the philosophical foundation of the Party, from which they drew the important conclusion that “the materialist conception of history is the philosophical basis of our Party.” [4]4 “Opportunism or putschism” refers to two erroneous tendencies in revolutionary strategy: opportunism (tailism, compromising with the enemy) and putschism (adventurism, reckless action without mass support).(P4) Later, as a commander of the Party on the front line of the Chinese revolution in the countryside, Mao Zedong creatively linked the materialist conception of history with investigation and research, proposing that “we are proponents of the materialist conception of history; everything must be examined from both historical and environmental aspects to get the truth,” [4]4 “Opportunism or putschism” refers to two erroneous tendencies in revolutionary strategy: opportunism (tailism, compromising with the enemy) and putschism (adventurism, reckless action without mass support).(P74) and emphasizing that “no investigation, no right to speak,” [5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P109) striving to make investigation and research an important method for guiding the practice of the Chinese revolution with the materialist conception of history. For this purpose, he personally went deep into the rural areas of southern China to conduct investigations and research, understanding the Chinese countryside, the Chinese peasants, the Chinese peasant revolution initiated by the Chinese Communist Party, and the Soviet movement that emerged after the Chinese revolution went deep into the countryside. He successively wrote a series of famous works on social investigation and, in the article *Oppose Book Worship*, used the materialist conception of history to theoretically summarize the significance and methods of investigation and research, emphasizing that “to depart from actual investigation and research will produce idealistic class estimates and idealistic work guidance; then the result will be either opportunism or putschism.” [5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P112) Through these highly practical theoretical works, Mao Zedong found the correct line and policies for the Chinese Communist Party to take root in the countryside and lead the peasants in the Chinese revolution, opening up a realistic path for the Chinese revolution to victory.

从参与中国共产党创建活动时起，毛泽东就重视马克思主义哲学之于党的重要性。1920年至1921年间，他与好友蔡和森通过法中两国间的书信往来，集中探讨了中国共产党创建问题，其中的一个内容就是党的哲学基础问题，由此得出了“唯物史观是吾党哲学的根据”[4](P4)的重要结论。以后，毛泽东作为党在中国农村革命第一线的指挥员，又创造性地把唯物史观与调查研究联系起来，提出“我们是唯物史观论者，凡事要从历史和环境两方面考察才能得到真相”，[4](P74)强调“没有调查，没有发言权”，[5](P109)力求把调查研究作为运用唯物史观指导中国革命实践的重要方法。他为此亲自深入中国南方农村进行调查研究，了解中国农村，了解中国农民，了解中国共产党发起的中国农民革命，了解中国革命深入农村后出现的苏维埃运动，先后撰写出一系列社会调查名篇，并在《反对本本主义》一文中运用唯物史观，从理论上对调查研究的意义和方法进行了总结，强调“离开实际调查就要产生唯心的阶级估量和唯心的工作指导，那末，它的结果，不是机会主义，便是盲动主义”。[5](P112)毛泽东通过这些实践性很强的理论工作，找到了中国共产党扎根农村、领导农民进行中国革命的正确的路线和政策，开辟了中国革命通向胜利的现实道路。

It was precisely in revolutionary practice and social investigation that Mao Zedong keenly perceived that there was another major problem in the practice of the Chinese revolution that urgently required the Chinese Communists to answer and resolve: the relationship between the universal truth of Marxism and the concrete reality of China. In *Oppose Book Worship*, Mao Zedong pointed out: “We must study the ‘books’ of Marxism, but they must be combined with the actual situation in our country. We need ‘books,’ but we must definitely correct the book worship that is divorced from actual circumstances.” [5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P111-112) Obviously, he had here clearly raised the problem of the relationship between the universal truth of Marxism and the concrete reality of China, pointing out the extreme importance of answering and resolving this problem for the practice of the Chinese revolution. However, because Mao Zedong’s understanding of Marxist philosophy at that time was mainly limited to the materialist conception of history and had not yet transcended the level of concrete empirical experience to rise to the height of general philosophical theory, he could not yet provide an essential and profound answer and resolution to this major problem from the perspective of Marxist philosophy, guiding the Chinese Communists of that time to ideologically recognize the harm of dogmatism and break free from its shackles. As a result, Mao Zedong was criticized by dogmatists within the Party, who regarded him as a “narrow empiricist” who only had concrete experience but did not understand Marxist theory. His highly practical theoretical works were also denied, being asserted that “Marxism cannot come out of the mountains and valleys.” This caused Mao Zedong to encounter an ideological predicament.

正是在革命实践和社会调查中，毛泽东敏锐地觉察到，中国革命实践还有一个重大问题，亟待中国共产党人作出回答和解决，这就是马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际的关系问题。在《反对本本主义》中，毛泽东指出：“马克思主义的‘本本’是要学习的，但是必须同我国的实际情况相结合。我们需要‘本本’，但是一定要纠正脱离实际情况的本本主义。”[5](P111-112)很显然，他在这里已经明确地提出了马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际的关系问题，指出了回答和解决这个问题对于中国革命实践的极端重要性。但由于当时毛泽东对马克思主义哲学的理解主要局限于唯物史观，还没有超越具体经验性层面上升到一般哲学理论的高度，因而还不能对这个重大问题从马克思主义哲学上作出本质而深刻的回答和解决，引导当时的中国共产党人从思想上认清教条主义的危害、走出教条主义的束缚。毛泽东由此受到党内教条主义者的指责，被视为只有具体经验而不懂得马克思主义理论的“狭隘经验主义者”；他的这些实践性很强的理论工作也遭到否定，被断言为“山沟里出不了马克思主义”。这使得毛泽东遭遇了思想困境。

Mao Zedong emerged from this ideological predicament after he led the Red Army to northern Shaanxi and concluded the Long March. The relatively stable environment in northern Shaanxi allowed Mao, while handling urgent matters of the Party, government, and military, to pay attention to the dialectical materialism movement then unfolding in the major cities under Kuomintang rule, such as Shanghai and Beiping. This philosophical movement occurred at the turn of the 1920s and 1930s. At that time, a group of Chinese Marxists engaged in theoretical work, Chinese Marxist philosophers, and scholars who endorsed Marxist philosophy broke through the White Terror of the reactionary Kuomintang regime to translate and introduce original Marxist philosophical texts and the latest foreign Marxist philosophical writings, and engaged in ideological debates with anti-Marxists and pseudo-Marxists. This vigorously promoted the dissemination, development, and adaptation of dialectical materialism to the Chinese context, producing dialectical materialism works written by Chinese themselves, represented by Ai Siqi’s *Popular Philosophy* and Li Da’s *Outline of Sociology*, thereby constructing a dialectical materialism form of Chinese Marxist philosophy. If, in the 1920s after the May Fourth Movement, the dissemination and development of Marxist philosophy in China had historical materialism as its main content, then by the 1930s, with the rise and development of the dialectical materialism movement, the center of gravity of the dissemination and development of Marxist philosophy in China shifted from historical materialism to dialectical materialism. With his profound philosophical cultivation, Mao Zedong diligently collected and earnestly studied the achievements of this philosophical movement, discovering from it that dialectical materialism could, from the perspective of general philosophical theory, answer and resolve the question of the relationship between the universal truth of Marxism and the concrete realities of China.

毛泽东走出这一思想困境，是在他统率红军到达陕北、结束长征之后。陕北相对稳定的环境，使毛泽东在处理党政军大事急事之外，关注到正在上海、北平等国民党统治的大城市中开展的唯物辩证法运动。这一哲学运动发生于20世纪20年代与30年代之交。当时一批从事理论工作的中国马克思主义者、中国马克思主义哲学家、中国赞成马克思主义哲学的学者，冲破国民党反动统治的白色恐怖，对马克思主义哲学原典和国外马克思主义哲学最新著述进行翻译介绍，同反马克思主义者和假马克思主义者展开思想论战，从而有力地推动了辩证唯物主义在中国的传播、发展和中国化，产生了以艾思奇著《大众哲学》和李达著《社会学大纲》为代表的中国人自己撰写的辩证唯物主义著作，建构起中国马克思主义哲学的辩证唯物主义形态。如果说五四运动后的20世纪20年代，马克思主义哲学在中国的传播和发展是以唯物史观为其主要内容；那么进至20世纪30年代，由于唯物辩证法运动的兴起和开展，使马克思主义哲学在中国的传播和发展的重心由唯物史观转向辩证唯物主义。毛泽东以深厚的哲学素养，对这一哲学运动的成果进行了努力搜集和认真研读，从中发现辩证唯物主义能够从一般哲学理论上，对马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际的关系问题作出回答和解决。

Mao Zedong thereby brought the achievements of the dialectical materialism movement from the big cities into the yellow earth of northern Shaanxi, and into the leading collective of the Chinese Communist Party that was leading the Chinese revolution on this land. In June 1937, in his speech at a meeting of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, Mao discussed that Chinese Communists must handle the question of the relationship between the universal truth of Marxism and the concrete realities of China, and to ideologically recognize the harm of dogmatism and break free from its shackles, they must understand dialectical materialism, apply dialectical materialism, and popularize dialectical materialism. He pointed out: “The Party has only fifteen years of history; the tradition of the theory and practice of Marxism is not yet very deep; it cannot yet solve every problem with Marxist principle; not everyone has learned dialectical materialism well from an early stage.” [4]4 “Opportunism or putschism” refers to two erroneous tendencies in revolutionary strategy: opportunism (tailism, compromising with the enemy) and putschism (adventurism, reckless action without mass support).(P508) He further proposed: “Some mistakes (for example, the incomplete understanding of the characteristics of the Chinese revolution) were not only made after the Fourth Plenary Session (i.e., the Sixth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC — editor’s note), but were also made before. This is because dialectical materialism thought had not yet been popularized and deepened within the Party. … To overcome this tradition lies in popularizing and deepening the Marxist methodology (dialectical materialism) among the majority of cadres.” [4]4 “Opportunism or putschism” refers to two erroneous tendencies in revolutionary strategy: opportunism (tailism, compromising with the enemy) and putschism (adventurism, reckless action without mass support).(P509-510) Precisely thus, in Mao’s view, regarding the philosophical foundation of the Chinese Communist Party, besides speaking of historical materialism, it was also necessary to include dialectical materialism, and even to emphasize dialectical materialism. In his reading notes of the time, he wrote: “Dialectical materialism is the decisive element in Marxism.” [6]6 The “Second Domestic Revolutionary War” (1927–1937) is the official Chinese term for the period of the Chinese Civil War between the CPC and the Kuomintang, also known as the Ten-Year Civil War.(P14) From emphasizing historical materialism to stressing dialectical materialism was a great leap in his understanding of Marxist philosophy.

