Starting from real life and realistic people, Marx grasped the process of human social history from the perspective of social existence and social practice, and pointed out the real relationship between thinking and existence and the essence of historical materialism, that is, people are not divorced from social reality and live under the aura of rationalism, but carry out various practical activities of human beings in a certain objective social relationship according to objective laws. Engels and Marx have different philosophical perspectives in understanding the differences between old and new materialism, emphasizing the systematic exposition of historical materialism from the perspective of combining dialectics with materialism. Especially in the criticism of Hegel's philosophy and Feuerbach's old philosophy, he clearly stated that mechanical materialism is the inevitable result of people's epistemology when natural science and technology have not been fully developed in various fields. Engels chose to criticize the old philosophy, absorb the rational core of Hegel and Feuerbach's philosophical thoughts, especially Hegel's dialectics, and put it in the framework of materialism. Finally, he systematically discussed the historical materialism in Feuerbach.

Here, we can find the philosophical differences between them. One focuses on social existence, and the other focuses on dialectical methods in the historical process, mainly because of their different historical backgrounds and philosophical perspectives. Facing the prevalence of historical idealism, Marx needs to get rid of the falsity of rationalism and point out that real life is the source of history and man is the subject of history, otherwise he will fall into the whirlpool of idealism and cannot understand and solve the practical problems in capitalist society. Engels put forward the historical materialism when Marxist theory was distorted and used by many practical interests, with the aim of maintaining the unity of the Marxist team to the maximum extent and improving the revolutionary enthusiasm of the proletariat. Therefore, Engels not only emphasized the dialectics of history, but also emphasized the objectivity and constraint of the existence of historical laws. People who carry out activities in the field of social history are conscious, thoughtful or passionate people who pursue a certain purpose; Nothing will happen without conscious intention and expected purpose. However, no matter how important this difference is to historical research, especially to the historical research of various times and events, it cannot change the fact that the historical process is dominated by internal general laws. The problem is just to find these rules. ?

Everything is a temporary link in the historical development chain, not an eternal whole. History is the result of the interaction of various social forces, which provides scientific theoretical guidance for the proletarian revolutionary movement.

Third, the political and economic differences between Marx and Engels: economic base and superstructure.

On the political and economic levels, Marx and Engels elaborated their views on history with their own objective historical backgrounds. In their cooperative works, such as German Ideology, Manifesto and Das Kapital, they discussed the role of class struggle and political superstructure in modern times. But it is worth noting that at that time, they were faced with the old philosophical era in which historical idealism prevailed. In order to overcome the inversion of ideology and restore the true colors of history, Marx and Engels focused their efforts on the realistic economic foundation at that stage, and pointed out the fallacy of idealistic historical view from the realistic living conditions of people, that is, the epochal and historic nature of the bourgeoisie. Marx and Engels emphasized finding the key to solve the mystery of irrational order in capitalist society from the civil society behind the capitalist political society, which is the decisive factor affecting the external state machine and political system. It is further affirmed that the political constraints that hinder the progress of productive forces and the transformation of production methods should be broken, and its foothold and destination fall on seeking a reasonable political and economic order in society.

But Engels made an appointment later? Bloch's letter said:? Historical materialism holds that the decisive factor of historical process is the production and reproduction of real life in the final analysis. Neither Marx nor I can be more certain. If someone misinterprets here that economic factors are the only decisive factor, then he is turning this proposition into an abstract and absurd empty talk with no content. Economy is the foundation, but it affects the historical process and in many cases mainly determines the form of this struggle, as well as various factors of the superstructure? .

Here, Engels not only emphasized that the superstructure is the economic foundation, but also highlighted the important role of the superstructure in the social and historical process. Although it was put forward before Marx's death, it has been hidden in a corner of their theory and has been mentioned in Engels' On Feuerbach. Engels overcame the neglect of class motivation and political superstructure in the past when he systematically expounded historical materialism, pointed out that economic determinism and environmental determinism were unscientific, and attached importance to the dynamic role of man as a historical subject in the historical process.

By combing the classic texts of Marx and Engels on historical materialism, especially analyzing Engels' Feuerbach theory, we can find that Engels and Marx maintained a high degree of consistency in the early stage of the formation of historical materialism. However, with the change of social and historical environment and the new needs of the workers' movement in the new period, Engels paid attention to historical dialectics and historical laws when systematically discussing historical materialism, while Marx paid more attention to the study of social reality and social existence in order to counter the hypocrisy of historical idealism. Although there are differences between them in some aspects, they are more about explaining the reasonable core of Marxist philosophy. We should start from two levels: fact judgment and value judgment, clarify the academic relationship between them, and grasp the true thought of Marxism on the basis of classic works of Marxist philosophy.

References:

[1] Zhang Kuiliang. Engels and historical materialism [J]. Research on Marxist Philosophy, 20 12, (11):15-21.

[2] Marx and Engels. Selected Works of Marx and Engels: Volume 2 [M]. Beijing: People's Publishing House,1995,34.

[3] Marx and Engels. Selected Works of Marx and Engels: Volume 2 [M]. Beijing: People's Publishing House. 1995,33.

[4] Levin. Comparison between Marx and Engels [C]. Du bian Compilation of Marxist-Leninist Works: Series 14. Beijing: People's Publishing House, 198 1, 2 12.

[5] Marx and Engels. Selected Works of Marx and Engels: Volume 2 [M]. Beijing: People's Publishing House,1995,82.

[6] Marx and Engels. Selected Works of Marx and Engels: Volume 4 [M]. Beijing: People's Publishing House,1995,241.

[7] Marx and Engels. Selected Works of Marx and Engels: Volume 4 [M]. Beijing: People's Publishing House,1995,698.

;