毛泽东由此把唯物辩证法运动的成果，从大城市引入陕北黄土地，引入正在这块土地上领导中国革命的中国共产党领导集体。1937年6月，毛泽东在中共中央政治局会议的发言中，就谈到中国共产党人要处理好马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际的关系问题，从思想上认清教条主义的危害、走出教条主义的束缚，必须要懂得辩证唯物主义、运用辩证唯物主义、普及辩证唯物主义。他指出：“党还只有十五年历史，马克思主义的理论与实际的传统还不十分深厚，解决问题还不能样样带马克思主义原则性，还没有很早及人人都学好唯物辩证法。”[4](P508)他进而提出：“有些错误（例如不完全了解中国革命的特点），也不是原在四中全会（即中共六届四中全会——引者注）后犯了，而是以前也犯了的。这是由于唯物辩证法思想在党内还没有普及与深入的原故。……要克服这个传统，在于普及与深入马克思主义的方法论（唯物辩证法）于多数干部中。”[4](P509-510)正是这样，在毛泽东看来，对于中国共产党的哲学基础，除了讲唯物史观，还必须包括辩证唯物主义，甚至更强调辩证唯物主义。他在当时的读书批注中写道：“唯物辩证法在马克斯主义（即马克思主义——引者注）中是决定要素。”[6](P14)从重视唯物史观到强调辩证唯物主义，是他对马克思主义哲学理解的一大飞跃。

It was precisely based on discovering, from the major issues raised by the practice of the Chinese revolution, the significance of dialectical materialism for Chinese Communists, that Mao Zedong, between 1936 and 1937, concentrated his energy on in-depth research and vigorous advocacy of dialectical materialism, and personally went to the Chinese People’s Anti-Japanese Military and Political University to give systematic lectures. For this purpose, he wrote *Dialectical Materialism (Lecture Outline)*, with *On Practice* and *On Contradiction* as its focus and culmination, thereby constructing the core content of the “practice-oriented” philosophical system. It was precisely thus that Mao later said, “We wrote *On Practice* and *On Contradiction* at the end of the Second Domestic Revolutionary War and the beginning of the War of Resistance Against Japan; these were written to meet the needs of the time and could not but be written.” [3]3 “Soviet movement” refers to the establishment of Soviet-style (council-based) political power structures in the rural revolutionary base areas led by the CPC from the late 1920s to the 1930s.(P109)

正是基于从中国革命实践提出的重大问题中发现了辩证唯物主义之于中国共产党人的重要意义，毛泽东于1936年至1937年间，集中精力对辩证唯物主义进行了深入研究和大力倡导，并亲自到中国人民抗日军政大学进行系统讲授，为此撰写出以《实践论》和《矛盾论》为重点和归结的《辩证法唯物论（讲授提纲）》，建构了“实践论”哲学体系的核心内容。正是这样，毛泽东后来才说“我们在第二次国内战争末期和抗战初期写了《实践论》、《矛盾论》，这些都是适应于当时的需要而不能不写的”。[3](P109)

II. Shifting the Emphasis of Elaborating Dialectical Materialism from Ontology to Epistemology

二、把阐发辩证唯物主义的着重点由本体论移至认识论

Mao Zedong’s research and lectures on dialectical materialism, in terms of their main theoretical sources, were a direct absorption of the achievements of the dialectical materialism movement. However, the *Dialectical Materialism (Lecture Outline)* he wrote was not a mere recitation of Soviet Marxist philosophy textbooks, nor a copy of Chinese scholars’ Marxist philosophy works. Rather, it contained his own reflections integrated with the practice of the Chinese revolution, and especially had its own emphasis in elaborating dialectical materialism. This emphasis was on elaborating the epistemology and dialectics of dialectical materialism, thereby answering and resolving the question of the relationship between the universal truth of Marxism and the concrete realities of China. From this, he wrote *On Practice* and *On Contradiction*, constructing the core content of the “practice-oriented” philosophical system.

毛泽东研究和讲授辩证唯物主义，从主要理论来源看，是对唯物辩证法运动成果的直接吸取。但他撰写的《辩证法唯物论（讲授提纲）》，并不是照着苏联马克思主义哲学教科书来讲的，也不是照搬中国学者的马克思主义哲学著作来写的，而是有着自己结合中国革命实践的思考，特别是有着自己阐发辩证唯物主义的着重点，这就是阐发辩证唯物主义的认识论及辩证法，以此来回答和解决马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际的关系问题，由此撰写出《实践论》和《矛盾论》，建构了“实践论”哲学体系的核心内容。

Before writing *Dialectical Materialism (Lecture Outline)*, Mao Zedong earnestly studied the latest foreign Marxist philosophical works translated by Chinese scholars during the dialectical materialism movement. The *Collection of Mao Zedong’s Philosophical Annotations*, compiled by the Party Literature Research Office of the CPC Central Committee, includes two of Mao’s reading notes from this period: one is *Annotations on the Book ‘Course on Dialectical Materialism’ by Shirokov, Eisenberg, et al., Translated by Li Da and Lei Zhongjian (Third Chinese Edition)*, and the other is *Annotations on the Book ‘Dialectical and Historical Materialism’ (Volume 1) by Mitin, et al., Translated by Shen Zhiyuan*. These annotations total over ten thousand characters. Both of these Chinese translations of Soviet Marxist philosophy textbooks were important translated works published during the dialectical materialism movement, showing the arduous effort Mao put into absorbing these achievements at that time. However, as can be seen from these annotations, Mao studied these translated works not for the general purpose of strengthening his own Marxist philosophical cultivation, but to answer and resolve the question of the relationship between the universal truth of Marxism and the concrete realities of China. His reading had a clear purpose and direction, with the focus placed on studying the epistemology and dialectics of dialectical materialism. For example, regarding the book *Course on Dialectical Materialism*, Mao wrote few annotations on Chapter One, “Materialism and Idealism,” but wrote nearly ten thousand characters of annotations on Chapter Two, “Dialectics as Epistemology,” and Chapter Three, “The Fundamental Law of Dialectics — The Law of the Transformation of Quality into Quantity and Quantity into Quality.” The top, bottom, left, and right margins of some pages were densely covered with his comments, illustrating the center of gravity of his reading and thinking.

毛泽东在撰写《辩证法唯物论（讲授提纲）》前，曾认真研读中国学者在唯物辩证法运动中翻译的国外马克思主义哲学最新著作。在中共中央文献研究室所编的《毛泽东哲学批注集》中，收录有毛泽东在这一时期的两篇读书批注，一篇是《读西洛可夫、爱森堡等著李达、雷仲坚译〈辩证法唯物论教程〉（中译本第三版）一书的批注》，一篇是《读米丁等著沈志远译〈辩证唯物论与历史唯物论〉（上册）一书的批注》，共一万多字批注。这两部苏联人写的马克思主义哲学教科书中译本，都是在唯物辩证法运动中问世的重要译著，由此可见当年毛泽东为吸取这些成果所下的艰苦功夫。但从这些批注中可以看出，毛泽东研读这些译著，不是一般意义的为加强自身马克思主义哲学素养而读书，而是为着回答和解决马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际的关系问题而读书，有其鲜明的目的性和指向性，读书的着重点放在研讨辩证唯物主义的认识论及辩证法上。如对于《辩证法唯物论教程》一书，毛泽东对第一章《唯物论与观念论》写的批注就不多，而对第二章《当作认识论看的辩证法》和第三章《辩证法的根本法则——由质到量及由量到质的转变的法则》则有近万字的批注，一些页面的天头地脚、左右两侧都密密麻麻写满了批语，由此可见他读书思考的重心所在。

Similarly, Mao Zedong placed great importance on Marxist philosophical works written by Chinese scholars, but he did not confine himself to the frameworks of these works. Ai Siqi’s *Popular Philosophy* and Li Da’s *Outline of Sociology* both took ontology as the focal point for expounding dialectical materialism. For instance, *Popular Philosophy* consists of four chapters. Apart from the first chapter, “Introduction,” the logical progression from Chapter 2, “Ontology (Worldview),” through Chapter 3, “Epistemology,” to Chapter 4, “Methodology,” is very clearly evident. Ai Siqi explained this logical structure, arguing that to clarify why dialectical materialism is more correct than other philosophies and more consistent with factual truth, one must proceed in three steps: “The first step is to discuss what the world itself actually is. Is it matter? Is it spirit? This step of discussion is called ontology; the second step is to discuss how we can know everything in the world. This step of discussion is called epistemology; the third step is to discuss how everything in the world, as well as human thought, changes and moves, and by what laws it changes and moves. That is to say, what are the most universal and fundamental laws of change for all things in the world? This step of discussion is called methodology.” [7]7 Ai Siqi, *Popular Philosophy*, in *Complete Works of Ai Siqi*, vol. 2, p. 140. [This note explains the source of the quotation from Ai Siqi’s work, which is a well-known Chinese Marxist philosophical text from the 1930s.](P140) Among these three parts of dialectical materialism, he believed that ontology, as a worldview exploring the fundamental philosophical question of the relationship between subject and object, was the most fundamental and crucial, and therefore he placed the emphasis of his exposition of dialectical materialism on ontology. The formation of this logical structure had not only theoretical reasons but also practical ones. This was because, alongside the rise of the dialectical materialism movement, a debate on dialectical materialism unfolded between the anti-Marxist Zhang Dongsun and the pseudo-Marxist Ye Qing. Although the two sides in the debate held different views and attacked each other, they converged on the question of whether Marxist philosophy had an ontology, arriving at the same conclusion by different paths: Zhang Dongsun, from a humanist philosophical standpoint, strongly argued for the importance of ontology to philosophy, claiming that Marxist philosophy was in fact merely a social philosophy or a philosophy of history and had no ontology at all; Ye Qing, adopting a scientistic philosophical attitude, strongly argued that the direction of modern philosophy lay in scientization and positivization, declaring that Marxist philosophy had already become a positive science and was no longer philosophy in the traditional sense, thereby also denying that Marxist philosophy had an ontology. Their denial of the ontology of Marxist philosophy distorted the core content of Marxist philosophy and did great harm to the correct understanding of Marxist philosophy among Chinese people at the time. This led Ai Siqi and Li Da to attach great importance to the ontology of Marxist philosophy, taking it as the starting point and focus for systematically expounding dialectical materialism. However, when Mao Zedong concentrated his efforts on thinking about and expounding dialectical materialism in northern Shaanxi, the ideological enemies he faced had already changed. They were no longer simply the initiators of the dialectical materialism debate, but mainly the dogmatists within the Chinese Communist Party who had the Communist International as their background. Overcoming this extremely harmful dogmatism from its ideological roots, effectively integrating the universal truth of Marxism with the concrete realities of China, and enabling the Party to avoid repeating historical mistakes in the upcoming War of Resistance Against Japan became the important problems he urgently needed to solve at that time. It was precisely for this reason that, in the *Lecture Outline on Dialectical Materialism*, although Mao Zedong also began by discussing the battle between the two camps of materialism and idealism in philosophy and touched upon the issue of ontology, he shifted the emphasis of his exposition of dialectical materialism from ontology to epistemology, emphasizing and highlighting that “dialectical materialism is the only scientific epistemology.” [8]8 Mao Zedong, *Lecture Outline on Dialectical Materialism*, in *Collected Works of Mao Zedong*, vol. 8, p. 28. [This note explains the source of the quotation from Mao’s lecture outline, which was a key text in the development of his philosophical thought.](P28)

同样，毛泽东很重视中国学者撰写的马克思主义哲学著作，但也没有局限在这些著作的框架中。艾思奇著《大众哲学》和李达著《社会学大纲》，都以本体论作为阐发辩证唯物主义的着重点。如《大众哲学》，全书共四章，除第一章《绪论》外，从第二章《本体论（世界观）》、第三章《认识论》到第四章《方法论》，十分鲜明地体现了由本体论而认识论而方法论的逻辑展开。艾思奇对于这一逻辑结构有过说明，认为要阐明辩证唯物主义比别的哲学更正确、更能与事实真理一致，要分做三步来讲：“第一步要先讲世界的本身究竟是什么东西？是物质吗？是精神吗？这一步的讨论，叫做本体论；第二步讲我们是怎样能认识世界上的一切？这一步的讨论叫做认识论；第三步讲世界的一切以及我们人类的思想等等是怎样变化运动，是依着什么法则变化运动的？也就是说，世界上一切事物的最普遍最根本的变化法则是什么？这一步的讨论叫做方法论。”[7](P140)在辩证唯物主义这三个部分中，他认为本体论作为世界观探讨主观和客观关系这一哲学根本问题，最为根本和关键，因而将阐发辩证唯物主义的着重点放在本体论上。这种逻辑结构的形成，除了理论的原因外，还有现实的原因。这就是在唯物辩证法运动兴起的同时，在反马克思主义者张东荪和假马克思主义者叶青之间展开了唯物辩证法论战。论战双方虽然主张各异、互相攻击，但却在对待马克思主义哲学有没有本体论问题上，呈现出殊途同归的一致性：张东荪立足人文主义哲学立场，力主本体论之于哲学的重要性，认为马克思主义哲学实际上只是一种社会哲学或历史哲学，根本就没有本体论；叶青则取科学主义哲学态度，力主现代哲学的走向在于科学化、实证化，宣称马克思主义哲学已经变成了实证性的科学而不再是传统意义的哲学，由此也否定了马克思主义哲学有本体论。他们对马克思主义哲学本体论的否定，曲解了马克思主义哲学的核心内容，对当时中国人正确地理解马克思主义哲学产生了很大的危害性，这就使得艾思奇、李达十分重视马克思主义哲学本体论，以此作为系统阐发辩证唯物主义的出发点和着重点。而当毛泽东在陕北集中精力思考和阐发辩证唯物主义的时候，他所面对的思想上的敌人已经发生了变化，不再是单纯的唯物辩证法论战的发难者，而主要是中国共产党内以共产国际为背景的教条主义。从思想根源上克服这种危害极大的教条主义，把马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际很好地结合起来，使党在即将到来的抗日战争中不再重犯历史上的错误，成为他在当时所迫切需要解决的重要问题。正是这样，在《辩证法唯物论（讲授提纲）》中，毛泽东虽然也是从哲学中的唯物主义与唯心主义两军对战讲起，谈了本体论问题，但却把阐发辩证唯物主义的着重点由本体论移至认识论，强调和凸显“唯物辩证法是惟一科学的认识论”。[8](P28)

This shift in the emphasis of the exposition of dialectical materialism is clearly reflected in Mao Zedong’s writing of the *Lecture Outline on Dialectical Materialism*. This lecture outline is divided into three chapters and sixteen sections. Chapter 1, “Idealism and Materialism,” has four sections: Section 1, “The Battle of the Two Camps in Philosophy”; Section 2, “The Difference Between Idealism and Materialism”; Section 3, “The Roots of the Emergence and Development of Idealism”; Section 4, “The Roots of the Emergence and Development of Materialism.” Chapter 2, “Dialectical Materialism,” has eleven sections: Section 1, “Dialectical Materialism Is the Weapon of the Proletarian Revolution”; Section 2, “The Relationship Between Old Philosophical Heritage and Dialectical Materialism”; Section 3, “The Consistency of Worldview and Methodology in Dialectical Materialism”; Section 4, “The Question of the Object of Dialectical Materialism—What Does Dialectical Materialism Study?”; Section 5, “On Matter”; Section 6, “On Motion (Theory of Development)”; Section 7, “On Space and Time”; Section 8, “On Consciousness”; Section 9, “The Theory of Reflection”; Section 10, “The Theory of Truth”; Section 11, “On Practice.” Chapter 3, “Materialist Dialectics,” originally planned to have three sections: Section 1, “The Law of the Unity of Opposites”; Section 2, “The Law of the Transformation of Quantity into Quality”; Section 3, “The Law of the Negation of the Negation.” However, in reality, only the first section was written; the latter two sections could not be completed due to the full-scale outbreak of the War of Resistance Against Japan. Therefore, the entire lecture outline actually consists of only sixteen sections. Judging from the content of each section of the lecture outline, the first fourteen sections are all outline in nature. In these sections, Mao Zedong provides a concise and essential discussion of the basic theories of dialectical materialism, including issues of ontology; it is precisely for this reason that he called this work a “lecture outline.” In the last two sections, namely Section 11 of Chapter 2, “On Practice,” and Section 1 of Chapter 3, “The Law of the Unity of Opposites,” he elaborates in detail, making these two sections the most detailed, most profound, and most brilliant content of the *Lecture Outline on Dialectical Materialism*. They possess a logical structure that echoes each other while being able to stand alone as independent essays. Later, after revision, these two parts became Mao Zedong’s famous philosophical works *On Practice* and *On Contradiction*.

这种阐发辩证唯物主义的着重点的转移，在毛泽东对《辩证法唯物论（讲授提纲）》的撰写中鲜明地体现出来。这个讲授提纲共分三章十六节，第一章《唯心论与唯物论》有四节：第一节《哲学中的两军对战》，第二节《唯心论与唯物论的区别》，第三节《唯心论发生与发展的根源》，第四节《唯物论发生与发展的根源》；第二章《辩证法唯物论》有十一节：第一节《辩证法唯物论是无产阶级革命的武器》，第二节《旧的哲学遗产同辩证法唯物论的关系》，第三节《辩证法唯物论中宇宙观和方法论的一致性》，第四节《唯物辩证法的对象问题——唯物辩证法是研究什么的》，第五节《物质论》，第六节《运动论（发展论）》，第七节《时空论》，第八节《意识论》，第九节《反映论》，第十节《真理论》，第十一节《实践论》；第三章《唯物辩证法》原计划写三节：第一节《矛盾统一法则》，第二节《质量互变法则》，第三节《否定之否定法则》，但实际上只写出了第一节，后面两节因抗日战争全面爆发而未能完成，因此全部讲授提纲实际上只有十六节。从讲授提纲各节内容上看，前十四节都是提纲性质。在这些章节中，毛泽东对辩证唯物主义的基本理论，包括本体论问题，作了简明扼要的论述；他称这一著作为“讲授提纲”，正是据此而来。而在最后两节，即第二章第十一节《实践论》和第三章第一节《矛盾统一法则》，他则详细地加以展开阐述，使这两节成为《辩证法唯物论（讲授提纲）》中最为详细、最为深刻、最为精彩的内容，具有前后呼应而又能独立成篇的逻辑结构，以后这两个部分经过修订，就成为毛泽东的哲学名篇《实践论》和《矛盾论》。

What is particularly noteworthy is that Mao Zedong shifted the emphasis of his exposition of dialectical materialism from ontology to epistemology, not simply on the grounds of the practical needs of the Chinese revolution, but by striving to find an internal logical basis within dialectical materialism itself. In the *Outline Lecture Notes on Dialectical Materialism*, Mao placed great importance on Lenin’s idea of the unity of dialectics, epistemology, and logic (then translated as *lunlixue*), emphasizing and highlighting it theoretically, making it a key and overarching concept for grasping dialectical materialism. Through this, he elucidated that dialectical materialism can and must transform ontology as a worldview into a method for understanding and changing the world, and that the focus of its exposition is entirely justified in shifting to epistemology. He pointed out: “Dialectical materialism is the only scientific epistemology, and it is also the only scientific logic.” [8]8 Mao Zedong, *Lecture Outline on Dialectical Materialism*, in *Collected Works of Mao Zedong*, vol. 8, p. 28. [This note explains the source of the quotation from Mao’s lecture outline, which was a key text in the development of his philosophical thought.](P28) Here, because dialectical materialism studies the origin and development of human cognition of the external world, studies the transition of human knowledge from ignorance to knowledge, from incomplete knowledge to more complete knowledge, and studies the increasingly profound and abundant reflection of the laws of development of nature and human society in the human mind, dialectical materialism is therefore consistent with epistemology; because dialectical materialism studies the most general laws of development of the objective world, and studies the forms of reflection of the state of development of the objective world in human thought, dialectical materialism is therefore also consistent with logic. Regarding this philosophical idea of Lenin’s, Mao also used a passage with a strong Chinese flavor to explain: “Dialectical materialism is the scientific methodology of Marxism, it is the method of cognition, it is the method of logic, yet it is the worldview. The world is originally a developing material world—this is the worldview; taking this worldview and turning it around to look at the world, to study the problems of the world, to guide revolution, to do work, to engage in production, to command operations, to discuss people’s merits and demerits—this is methodology; there is no other separate methodology besides this. Therefore, in the hands of Marxists, worldview and methodology are one and the same thing; dialectics, epistemology, and logic are also one and the same thing.” [8]8 Mao Zedong, *Lecture Outline on Dialectical Materialism*, in *Collected Works of Mao Zedong*, vol. 8, p. 28. [This note explains the source of the quotation from Mao’s lecture outline, which was a key text in the development of his philosophical thought.](P30) From this, he drew the conclusion: “Dialectical materialism is the proletariat’s worldview, and at the same time it is the proletariat’s method for understanding the surrounding world and the method for revolutionary action; it is the unity of worldview and methodology.” [8]8 Mao Zedong, *Lecture Outline on Dialectical Materialism*, in *Collected Works of Mao Zedong*, vol. 8, p. 28. [This note explains the source of the quotation from Mao’s lecture outline, which was a key text in the development of his philosophical thought.](P29) This, based on the internal logic of dialectical materialism, demonstrated the rationality of shifting the emphasis of the exposition of dialectical materialism from ontology to epistemology.

尤其值得重视的是，毛泽东把阐发辩证唯物主义的着重点由本体论移至认识论，不是简单地以中国革命的现实需要为其理由，而是力求从辩证唯物主义中找到内在逻辑根据。在《辩证法唯物论（讲授提纲）》中，毛泽东十分重视列宁所说的辩证法、认识论、逻辑学（当时译为论理学）相统一的思想，从理论上加以强调和凸显，使之成为把握辩证唯物主义的一个关键性和总体性的思想，以此阐明辩证唯物主义可以而且必须将作为世界观的本体论转化为认识世界和改造世界的方法，其阐发的着重点完全有理由移至认识论。他指出：“唯物辩证法是惟一科学的认识论，也是惟一科学的论理学。”[8](P28)在这里，由于唯物辩证法研究人对外部世界认识的发生和发展，研究人的认识由不知到知、由不完全的知到更完全的知的转移，研究自然界和人类社会的发展法则在人的头脑中日益深刻和日益增多的反映，因而唯物辩证法与认识论是一致的；由于唯物辩证法研究客观世界的最一般的发展法则，研究客观世界的发展状况在人的思维中的反映形态，因而唯物辩证法与论理学也是一致的。对于列宁的这一哲学思想，毛泽东还用一段有着浓厚中国味的话来进行说明：“唯物辩证法是马克思主义的科学方法论，是认识的方法，是论理的方法，然而它就是世界观。世界本来是发展的物质世界，这是世界观；拿了这样的世界观转过来去看世界，去研究世界上的问题，去指导革命，去做工作，去从事生产，去指挥作战，去议论人家长短，这就是方法论，此外并没有别的什么单独的方法论。所以在马克思主义者手里，世界观同方法论是一个东西，辩证法、认识论、论理学，也是一个东西。”[8](P30)由此，他得出了结论：“辩证法唯物论是无产阶级的宇宙观，同时又是无产阶级认识周围世界的方法和革命行动的方法；它是宇宙观和方法论的一致体。”[8](P29)这就依据辩证唯物主义的内在逻辑，论证了把阐发辩证唯物主义的着重点由本体论移至认识论的合理性。

Thus it can be seen that, in order to answer and resolve the question of the relationship between the universal truth of Marxism and the concrete reality of China, Mao Zedong shifted the emphasis of his exposition of dialectical materialism from ontology to epistemology, using *On Practice* and *On Contradiction* to construct the core content of the “practice theory” philosophical system. This was not only a direct appropriation of the achievements of the dialectical materialist movement, but also an innovative development of those achievements.

由此可见，毛泽东为回答和解决马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际的关系问题，把阐发辩证唯物主义的着重点由本体论移至认识论，以《实践论》和《矛盾论》建构“实践论”哲学体系的核心内容，不仅是对唯物辩证法运动成果的直接吸取，而且是对唯物辩证法运动成果的创新性发展。

III. Using *On Practice* and *On Contradiction* to Construct the Core Content of the “Practice Theory” Philosophical System

三、以《实践论》和《矛盾论》建构“实践论”哲学体系的核心内容

The core of Mao Zedong’s construction of the “practice theory” philosophical system through *On Practice* and *On Contradiction* lies in systematically articulating a set of Sinicized dialectical materialist epistemology and dialectics. Examining the texts of *On Practice* and *On Contradiction*, the internal logic contained within them is clearly visible. This logic begins with a definition of the concept of “practice,” takes practice as the foundation of all human cognitive activity, takes the relationship between cognition and practice as the basic relationship of human cognitive activity, then proceeds to elucidate the relationship between practice and cognition in cognitive activity from the perspective of epistemology, and the relationship between the particular and the universal in cognitive activity from the perspective of dialectics, finally arriving at the epistemological issues in the practice of the Chinese revolution, clarifying the relationship between the universal truth of Marxism and the concrete reality of China.

毛泽东以《实践论》和《矛盾论》建构“实践论”哲学体系的核心内容，在于系统地讲出了一套中国化的辩证唯物主义认识论及辩证法。对《实践论》和《矛盾论》文本进行梳理，其中所蕴含的内在逻辑清晰可见。这就是从对“实践”概念作出界定开始，把实践作为人的全部认识活动的基石，把认识和实践的关系作为人的认识活动的基本关系，进而从认识论上阐明认识活动中实践与认识的关系，从辩证法上阐明认识活动中特殊与一般的关系，最后落脚于中国革命实践中的认识论问题，阐明马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际的关系。

Providing a clear definition of the concept of “practice” is the starting point of the exposition of the “practice theory” philosophical system, and also the logical starting point of the “practice theory” philosophical system. Philosophers throughout history have had different understandings of the concept of “practice.” In the first thesis of his *Theses on Feuerbach*, Marx put forward his own understanding of the concept of “practice,” which differed from both old materialism and idealism. He did not agree with old materialism’s understanding of human existence and activity solely from the perspective of nature, nor did he agree with idealism’s understanding of human existence and practice solely from the perspective of abstract reason. Rather, he held that practice is the activity of sensuous human beings, a revolutionary and critical activity, an “objective activity” [9]9 This refers to Marx’s first thesis on Feuerbach, where he criticizes both old materialism and idealism for their inadequate conceptions of practice, defining practice as “objective activity” (*gegenständliche Tätigkeit*).(P54) capable of changing the objective world. In the history of Chinese philosophy, the concept of “action” (*xing*) in the relationship between knowledge and action is a concept roughly equivalent to “practice.” In *On Practice*, Mao Zedong referred to the relationship between cognition and practice as “the relationship between knowledge and action”; [5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P282) however, Chinese philosophers’ understanding of “action” also underwent a process of change from an ethical meaning to an epistemological meaning. Therefore, providing a clear definition of the concept of “practice” in terms of Marxist philosophy was the first task Mao Zedong had to undertake when expounding the “practice theory” philosophical system.

对“实践”概念作出明确界定，是“实践论”哲学体系的论叙出发点，也是“实践论”哲学体系的逻辑起点。对于“实践”概念，古往今来的哲学家有过不同的理解。马克思在《关于费尔巴哈的提纲》第一条中，就提出了自己不同于旧唯物主义和唯心主义对“实践”概念的理解，不赞成旧唯物主义只从自然界来理解人的存在及其活动，也不赞成唯心主义只从抽象的理性来理解人的存在及其实践，而认为实践是感性的人的活动，是革命的批判的活动，是能够改变客观世界的“对象性的活动”。[9](P54)在中国哲学史上，知行关系中“行”的概念，是一个与“实践”概念大体相同的概念，毛泽东在《实践论》中即把认识和实践的关系称为“知和行的关系”；[5](P282)但中国哲学家对于“行”的理解，也有一个由伦理学意义向认识论意义的变化过程。因此，对“实践”概念予以马克思主义哲学的明确界定，是毛泽东阐发“实践论”哲学体系时首先要做的工作。

At the beginning of *On Practice*, Mao Zedong pointed out: “Before Marx, materialism examined the problem of knowledge apart from the social nature of man and apart from his historical development, and was therefore incapable of understanding the dependence of knowledge on social practice, that is, the dependence of knowledge on production and class struggle.” [5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P282) Here, in direct continuity with Marx, he emphasized that man cannot be understood apart from his social nature or his historical development, and further advocated understanding human practice through man’s social nature and historical development. It is precisely in this way that Mao referred to the “practice” he discussed as “social practice,” to distinguish it from the activity or practice discussed by old materialism and idealism, and also to avoid confusion with the daily activities of eating, drinking, and ordinary social interactions. From then on, “social practice” became an important concept in Mao Zedong’s philosophical thought, appearing repeatedly in his philosophical expositions, even into his later years. This endowed the concept of “practice” with a clear connotation within Marxist philosophy.

在《实践论》开篇，毛泽东即指出：“马克思以前的唯物论，离开人的社会性，离开人的历史发展，去观察认识问题，因此不能了解认识对社会实践的依赖关系，即认识对生产和阶级斗争的依赖关系。”[5](P282)在这里，他与马克思一脉相承，强调不能离开社会性、离开历史发展来理解人，进而主张由人的社会性、人的历史发展来理解人的实践。正是这样，毛泽东又把所讲的“实践”称为“社会实践”，以与旧唯物主义和唯心主义所讲的活动或实践相区别，也与日常生活中的饮食起居、洒扫应对不致相混淆。自此以后，“社会实践”成为毛泽东哲学思想的一个重要概念，在毛泽东的哲学论述中反复出现，直至他的晚年仍然如此。这就赋予了“实践”概念以马克思主义哲学的明确内涵。

Mao Zedong also provided a concrete explanation of the extension of the concept of “practice.” In his view, the most basic content of social practice is, of course, the material production activities that people engage in to satisfy their basic survival needs such as food, clothing, shelter, and transportation; and, based on material production activities, people also unfold various social activities in politics, science, art, and other fields, thereby creating a rich and diverse human social life. These are also important contents of social practice. Therefore, from the perspective of extension, “social practice” mainly refers to three major categories of human social activities: material production, class struggle, and scientific experiment. These social activities develop with the development of human history. As human history has reached the present era, human social practice, especially class struggle, has also taken on entirely new characteristics: “This process of changing the world, which is determined according to scientific knowledge, has reached a historical juncture in the world and in China—a juncture unprecedented in history—that is, to overthrow entirely the dark side of the world and China and transform them into a bright world never before seen.” [5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P296) In this way, starting from both connotation and extension, Mao Zedong provided a clear definition of the concept of “practice” within Marxist philosophy, giving the “practice theory” philosophical system a clear and reliable logical starting point.

毛泽东又对“实践”概念的外延作了具体说明。在他看来，社会实践的最基本的内容，当然是人为了解决自己的衣食住行等基本生存需要所从事的物质生产活动；而以物质生产活动为基础，人又展开了政治、科学、艺术等多方面的社会性活动，从而创造了丰富多彩的人类社会生活，这些也是社会实践的重要内容。因此，“社会实践”从外延上看，主要指物质生产、阶级斗争、科学实验三大类人的社会性活动。这种社会性活动随着人类历史发展而发展。人类历史发展到现时代，人的社会实践，特别是阶级斗争也呈现出全新的特点：“这种根据科学认识而定下来的改造世界的实践过程，在世界、在中国均已到达了一个历史的时节——自有历史以来未曾有过的重大时节，这就是整个儿地推翻世界和中国的黑暗面，把它们转变过来成为前所未有的光明世界。”[5](P296)这样一来，毛泽东就从内涵和外延两方面入手，对“实践”概念作出了马克思主义哲学的明确界定，使“实践论”哲学体系具有了清晰可靠的逻辑起点。

After clearly defining the concept of “practice,” Mao Zedong placed practice within the framework of Marxist philosophy for examination, emphasizing the extreme importance of practice for dialectical materialism. He pointed out: “Marxist philosophy—dialectical materialism—has two most notable characteristics: one is its class character, openly declaring that dialectical materialism serves the proletariat; the other is its practical character, emphasizing the dependence of theory on practice, with theory based on practice and in turn serving practice.”[5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P284) The importance of practice that he emphasized, when viewed concretely, contains two layers of meaning: first, at the level of dialectical materialism, it emphasizes the dependence of theory on practice, i.e., theory is based on practice and in turn serves practice; second, at the level of the epistemology of dialectical materialism, it emphasizes the dependence of cognition on practice, i.e., cognition arises from practice and in turn serves practice. These two layers of meaning are interrelated: the first layer is more fundamental, more important, and more universal for dialectical materialism, while the second layer lays the foundation for the epistemology of dialectical materialism. Specifically, for Mao Zedong’s “practice theory” philosophical system, it mainly elaborates the second layer of meaning and thereby elucidates the first layer. This is what *On Practice* states: “The epistemology of dialectical materialism places practice in the primary position, holding that human cognition can in no way be separated from practice, and repudiating all erroneous theories that deny the importance of practice or separate cognition from practice. … The standpoint of practice is the first and basic standpoint of the epistemology of dialectical materialism.”[5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P284) It can be said that this provides the general program for unfolding the “practice theory” philosophical system.

在对“实践”概念作出明确界定后，毛泽东将实践置于马克思主义哲学中进行考察，强调实践对于辩证唯物主义的极端重要性，指出：“马克思主义的哲学辩证唯物论有两个最显著的特点：一个是它的阶级性，公然申明辩证唯物论是为无产阶级服务的；再一个是它的实践性，强调理论对于实践的依赖关系，理论的基础是实践，又转过来为实践服务。”[5](P284)他所强调的实践的这种重要性，具体地看，包含了两层意思：一是在辩证唯物主义的层次上，强调理论对实践的依赖关系，即理论的基础是实践，又转过来为实践服务；二是在辩证唯物主义认识论的层次上，强调认识对实践的依赖关系，即认识发生于实践，又转过来服务于实践。这两层意思是相关联的：第一层意思对辩证唯物主义更基本、更重要、更具有普遍性，而第二层意思则奠定了辩证唯物主义认识论的基础。具体到毛泽东的“实践论”哲学体系，主要是阐发第二层意思，并由此来阐明第一层意思。这就是《实践论》所说的：“辩证唯物论的认识论把实践提到第一的地位，认为人的认识一点也不能离开实践，排斥一切否认实践重要性、使认识离开实践的错误理论。……实践的观点是辩证唯物论的认识论之第一的和基本的观点。”[5](P284)可以说，这就为展开“实践论”哲学体系提供了总纲领。

Starting from this general program, Mao Zedong further delved into the relationship between cognition and practice, thereby unfolding the core content of the “practice theory” philosophical system. The content he unfolded mainly has two aspects: first, based on practice, it elucidates from the perspective of epistemology the relationship between practice and cognition in cognitive activity—this mainly concerns the foundational issue of understanding the world; second, based on practice, it elucidates from the perspective of dialectics the relationship between the particular and the general in cognitive activity—this mainly concerns the methodological issue of understanding the world. These two aspects echo and are interrelated with each other.

由这个总纲领出发，毛泽东进一步深入阐明认识和实践的关系问题，由此展开了“实践论”哲学体系的核心内容。他所展开的内容主要有两个方面：一是以实践为基础，从认识论上阐明认识活动中实践与认识的关系，这主要是讲认识世界的基础问题；二是以实践为基础，从辩证法上阐明认识活动中特殊与一般的关系，这主要是讲认识世界的方法问题。这两个方面的内容是前后呼应、相互关联的。

The first aspect is what Mao Zedong concentrated on elaborating in *On Practice*. *On Practice*, based on practice, reveals that the development of human cognition includes two stages: the first stage is that cognition arises from practice, and the second stage is that cognition serves practice. Through these two stages, it elucidates the dependence of cognition on practice and draws the general conclusion: “Discover truth through practice, and again verify and develop truth through practice. From perceptual knowledge actively develop it into rational knowledge, and from rational knowledge actively guide revolutionary practice to transform the subjective world and the objective world. Practice, knowledge, again practice, and again knowledge—this form repeats itself in endless cycles, and with each cycle the content of practice and knowledge rises to a higher level. This is the entire epistemology of dialectical materialism, this is the dialectical-materialist theory of the unity of knowing and doing.”[5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P296-297) The relationship between practice and cognition discussed in *On Practice* can be summarized as a formula: “practice—cognition—practice.” In this way, it solved a major problem that had long troubled Chinese Communists: where exactly do people’s correct cognitions (including the Party’s correct line, principles, and policies) come from, and how are they obtained? That is, people’s correct cognitions (including the Party’s correct line, principles, and policies) can only come from practice, and through practice be tested and developed, rather than coming from textbooks, from dogmas, or from the instructions of the Communist International.

第一个方面的内容，是毛泽东在《实践论》中集中阐发的。《实践论》以实践为基础，揭示了人的认识发展包括两个阶段，第一个阶段是认识发生于实践，第二个阶段是认识服务于实践，由这两个阶段阐明了认识对于实践的依赖性，并得出了总的结论：“通过实践而发现真理，又通过实践而证实真理和发展真理。从感性认识而能动地发展到理性认识，又从理性认识而能动地指导革命实践，改造主观世界和客观世界。实践、认识、再实践、再认识，这种形式，循环往复以至无穷，而实践和认识之每一循环的内容，都比较地进到了高一级的程度。这就是辩证唯物论的全部认识论，这就是辩证唯物论的知行统一观。”[5](P296-297)《实践论》所论实践与认识的关系，可以概括为一个公式：“实践—认识—实践”。这样一来，就解决了一个长期困扰中国共产党人的大问题：人的正确认识（包括党的正确的路线、方针、政策）到底是从哪里来的，是怎样获得的。这就是人的正确认识（包括党的正确的路线、方针、政策）只能来自于实践，并通过实践得到检验、得到发展，而不是来自本本，来自教条，来自共产国际的指示。

The second aspect is what Mao Zedong concentrated on elaborating in *On Contradiction*. *On Contradiction* points out that to obtain correct cognition, one must not only go through the cognitive process of “practice—cognition—practice,” but also understand the dialectics of this process. That is, in human cognitive activity, people always first come into contact with and cognize individual, particular things in practice, and through the generalization of various individual, particular things, abstract from them things that are common and universal—these things are also things of a law-like nature—and then, guided by these common, universal, law-like things, engage in new practical activities. That is to say: “These are two processes of cognition: one is from the particular to the general, and the other is from the general to the particular. Human cognition always proceeds in this cyclical manner, and each cycle (as long as it strictly follows scientific method) may elevate human cognition to a higher level, constantly deepening human cognition.”[5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P310) Therefore, the relationship between the particular and the general discussed in *On Contradiction* can be summarized as another formula: “particular—general—particular.” In this way, it profoundly elucidated the philosophical basis for Chinese Communists to oppose doctrinairism and the ideological method to overcome doctrinairism: there exists a dialectical connection between the general and the particular between people’s correct cognitions (including the Party’s correct line, principles, and policies) and concrete reality; to apply people’s correct cognitions (including the Party’s correct line, principles, and policies) to concrete reality requires a process of concretization that transforms the general into the particular.

第二个方面的内容，是毛泽东在《矛盾论》中集中阐发的。《矛盾论》指出，要获得正确的认识，不仅要经过“实践—认识—实践”的认识过程，而且还必须懂得这个过程的辩证法。这就是在人的认识活动中，人们总是先在实践中接触和认识个别的、特殊的事物，并通过对各种个别的、特殊的事物的概括，抽象出其中具有共性的、普遍性的东西，这些东西也就是规律性的东西，然后再以这种共性的、普遍性的、规律性的东西为指导，去进行新的实践活动。也就是说：“这是两个认识的过程：一个是由特殊到一般，一个是由一般到特殊。人类的认识总是这样循环往复地进行的，而每一次的循环（只要是严格地按照科学的方法）都可能使人类的认识提高一步，使人类的认识不断地深化。”[5](P310)因此，《矛盾论》所论特殊与一般的关系，又可以概括为一个公式：“特殊—一般—特殊”。这样一来，就深刻地阐明了中国共产党人反对本本主义的哲学根据和克服本本主义的思想方法：人的正确认识（包括党的正确的路线、方针、政策）与具体实际之间存在着一般和特殊的辩证联结；要把人的正确认识（包括党的正确的路线、方针、政策）运用于具体实际，需要有一个由一般转化为特殊的具体化过程。

Through these two aspects, Mao Zedong clarified the foundational and methodological issues of understanding the world, finally grounding them in the epistemological issues of the Chinese revolution, elucidating how Chinese Communists should view the relationship between the universal truth of Marxism and the concrete reality of China. He pointed out: “Through practice, through long-term experience in struggle, and after Marx and Engels used scientific methods to summarize these various experiences, the theory of Marxism was produced”;[5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P288) “However, Marxism values theory, precisely and only because it can guide action.”[5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P292) Since Marxist theory comes from revolutionary practice and must be tested in guiding revolutionary practice, this requires Chinese Communists to follow Lenin’s teaching and understand that “the most essential thing in Marxism, the living soul of Marxism, lies in the concrete analysis of concrete conditions”;[5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P312) and not, like the doctrinaires within the Party, “mechanically apply a formula they consider immutable everywhere, which can only cause setbacks to the revolution, or ruin things that were originally done well.”[5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P311) Mao Zedong thus concluded: “Idealism and mechanical materialism, opportunism and adventurism, are all characterized by the separation of the subjective from the objective and the divorce of cognition from practice. The Marxist-Leninist epistemology characterized by scientific social practice must resolutely oppose these erroneous ideas.”[5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P295) In this way, through the epistemology and dialectics of dialectical materialism, he profoundly elucidated the relationship between the universal truth of Marxism and the concrete reality of China.

通过这两个方面的内容，毛泽东讲清楚了认识世界的基础问题和方法问题，最后落脚于中国革命中的认识论问题，阐明中国共产党人应当如何看待马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际的关系。他指出：“由于实践，由于长期斗争的经验，经过马克思、恩格斯用科学的方法把这种种经验总结起来，产生了马克思主义的理论”；[5](P288)“然而马克思主义看重理论，正是，也仅仅是，因为它能够指导行动”。[5](P292)既然马克思主义理论来自革命实践，又要在指导革命实践中接受其检验，这就要求中国共产党人必须遵照列宁的教诲，懂得“马克思主义的最本质的东西，马克思主义的活的灵魂，就在于具体地分析具体的情况”；[5](P312)而不能像党内的教条主义者那样，“只是千篇一律地使用一种自以为不可改变的公式到处硬套，这就只能使革命遭受挫折，或者将本来做得好的事情弄得很坏”。[5](P311)毛泽东由此得出结论：“唯心论和机械唯物论，机会主义和冒险主义，都是以主观和客观相分裂，以认识和实践相脱离为特征的。以科学的社会实践为特征的马克思列宁主义的认识论，不能不坚决反对这些错误思想。”[5](P295)这样一来，就通过辩证唯物主义认识论及辩证法，深刻地阐明了马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际的关系。

All this shows that Mao Zedong, in constructing the core content of the “practice theory” philosophical system with *On Practice* and *On Contradiction*, placed great emphasis on using analytical methods. Starting from the concept of “practice,” he gradually deepened and enriched the ideological connotations in the relationship between cognition and practice, linking each link closely, advancing step by step, unfolding layer by layer, revealing a meticulous and rigorous internal logic. That the “practice theory” philosophical system could be established, could possess theoretical thoroughness and persuasiveness, and could be accepted, grasped, and applied by Chinese Communists, includes this method of exposition and internal logic.

这些都表明，毛泽东以《实践论》和《矛盾论》建构“实践论”哲学体系的核心内容，十分重视运用分析的方法，从“实践”概念出发，将认识和实践关系中的思想内涵逐渐深入、逐渐丰富地阐发出来，环环紧扣、步步深入、层层展开，显示出细致严密的内在逻辑。“实践论”哲学体系能够建立起来，能够具有理论的彻底性和说服力，能够为中国共产党人所接受、所掌握、所运用，就包括了这种论叙方法和内在逻辑。

IV. Integrating Marxist Historical Materialism and Political Philosophy into the “Practice Theory” Philosophical System

四、把马克思主义的唯物史观和政治哲学融入“实践论”哲学体系

In creating the “On Practice” philosophical system, Mao Zedong highlighted the significance and status of the epistemology of dialectical materialism within Marxist philosophy, but he did not thereby belittle or neglect Marxist historical materialism and political philosophy. Instead, he strove to integrate these contents into the “On Practice” philosophical system, making them organic components of it.

毛泽东创立“实践论”哲学体系，凸显了辩证唯物主义认识论在马克思主义哲学中的意义和地位，但他并没有因此而轻视或忽视马克思主义的唯物史观和政治哲学，而是力求把这些内容融入“实践论”哲学体系，使之成为其中的有机内容。

Marxist historical materialism emphasizes that the masses of the people are the fundamental driving force of history, and Marxist political philosophy pursues the people becoming masters of their own affairs. These were positions Mao Zedong had unswervingly upheld since his participation in the founding activities of the Communist Party of China. From 1927 onward, Mao became the Party’s commander on the front line of China’s rural revolution, leading Chinese Communists to open up the Chinese revolutionary path of armed independent regimes of workers and peasants, encircling the cities from the countryside, and finally seizing state power nationwide. This experience made him deeply feel the immense historical role of the masses in supporting the Chinese revolution. In the struggle to establish the Jinggangshan revolutionary base area, he revealed that the workers, peasants, and soldiers who had undergone the baptism of the Great Revolution storm were a crucial factor in the survival of China’s red political power, pointing out: “The places where China’s red political power first emerged and could exist for a long time were not those areas that had not experienced the influence of the democratic revolution, such as Sichuan, Guizhou, Yunnan, and the northern provinces, but rather those places where, during the bourgeois-democratic revolution of 1926 and 1927, the masses of workers, peasants, and soldiers had risen up on a large scale, such as Hunan, Guangdong, Hubei, and Jiangxi.” [5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P49)[5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P139) During the transition from the Agrarian Revolutionary War to the War of Resistance Against Japan, he also put forward the goal of establishing a broad united front, stating: “Organizing tens of millions of people and mobilizing a mighty revolutionary army is the need for today’s revolution to attack the counter-revolution.” [5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P155)

马克思主义的唯物史观强调人民群众是历史的根本动力，马克思主义的政治哲学追求人民群众当家作主，这些都是毛泽东自参与中国共产党创建活动时起就坚定不移主张的。从1927年起，毛泽东成为党在中国农村革命第一线的指挥员，带领中国共产党人开辟了工农武装割据、农村包围城市、最后夺取全国政权的中国革命道路，这一经历更使他深深感受到人民群众支撑中国革命的巨大历史作用。在创建井冈山革命根据地的斗争中，他就揭示了经受大革命风暴洗礼的工农兵民众是中国红色政权能够存在的重要因素，指出：“中国红色政权首先发生和能够长期地存在的地方，不是那种并未经过民主革命影响的地方，例如四川、贵州、云南及北方各省，而是在一九二六和一九二七两年资产阶级民主革命过程中工农兵士群众曾经大大地起来过的地方，例如湖南、广东、湖北、江西等省。”[5](P49)[5](P139)在土地革命战争向抗日战争转变时期，他又提出建立广泛的统一战线的目标，指出：“组织千千万万的民众，调动浩浩荡荡的革命军，是今天的革命向反革命进攻的需要。”[5](P155)

It was precisely in this way that Mao Zedong, in “On Practice” and “On Contradiction,” differed from general philosophical epistemology, which takes only the individual person as the subject of cognitive activity. Instead, he engaged in new thinking about the subject of cognitive activity, pointing out that the subject of cognitive activity can be either an individual person or a collective person, and that the Communist Party, the proletariat, and the Chinese people led by the Party can all serve as the collective subject of cognitive activity. He said: “As society has developed to the present era, the responsibility for correctly understanding and transforming the world has historically fallen on the shoulders of the proletariat and its party.” [5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P296) — “to transform their own cognitive abilities and the relationship between the subjective world and the objective world.” [5]5 The “Fourth Plenary Session” refers to the Fourth Plenary Session of the Sixth Central Committee of the CPC, held in January 1931, which marked the rise of Wang Ming’s dogmatic line within the Party leadership.(P296) Here, “the proletariat and its party,” as well as “the revolutionary people,” are all taken as subjects of cognitive activity. It can be said that when constructing the core content of the “On Practice” philosophical system, Mao Zedong placed greater emphasis on and more prominently highlighted this kind of collective subject, though in the relevant discussions, he had not yet provided a specialized exposition on how to bring into play the role of this collective subject in understanding and transforming the world.

正是这样，毛泽东在《实践论》和《矛盾论》中，不同于一般哲学认识论只以个体的人作为认识活动的主体，而对认识活动的主体进行了新的思考，指出认识活动的主体既可以是个体的人，也可以是集体的人，共产党、无产阶级和党领导的中国人民都可以作为认识活动的集体主体。他说：“社会的发展到了今天的时代，正确地认识世界和改造世界的责任，已经历史地落在无产阶级及其政党的肩上。”[5](P296)——改造自己的认识能力，改造主观世界同客观世界的关系。”[5](P296)这里就把“无产阶级及其政党”，还有“革命人民”，都作为认识活动的主体。可以说，毛泽东在建构“实践论”哲学体系的核心内容时，更重视、更凸显的就是这种集体主体，只是在有关论说中，尚未对如何发挥这种集体主体认识世界和改造世界的作用作出专门阐发。

In 1941, Mao Zedong wrote a preface for the book *Rural Surveys*. In this preface, he emphasized that the investigations and studies of Chinese Communists cannot be separated from the support and testing of the masses, and he specifically explained how to bring into play the role of the masses as the subject of cognition in investigation and research. He pointed out: “To do this, first, one must look downward, not just look up at the sky. Without the interest and determination to look downward, one will never truly understand China’s affairs in a lifetime.” [10]10 The “practice theory” (实践论) philosophical system refers to Mao Zedong’s theoretical framework centered on the primacy of practice, primarily developed in his essays *On Practice* (1937) and *On Contradiction* (1937), which sought to adapt Marxist philosophy to the concrete conditions of the Chinese revolution.(P789-790) Here, “this” refers to the investigations and studies of Chinese Communists; “looking downward” means that Chinese Communists must rely on the masses in their investigations and studies; and “truly understanding China’s affairs” refers to the goal and the results that investigations and studies aim for. He then spoke from his own personal experience about how, by holding good investigation meetings, one could gain a true understanding of Chinese society from truly experienced middle- and lower-level cadres and ordinary people, calling these people at the bottom of society “my respected teachers,” [10]10 The “practice theory” (实践论) philosophical system refers to Mao Zedong’s theoretical framework centered on the primacy of practice, primarily developed in his essays *On Practice* (1937) and *On Contradiction* (1937), which sought to adapt Marxist philosophy to the concrete conditions of the Chinese revolution.(P790) and from this drew the conclusion: “The masses are the real heroes, while we ourselves are often childish and ridiculous; without understanding this, one cannot acquire even the most basic knowledge.” [10]10 The “practice theory” (实践论) philosophical system refers to Mao Zedong’s theoretical framework centered on the primacy of practice, primarily developed in his essays *On Practice* (1937) and *On Contradiction* (1937), which sought to adapt Marxist philosophy to the concrete conditions of the Chinese revolution.(P790) However, the subjective role of the masses in understanding the world as discussed here was mainly addressed at the empirical level of investigation and research, and had not yet been elevated to the theoretical level of the epistemology of dialectical materialism.

1941年，毛泽东为《农村调查》一书撰写了序言。在这篇序言中，他强调中国共产党人的调查研究不能离开人民群众的支持和检验，并具体阐明了如何在调查研究中发挥人民群众作为认识主体的作用。他指出：“要做这件事，第一是眼睛向下，不要只是昂首望天。没有眼睛向下的兴趣和决心，是一辈子也不会真正懂得中国的事情的。”[10](P789-790)这里所说的“这件事”，是指中国共产党人的调查研究；所说的“眼睛向下”，是指中国共产党人在调查研究中必须依靠人民群众；所说的“真正懂得中国的事情”，是指调查研究所指向的目标和所要获得的结果。他进而以自己的亲身经验，谈到如何通过开好调查会，从真正有经验的中下级干部和老百姓那里获得对中国社会的真实了解，把这些社会底层人物称为“我的可敬爱的先生”，[10](P790)并由此得出结论说：“群众是真正的英雄，而我们自己则往往是幼稚可笑的，不了解这一点，就不能得到起码的知识。”[10](P790)但这里所讲的人民群众在认识世界中的主体作用，主要是从调查研究的经验层面上讲的，还没有上升为辩证唯物主义认识论的理论层面。

The true realization of this theoretical elevation—to clarify, at the theoretical level of the epistemology of dialectical materialism, the subjective role of the masses in understanding and transforming the world—was Mao Zedong’s 1943 decision drafted for the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, “On Methods of Leadership.” At the beginning of this article, he pointed out that, no matter what work Chinese Communists undertake, two methods must be adopted: one is the method of combining the general with the particular, and the other is the method of combining leadership with the masses. From the perspective of the epistemology of dialectical materialism, the two methods Mao emphasized both deal with the relationship between cognition and practice, elucidating this relationship from different aspects. The former method had already been specifically expounded in “On Contradiction,” while the latter method was what he intended to clarify in this decision. He further pointed out: “In all the practical work of our Party, all correct leadership must be ‘from the masses, to the masses.’ This means: take the opinions of the masses (scattered and unsystematic opinions) and concentrate them (after study, turn them into concentrated and systematic opinions), then go to the masses to propagate and explain them, turning them into the opinions of the masses, so that the masses hold to them and put them into action, and test the correctness of these opinions in the actions of the masses. Then concentrate the opinions of the masses again, and go to the masses again to persist in them. And so on, endlessly, each time becoming more correct, more vital, and richer. This is the Marxist theory of knowledge.” [10]10 The “practice theory” (实践论) philosophical system refers to Mao Zedong’s theoretical framework centered on the primacy of practice, primarily developed in his essays *On Practice* (1937) and *On Contradiction* (1937), which sought to adapt Marxist philosophy to the concrete conditions of the Chinese revolution.(P899) The formulation “from the masses, to the masses” proposed here later became the classic expression of the mass line of the Communist Party of China, and it remains so to this day. The relationship between Party leadership and the masses led by the Party, as elucidated by this mass line, not only embodies the Marxist historical materialist emphasis that the masses are the fundamental driving force of history, but also embodies the Marxist political philosophical pursuit of the people becoming masters of their own affairs. More importantly, it clarifies, from the epistemological sense of dialectical materialism, how Chinese Communists bring into play the subjective role of the masses in understanding and transforming the world. This is consistent, complementary, and unified with the “practice—cognition—practice” formula of “On Practice” and the “particular—general—particular” formula of “On Contradiction,” in terms of method of exposition and internal logic. “From the masses,” from the perspective of the epistemology of dialectical materialism, means that cognition arises from practice, moving from the particular to the general; “to the masses,” from the perspective of the epistemology of dialectical materialism, means that cognition in turn serves practice, moving from the general back to the particular. Therefore, this relationship between Party leadership and the masses led by the Party, as expounded in terms of the epistemology of dialectical materialism, can be summarized as a new epistemological formula: “masses—leadership—masses.” This new formula constitutes an important expansion of the “On Practice” philosophical system, enriching its basic content and extending the internal logic inherent in it, thus forming, together with the two formulas of “On Practice” and “On Contradiction,” the theoretical skeleton of the “On Practice” philosophical system.

真正实现这一理论升华，从辩证唯物主义认识论的理论层面来阐明人民群众在认识世界和改造世界中的主体作用，是毛泽东在1943年为中共中央起草的决定《关于领导方法的若干问题》。他在这篇文章的开篇即指出，中国共产党人无论进行何项工作，有两个方法是必须采用的，一个方法是一般和个别相结合，另一个方法是领导和群众相结合。从辩证唯物主义认识论看，毛泽东所强调的这两个方法都是就处理认识和实践的关系而言的，从不同方面对认识和实践关系进行了阐发，前一个方法在《矛盾论》中已经作了专门阐发，后一个方法则是他在这个决定中所要着重阐明的。他进而指出：“在我党的一切实际工作中，凡属正确的领导，必须是从群众中来，到群众中去。这就是说，将群众的意见（分散的无系统的意见）集中起来（经过研究，化为集中的系统的意见），又到群众中去作宣传解释，化为群众的意见，使群众坚持下去，见之于行动，并在群众行动中考验这些意见是否正确。然后再从群众中集中起来，再到群众中坚持下去。如此无限循环，一次比一次地更正确、更生动、更丰富。这就是马克思主义的认识论。”[10](P899)这里提出的“从群众中来，到群众中去”，以后成为中国共产党群众路线的经典表述，直到今天仍然如此。而这条群众路线所阐明的党的领导和党所领导的人民群众的关系，既体现了马克思主义的唯物史观所强调的人民群众是历史的根本动力，又体现了马克思主义的政治哲学所追求的人民群众当家作主，更主要是从辩证唯物主义认识论意义上阐明了中国共产党人如何发挥人民群众在认识世界和改造世界中的主体作用，与《实践论》所讲的“实践—认识—实践”和《矛盾论》所讲的“特殊—一般—特殊”，在论叙方法和内在逻辑上是相一致、相配合、相统一的。“从群众中来”，从辩证唯物主义认识论看，也就是认识发生于实践，由特殊到一般；“到群众中去”，从辩证唯物主义认识论看，也就是认识又服务于实践，再由一般到特殊。因此，这种作为辩证唯物主义认识论来讲的党的领导和党所领导的人民群众的关系，可以概括为一个新的认识论公式：“群众—领导—群众”。这个新的公式是对“实践论”哲学体系的重要扩充，丰富了这一哲学体系的基本内容，延展了其中所蕴含的内在逻辑，从而与《实践论》和《矛盾论》的两个公式一起，共同组成了“实践论”哲学体系的理论骨架。

In this way, Mao Zedong, through the mass line of “from the masses, to the masses” and the epistemological formula of “masses—leadership—masses,” integrated Marxist historical materialism and political philosophy into the “On Practice” philosophical system, thereby fusing Marxist epistemology, dialectics, historical materialism, and political philosophy into a coherent organic whole. Therefore, compared with general philosophical epistemology, the “On Practice” philosophical system possesses richer content of social practice and bears the revolutionary character of the Communist Party of China, displaying both its distinct practicality and its distinct class nature. Only by regarding the “practice—knowledge—practice” discussed in *On Practice*, the “particular—general—particular” discussed in *On Contradiction*, and the “masses—leadership—masses” discussed in *Some Questions Concerning Methods of Leadership* as a unified and internally logically connected cognitive activity can one properly handle the relationship between knowledge and practice and achieve a deep understanding and accurate grasp of the “On Practice” philosophical system. In his later years, when discussing epistemological issues, Mao Zedong once asked and answered himself, “What is philosophy? Philosophy is epistemology” [3]3 “Soviet movement” refers to the establishment of Soviet-style (council-based) political power structures in the rural revolutionary base areas led by the CPC from the late 1920s to the 1930s. (p. 390); his understanding of philosophy was precisely in this sense. When he said “philosophy is epistemology,” he did not mean that philosophy does not discuss historical outlook or political philosophy, but rather that these contents should all be integrated into epistemology, expounded as a unified whole within epistemology. The “On Practice” philosophical system he himself created was precisely how he discussed epistemology. Only in this sense can Mao Zedong’s understanding of philosophy be accurately grasped.

这样一来，毛泽东就通过“从群众中来，到群众中去”的群众路线，通过“群众—领导—群众”的认识论公式，把马克思主义的唯物史观和政治哲学融入了“实践论”哲学体系，从而把马克思主义的认识论、辩证法、唯物史观和政治哲学融会贯通起来，成为一个有机的整体。因此，“实践论”哲学体系与一般哲学认识论相比，具有更为丰富的社会实践内容，具有中国共产党的革命品格，在显示其鲜明的实践性的同时又显示出鲜明的阶级性。只有把《实践论》所讲的“实践—认识—实践”，《矛盾论》所讲的“特殊—一般—特殊”，《关于领导方法的若干问题》所讲的“群众—领导—群众”，看做是一个统一的有内在逻辑联系的认识活动，才能处理好认识和实践的关系，达到对“实践论”哲学体系的深入理解和准确把握。毛泽东晚年在谈认识论问题时，曾有过“什么叫哲学？哲学就是认识论”[3](P390)的自问自答；他对哲学的这一理解，也正是在这个意义上讲的。他说“哲学就是认识论”，不是主张哲学不讲历史观、不讲政治哲学，而是认为要把这些内容都融入认识论之中，在认识论中圆融于一体阐发出来。他自己创立的“实践论”哲学体系，就是这样来讲认识论的。只有从这个意义上，才能准确地把握毛泽东对哲学的这一理解。

V. Transforming the “On Practice” Philosophical System into Methodology to Guide the Practice of the Chinese Revolution

五、从“实践论”哲学体系中转化出方法论以指导中国革命实践

Mao Zedong created the “On Practice” philosophical system, elucidating through dialectical materialist epistemology the relationship between the universal truths of Marxism and the concrete realities of China. However, in his view, it was insufficient merely to clarify this issue at the theoretical level; it was also necessary to use this theory to realize the integration of the universal truths of Marxism with China’s concrete realities in the practice of the Chinese revolution, so as to guide the revolutionary practice of Chinese Communists and the Chinese people and achieve victory in the Chinese revolution. This is what he emphasized: “As for Marxist theory, it is necessary to master it and apply it; the purpose of mastering it is solely to apply it.” [10]10 The “practice theory” (实践论) philosophical system refers to Mao Zedong’s theoretical framework centered on the primacy of practice, primarily developed in his essays *On Practice* (1937) and *On Contradiction* (1937), which sought to adapt Marxist philosophy to the concrete conditions of the Chinese revolution. (p. 815) [10]10 The “practice theory” (实践论) philosophical system refers to Mao Zedong’s theoretical framework centered on the primacy of practice, primarily developed in his essays *On Practice* (1937) and *On Contradiction* (1937), which sought to adapt Marxist philosophy to the concrete conditions of the Chinese revolution. (p. 801) Precisely for this reason, Mao Zedong placed great importance on “finding methods” from dialectical materialism, striving to derive from the “On Practice” philosophical system a methodology for understanding China’s national conditions, analyzing China’s situation, guiding the Chinese revolution, and solving China’s problems.

毛泽东创立“实践论”哲学体系，通过辩证唯物主义认识论，阐明了马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际的关系。但在他看来，仅仅从理论层面上来阐明这个问题还是不够的，还要运用这个理论来实现中国革命实践中的马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际的结合，以指导中国共产党人和中国人民的革命实践，夺取中国革命的胜利。这就是他所强调的：“对于马克思主义的理论，要能够精通它、应用它，精通的目的全在于应用。”[10](P815)[10](P801)正是这样，毛泽东十分重视从辩证唯物主义中“找方法”，力求从“实践论”哲学体系中转化出认识中国国情、分析中国局势、指导中国革命、解决中国问题的方法论。

The emphasis on the methodological significance of dialectical materialism was already pointed out by Mao Zedong in his *Lecture Notes on Dialectical Materialism*. Based on Lenin’s idea of the unity of dialectics, epistemology, and logic, he believed that dialectical materialism is both the world outlook of the proletariat and the method for the proletariat to understand the surrounding world and the method for revolutionary action; thus, it is a unity of world outlook and methodology. After creating the “On Practice” philosophical system, Mao Zedong borrowed two famous ancient Chinese idioms, “shooting the arrow at the target” and “seeking truth from facts,” to explain this issue to Chinese Communists in vivid Chinese language. In explaining what “shooting the arrow at the target” means, he used lively language to clearly and thoroughly state what he approved of and what he opposed, pointing out: “How are Marxist-Leninist theory and the realities of the Chinese revolution to be linked? To use a common expression, it is ‘shooting the arrow at the target.’ The ‘arrow’ is the arrow, the ‘target’ is the target, and one must aim the arrow at the target. The relationship between Marxism-Leninism and the Chinese revolution is the relationship between the arrow and the target. Some comrades, however, are ‘shooting the arrow without a target,’ shooting wildly, and such people are likely to ruin the revolution. Some comrades merely hold the arrow in their hands, rubbing it back and forth, exclaiming repeatedly, ‘Good arrow! Good arrow!’ but are always unwilling to shoot it. Such people are connoisseurs of antiques, having almost no connection with the revolution. The arrow of Marxism-Leninism must be used to shoot at the target of the Chinese revolution. If this issue is not made clear, the theoretical level of our Party will never be raised, and the Chinese revolution will never be victorious.” [10]10 The “practice theory” (实践论) philosophical system refers to Mao Zedong’s theoretical framework centered on the primacy of practice, primarily developed in his essays *On Practice* (1937) and *On Contradiction* (1937), which sought to adapt Marxist philosophy to the concrete conditions of the Chinese revolution. (pp. 819-820) In explaining what “seeking truth from facts” means, he gave new interpretations to what “facts,” “seeking,” and “truth” are one by one, thereby drawing a very important conclusion, pointing out: “‘Facts’ are all things that exist objectively, ‘truth’ is the internal connection of objective things, that is, the law, and ‘seeking’ is our study. We must proceed from the actual conditions of domestic and foreign, provincial and county, district and internal situations, and derive from them the inherent laws that are not fabricated, that is, find the internal connections of surrounding events, as the guide for our actions. To do this, we must not rely on subjective imagination, not on momentary enthusiasm, not on dead books, but on objective facts, possess detailed materials, and under the guidance of the general principles of Marxism-Leninism, draw correct conclusions from these materials. Such conclusions are not a mere enumeration of phenomena A, B, C, D, nor a boastful and bombastic article, but scientific conclusions. This attitude has the intention of seeking truth from facts and no intention of currying favor. This attitude is the manifestation of Party spirit, the Marxist-Leninist style of uniting theory and practice.” [10]10 The “practice theory” (实践论) philosophical system refers to Mao Zedong’s theoretical framework centered on the primacy of practice, primarily developed in his essays *On Practice* (1937) and *On Contradiction* (1937), which sought to adapt Marxist philosophy to the concrete conditions of the Chinese revolution. (p. 801) Thus, by skillfully using these two famous ancient Chinese idioms, with a strong Chinese flavor, he elucidated the general principle of transforming the “On Practice” philosophical system into methodology.

重视辩证唯物主义的方法论意义，是毛泽东在《辩证法唯物论（讲授提纲）》中就已指出的。他依据列宁的辩证法、认识论、逻辑学相统一的思想，认为辩证唯物主义既是无产阶级的宇宙观，又是无产阶级认识周围世界的方法和革命行动的方法，因而是宇宙观和方法论的一致体。在创立“实践论”哲学体系后，毛泽东又借用“有的放矢”和“实事求是”两个中国古代著名成语，用生动活泼的中国话语向中国共产党人讲清楚这个问题。在说明什么是“有的放矢”时，他用鲜活的语言把所赞成的和所反对的都说得很清楚很透彻，指出：“马克思列宁主义理论和中国革命实际，怎样互相联系呢？拿一句通俗的话来讲，就是‘有的放矢’。‘矢’就是箭，‘的’就是靶，放箭要对准靶。马克思列宁主义和中国革命的关系，就是箭和靶的关系。有些同志却在那里‘无的放矢’，乱放一通，这样的人就容易把革命弄坏。有些同志则仅仅把箭拿在手里搓来搓去，连声赞曰：‘好箭！好箭！’却老是不愿意放出去。这样的人就是古董鉴赏家，几乎和革命不发生关系。马克思列宁主义之箭，必须用了去射中国革命之的。这个问题不讲明白，我们党的理论水平永远不会提高，中国革命也永远不会胜利。”[10](P819-820)在说明什么是“实事求是”时，他对何谓“实事”、何谓“求”、何谓“是”一一赋予新解，由此得出十分重要的结论，指出：“‘实事’就是客观存在着的一切事物，‘是’就是客观事物的内部联系，即规律性，‘求’就是我们去研究。我们要从国内外、省内外、县内外、区内外的实际情况出发，从其中引出其固有的而不是臆造的规律性，即找出周围事变的内部联系，作为我们行动的向导。而要这样做，就须不凭主观想象，不凭一时的热情，不凭死的书本，而凭客观存在的事实，详细地占有材料，在马克思列宁主义一般原理的指导下，从这些材料中引出正确的结论。这种结论，不是甲乙丙丁的现象罗列，也不是夸夸其谈的滥调文章，而是科学的结论。这种态度，有实事求是之意，无哗众取宠之心。这种态度，就是党性的表现，就是理论和实际统一的马克思列宁主义的作风。”[10](P801)这就通过活用这两个中国古代著名成语，以浓厚的中国味，阐明了从“实践论”哲学体系中转化出方法论的总原则。

During the War of Resistance Against Japan, Mao Zedong, based on the general principles of “shooting the arrow at the target” and “seeking truth from facts,” transformed the “On Practice” philosophical system into methodology, using it to understand China’s national conditions, analyze China’s situation, guide the Chinese revolution, and solve China’s problems, thereby developing a complete set of Sinicized Marxist military theory, revolutionary theory, and state theory, enabling Chinese Communists to achieve success in the practice of the Chinese revolution.

在抗日战争时期，毛泽东依据“有的放矢”和“实事求是”的总原则，从“实践论”哲学体系中转化出方法论，以此来认识中国国情、分析中国局势、指导中国革命、解决中国问题，从而发展出一整套中国化的马克思主义的军事理论、革命理论、国家理论，使中国共产党人在中国革命实践中获得了成功。

In military theory, Mao Zedong, starting from the “On Practice” philosophical system and combining the experiences and lessons of Chinese Communists in engaging in revolutionary warfare, proposed correct methods for analyzing and guiding war. His work *On Protracted War* is a representative work in this regard. He pointed out: “The tendencies of idealism and mechanism in war questions are the epistemological roots of all erroneous views. … Therefore, opposing the tendencies of idealism and mechanism in war questions and adopting objective and comprehensive viewpoints to examine war can lead to correct conclusions on war questions.” [11]11 The “Great Revolution” (1924-1927) refers to the First United Front between the CPC and the Kuomintang, also known as the National Revolution, which aimed to overthrow the warlords and foreign imperialism. (p. 447) Proceeding from this, based on dialectical materialist epistemology, he raised the issue of how to correctly exert “conscious activity” [11]11 The “Great Revolution” (1924-1927) refers to the First United Front between the CPC and the Kuomintang, also known as the National Revolution, which aimed to overthrow the warlords and foreign imperialism. (p. 477) in war, pointing out: “Those who direct war cannot exceed the limits permitted by objective conditions to expect victory in war, but they can and must, within the limits of objective conditions, actively strive for victory in war. The stage for the activities of war commanders must be built on the basis of objective conditions, yet relying on this stage, they can direct many vivid, magnificent, and stirring dramas.” [11]11 The “Great Revolution” (1924-1927) refers to the First United Front between the CPC and the Kuomintang, also known as the National Revolution, which aimed to overthrow the warlords and foreign imperialism. (p. 478) It was precisely based on this methodology that a Chinese Marxist military theory guiding the Chinese revolutionary war to victory was formed, solving the biggest problem that the Communist Party of China most urgently needed to solve in the first half of the 20th century.

在军事理论上，毛泽东从“实践论”哲学体系出发，结合中国共产党人从事革命战争的经验和教训，提出了分析战争和指导战争的正确方法。他撰写的《论持久战》一书，就是这方面的代表作。他指出：“战争问题中的唯心论和机械论的倾向，是一切错误观点的认识论上的根源。……因此，反对战争问题中的唯心论和机械论的倾向，采用客观的观点和全面的观点去考察战争，才能使战争问题得出正确的结论。”[11](P447)由此而进，他立足辩证唯物主义认识论，提出了在战争中如何正确发挥“自觉的能动性”[11](P477)的问题，指出：“指导战争的人们不能超越客观条件许可的限度期求战争的胜利，然而可以而且必须在客观条件的限度之内，能动地争取战争的胜利。战争指挥员活动的舞台，必须建筑在客观条件的许可之上，然而他们凭借这个舞台，却可以导演出很多有声有色、威武雄壮的戏剧来。”[11](P478)正是根据这一方法论，形成了指导中国革命战争走向胜利的中国马克思主义军事理论，解决了中国共产党在20世纪上半叶最迫切需要解决的大问题。

In revolutionary theory, Mao Zedong, proceeding from the “On Practice” philosophical system, reflected on and summarized the experiences and lessons of the Chinese Communist Party’s leadership of the Chinese revolution since its founding, and insisted on solving the problems of the Chinese revolution by starting from a clear understanding of China’s actual conditions, rather than merely following Marxist-Leninist texts and the directives of the Communist International. He especially reminded Chinese Communists: “Our principle is revolutionary, but it is concrete, not abstract; it must solve problems by integrating with actual conditions.” [12]12 The “Agrarian Revolutionary War” (1927-1937) is the CPC’s term for the period of the Chinese Civil War following the split with the Kuomintang, during which the CPC established rural soviet bases and carried out land reform.(P109) It was precisely in this way that he pointed out: “Only by clearly understanding the nature of Chinese society can we clearly understand the targets of the Chinese revolution, the tasks of the Chinese revolution, the motive forces of the Chinese revolution, the nature of the Chinese revolution, and the prospects and transformation of the Chinese revolution. Therefore, to clearly understand the nature of Chinese society, that is, to clearly understand China’s national conditions, is the fundamental basis for clearly understanding all revolutionary problems.” [11]11 The “Great Revolution” (1924-1927) refers to the First United Front between the CPC and the Kuomintang, also known as the National Revolution, which aimed to overthrow the warlords and foreign imperialism.(P633) In the book *The Chinese Revolution and the Chinese Communist Party*, Mao Zedong, starting from the development of Chinese history, examined China’s ancient feudal society and modern semi-colonial and semi-feudal society, as well as the Chinese revolutionary movement since the Opium War, thereby elucidating the targets of the Chinese revolution, the tasks of the Chinese revolution, the motive forces of the Chinese revolution, the nature of the Chinese revolution, the prospects of the Chinese revolution, and the issues of the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese revolution. This formed a complete set of theories on the new-democratic revolution, pointing the way for Chinese Communists to win victory in China’s democratic revolution and to realize the transition from the democratic revolution to the socialist revolution. The subsequent course of the Chinese revolution, despite many twists and turns, always advanced in this direction, thereby winning the great victories of China’s democratic revolution and socialist revolution.

在革命理论上，毛泽东从“实践论”哲学体系出发，反思和总结了中国共产党自诞生起领导中国革命的经验和教训，力主从认清中国的实际情况入手，而不是仅仅遵循马列本本和共产国际指示，来解决中国革命问题。他特别提醒中国共产党人：“我们的原则是革命的，但它是具体的，不是抽象的，必须结合着实际情况来解决问题。”[12](P109)正是这样，他指出：“只有认清中国社会的性质，才能认清中国革命的对象、中国革命的任务、中国革命的动力、中国革命的性质、中国革命的前途和转变。所以，认清中国社会的性质，就是说，认清中国的国情，乃是认清一切革命问题的基本的根据。”[11](P633)在《中国革命和中国共产党》一书中，毛泽东即从中国历史发展入手，考察了中国古代的封建社会和近代的半殖民地半封建社会，以及鸦片战争以来的中国革命运动，从而阐明了中国革命的对象、中国革命的任务、中国革命的动力、中国革命的性质、中国革命的前途、中国共产党与中国革命诸问题，形成了一整套新民主主义革命理论，为中国共产党人夺取中国民主革命胜利并实现由民主革命向社会主义革命转变指明了方向。后来的中国革命进程，尽管历经了许多曲折，但始终是朝着这个方向前进的，从而赢得了中国民主革命和社会主义革命的伟大胜利。

In state theory, Mao Zedong, proceeding from the “On Practice” philosophical system, emphasized starting from China’s actual conditions to answer the great question of the era: “Where is China heading?” He pointed out: “The scientific attitude is ‘seeking truth from facts’; the arrogant attitudes of ‘being self-righteous’ and ‘presuming to teach others’ can never solve problems. The disaster and suffering of our nation are extremely severe; only a scientific attitude and a responsible spirit can lead our nation to the road of liberation.” [11]11 The “Great Revolution” (1924-1927) refers to the First United Front between the CPC and the Kuomintang, also known as the National Revolution, which aimed to overthrow the warlords and foreign imperialism.(PP662-663) It was precisely in this way that, in the article *On New Democracy*, Mao Zedong proposed to Chinese Communists and the Chinese people the goal of struggle “to build a new society and a new state for the Chinese nation” [11]11 The “Great Revolution” (1924-1927) refers to the First United Front between the CPC and the Kuomintang, also known as the National Revolution, which aimed to overthrow the warlords and foreign imperialism.(P663), and pointed out that this future new China could only be a new-democratic republic under the joint dictatorship of all anti-imperialist and anti-feudal forces led by the proletariat. “This new-democratic republic, on the one hand, differs from the old-style, European-American, bourgeois-dictatorship, capitalist republic—that is the old-democratic republic, which is already obsolete; on the other hand, it also differs from the Soviet-style, proletarian-dictatorship, socialist republic—that kind of socialist republic is already flourishing in the Soviet Union and will be established in all capitalist countries, and will undoubtedly become the dominant form of state and government structure in all industrially advanced countries; but that kind of republic, in a certain historical period, is not yet applicable to the revolution of colonial and semi-colonial countries.” [11]11 The “Great Revolution” (1924-1927) refers to the First United Front between the CPC and the Kuomintang, also known as the National Revolution, which aimed to overthrow the warlords and foreign imperialism.(P675) He thereby proposed a complete set of theories on the new-democratic state, focusing on outlining the blueprint for the future new China from three aspects: politics, economy, and culture. He pointed out: “We must not only transform a China that is politically oppressed

在国家理论上，毛泽东从“实践论”哲学体系出发，强调从中国的实际情况出发来回答“中国向何处去”这一时代大问题。他指出：“科学的态度是‘实事求是’，‘自以为是’和‘好为人师’那样狂妄的态度是决不能解决问题的。我们民族的灾难深重极了，惟有科学的态度和负责的精神，能够引导我们民族到解放之路。”[11](P662-663)正是这样，毛泽东在《新民主主义论》一文中，向中国共产党人和中国人民提出了“建设一个中华民族的新社会和新国家”[11](P663)的奋斗目标，指出了这个未来的新中国只能是无产阶级领导下的一切反帝反封建的人们联合专政的新民主主义共和国。“这种新民主主义共和国，一方面和旧形式的、欧美式的、资产阶级专政的、资本主义的共和国相区别，那是旧民主主义的共和国，那种共和国已经过时了；另一方面，也和苏联式的、无产阶级专政的、社会主义的共和国相区别，那种社会主义的共和国已经在苏联兴盛起来，并且还要在各资本主义国家建立起来，无疑将成为一切工业先进国家的国家构成和政权构成的统治形式；但是那种共和国，在一定的历史时期中，还不适用于殖民地半殖民地国家的革命。”[11](P675)他由此提出了一整套新民主主义国家理论，着重从政治、经济、文化三个方面勾画了未来的新中国蓝图，指出：“我们不但要把一个政治上受压迫、经济上受剥削的中国，变为一个政治上自由和经济上繁荣的中国，而且要把一个被旧文化统治因而愚昧落后的中国，变为一个被新文化统治因而文明先进的中国。”[11](P663)新民主主义革命理论与新民主主义国家理论的结合，形成了完整的新民主主义理论，为新中国的诞生奠定了理论基础。

From this complete set of Sinicized Marxist theories and the successful experience of the Chinese revolutionary practice derived from them, it is indeed important and necessary to transform the “Theory of Practice” philosophical system into a methodology. Through this transformation, Chinese Marxist philosophy became a vibrant theory deeply rooted in the spiritual world of the Chinese people, a banner of thought and guide to action that led the Communist Party of China in guiding the Chinese people toward revolutionary victory. It thereby armed the Chinese Communists, won over the broad masses of the Chinese people, and achieved the great victory of the Chinese revolution. Only then did the Chinese Communists truly grasp the spiritual essence of Marxist philosophy, and only then did they truly understand, learn, and master Marxist philosophy. Only then could the superiority of Marxist philosophy in its competition with various currents of thought in the Chinese intellectual world be fully manifested, enabling it to become the successful and victorious force, the mainstream trend of thought with the greatest vitality, creativity, and influence in the development of 20th-century Chinese philosophy. It can be said that transforming the “Theory of Practice” philosophical system into a methodology is a major feature and a major contribution of this philosophical system, providing a theoretical and practical answer and resolution to the question of the relationship between the universal truths of Marxism and the concrete realities of China.

由这一整套中国化的马克思主义理论和由此取得的中国革命实践的成功经验看，从“实践论”哲学体系中转化出方法论，确实是重要的和必要的。经过此一转化，中国马克思主义哲学成为了深深植根于中国人精神世界的生机勃勃的理论，成为了指引中国共产党领导中国人民走向革命胜利的思想旗帜和行动指南，从而武装了中国共产党人，掌握了中国广大人民群众，取得了中国革命的伟大胜利；中国共产党人也才由此而真正领悟了马克思主义哲学的精神实质，也才真正懂得了、学会了、掌握了马克思主义哲学；马克思主义哲学在与中国思想世界诸思潮竞争中，所具有的优越性也才得以充分地显发出来，从而成为成功者和胜利者，成为了20世纪中国哲学开展中最具有生命力、创造力和影响力的主流思潮。可以说，从“实践论”哲学体系中转化出方法论，是这一哲学体系的一大特色和一大贡献，使马克思主义普遍真理和中国具体实际关系问题得到理论和实际相结合的回答和解决。

VI. Examining the Research Method from the Path of Creating the “Theory of Practice” Philosophical System

六、从“实践论”哲学体系的创立路径看其研究方法

Through the above examination of the various logical links in Mao Zedong’s creation of the “Theory of Practice” philosophical system, it can be clearly seen that Mao Zedong’s creation of this philosophical system was by no means achieved overnight, but rather underwent a long-term process of exploration. The main logical links of this process are as follows: First, from the practice of the Chinese revolution, the extreme importance of answering and resolving the question of the relationship between the universal truths of Marxism and the concrete realities of China was discovered. And from the movement of materialist dialectics, the great significance of dialectical materialism for answering and resolving this question was discovered. Next, in the exposition of dialectical materialism, its focus was shifted from ontology to epistemology. In *On Practice* and *On Contradiction*, the question of the relationship between knowledge and practice was deeply expounded, constructing the core content of the “Theory of Practice” philosophical system. In *Some Questions Concerning Methods of Leadership*, the principal role of the masses in understanding and transforming the world was clarified, integrating the Marxist materialist conception of history and political philosophy into the “Theory of Practice” philosophical system. Then, the general principles of “shooting the arrow at the target” and “seeking truth from facts” were put forward, transforming the “Theory of Practice” philosophical system into a methodology to guide the revolutionary practice of the Chinese Communists and the Chinese people, achieving the great victory of the Chinese revolution. Through these gradually progressive logical links, the path of creating the “Theory of Practice” philosophical system is clearly presented.

通过以上对毛泽东创立“实践论”哲学体系诸逻辑环节的梳理，可以清楚地看出毛泽东创立这一哲学体系决非一蹴而就，而是经过了一个长时期的探索历程。这一历程的主要逻辑环节在于：首先从中国革命实践中，发现回答和解决马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际关系问题的极端重要性；并从唯物辩证法运动中，发现辩证唯物主义对回答和解决这一问题的重要意义。进而在对辩证唯物主义的阐发中，将其着重点由本体论移至认识论；在《实践论》和《矛盾论》中，对认识和实践关系问题作出深入阐发，建构“实践论”哲学体系的核心内容；在《关于领导方法的若干问题》中，阐明人民群众在认识世界和改造世界中的主体作用，把马克思主义的唯物史观和政治哲学融入“实践论”哲学体系。再而提出“有的放矢”和“实事求是”的总原则，从“实践论”哲学体系中转化出方法论，以指导中国共产党人和中国人民的革命实践，取得了中国革命的伟大胜利。通过这些逐渐递进的逻辑环节，“实践论”哲学体系的创立路径清晰地呈现出来。

This path shows that the research method Mao Zedong used in creating the “On Practice” philosophical system can be summarized as proceeding from concrete reality to philosophical abstraction, and then returning from philosophical abstraction to concrete reality. The first “concrete reality” here refers to the practice of the Chinese revolution. It was precisely from the practice of the Chinese revolution that Mao Zedong discovered the extreme importance of answering and resolving the relationship between the universal truth of Marxism and the concrete reality of China. This led him, after commanding the Red Army to successfully conclude the Long March, to return to the philosophical world he had originally loved, to search and explore, and to create the “On Practice” philosophical system in order to elucidate the relationship between the universal truth of Marxism and the concrete reality of China. Thus there was the step of proceeding from concrete reality to philosophical abstraction. But Mao Zedong did not allow himself to remain in the abstract philosophical world; rather, he used the “On Practice” philosophical system to arm the Chinese Communists and to win over the broad masses of the Chinese people, in order to understand China and transform China. This then gave rise to the step of returning from philosophical abstraction to concrete reality. The second “concrete reality” here also refers to the practice of the Chinese revolution, but the practice of the Chinese revolution at this time was already very different from the practice of the Chinese revolution before the creation of the “On Practice” philosophical system. Because the “On Practice” philosophical system was created and a methodology was transformed from it, the Chinese Communist Party established its own philosophical foundation, acquired a correct ideological line, and thereby achieved the great victory of the Chinese revolution. In this way, Mao Zedong, with the “On Practice” philosophical system he created, successfully answered and resolved the relationship between the universal truth of Marxism and the concrete reality of China from the combination of theory and practice. The “On Practice” philosophical system has thereby become a model for the Sinicization of Marxist philosophy, and even today, in the 21st century, it still has important guiding significance for continuing to advance the Sinicization of Marxist philosophy.

这一路径显示出，毛泽东创立“实践论”哲学体系所运用的研究方法，概括地说，就是从现实的具体出发进至哲学的抽象，再由哲学的抽象回到现实的具体。这里的第一个现实的具体，指的是中国革命实践。毛泽东正是从中国革命实践中，发现回答和解决马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际关系问题的极端重要性，才使得他在统率红军胜利结束长征后，回到原本喜爱的哲学世界上下求索，创立“实践论”哲学体系，来阐明马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际的关系，这就有了从现实的具体出发进至哲学的抽象。但毛泽东并没有让自己停留在抽象的哲学世界，而是要用“实践论”哲学体系，武装中国共产党人，掌握中国广大人民群众，来认识中国和改造中国，这就又有了由哲学的抽象回到现实的具体。这里的第二个现实的具体，同样是指中国革命实践，但这时的中国革命实践已经与创立“实践论”哲学体系之前的中国革命实践大不相同了，由于“实践论”哲学体系的创立并从中转化出方法论，中国共产党确立了自己的哲学基础，获得了正确的思想路线，从而取得了中国革命的伟大胜利。这样一来，毛泽东以其创立的“实践论”哲学体系，从理论和实践的结合上成功地回答和解决了马克思主义普遍真理与中国具体实际的关系问题。“实践论”哲学体系也由此成为马克思主义哲学中国化的典范，在21世纪的今天仍然对继续推进马克思主义哲学中国化有着重要的指导性意义。

(Author’s bio: Li Weiwu, Professor and Doctoral Supervisor at the School of Philosophy, Wuhan University; Researcher at the Institute of Marxist Philosophy, Wuhan University; Researcher at the Hubei Provincial Collaborative Innovation Center for Marxist Theory and Chinese Practice)

（作者简介：李维武，武汉大学哲学学院教授、博士生导师，武汉大学马克思主义哲学研究所研究员，马克思主义理论与中国实践湖北省协同创新中心研究员）

Online editor: Tongxin

网络编辑：同心