Abstract
This paper focuses on the theoretical philosophy of Bukharin as developed in his book Filosofskie arabeski (Philosophical Arabesques). I analyze three concepts—perception, being, and dialectics—and show that and how they deviate from the meaning that they commonly have among other Russian Marxists. In this work, Bukharin drafts a theory that can be interpreted as a “relational ontology,” since it focuses on the relations between entities and since these relations are considered to be more fundamental than the entities themselves and provide epistemic access to reality. My examination of Bukharin’s theoretical views shows that he continues Lenin’s tradition of materialist and dialectical thought. That is why, in spite of his innovative approach to some key problems of theoretical philosophy, Bukharin did not go far enough in his studies. His theoretical position appears to be an integral part of his political engagement.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
He writes, for example: “The class struggle, as revolutionary practice, as scientific revolutionary practice, also presupposes theoretical cognition” (Bukharin 2005, p. 369).
As Yehoshua Yakhot correctly writes: “During this inner-party struggle [against the Right Opposition in the party led by Bukharin, Rykov, and Tomsky—M. S.], some attempt was made by Stalin’s supporters to associate the Bukharin opposition with the mechanists in philosophy, although that was not the main course of attack” (Yakhot 2012, p. XV).
Vesa Oittinen (2006) thinks that it is possible to read the Philosophical Arabesques as a self-defense of Bukharin, who was then trying to get rid of the label of “mechanist,” which was attributed to him during the 1920s and which was subsequently interpreted by the Stalinists as the theoretical hallmark of the “right-wing deviation.”
Bogdanov argues that human experience is individually and socially organized. Individual experience has a subjective character, while the socially organized experience gives us what we call “objective reality” (Bogdanov 2003, pp. 233–234). The physical world is, according to him, a “socially-organized experience” (Bogdanov 2003, p. 234), “the result of the collective work of organization of all people is, in a certain sense, a cognitive ‘socialism’” («peзyльтaт кoллeктивнoй opгaнизyющeй paбoты вcex людeй, cвoeгo poдa пoзнaвaтeльный ‘coциaлизм’») (Bogdanov 2003, p. 235). On the epistemology of Bogdanov, see, e.g., (Jensen 1978; Soboleva 2007). The question of the intellectual relationship between Bogdanov and Bukharin is difficult. Bukharin, who in the 1920s was clearly influenced by Bogdanov (as Lenin explicitly stated), tries to conceal this in the Arabesques, which contains some severe critiques of Bogdanov’s idealistic errors.
This is a crucial point that separates Bukharin’s theory from Bogdanov’s, which represents “methodological monism” instead of ontological monism.
Bukharin highlights that “the contradiction between theory and practice, word and deed” is a characteristic of all skeptical philosophies (Bukharin 2005, p. 53).
There are lots of passages expressing this idea from different perspectives. For example, Bukharin writes: “What we are concerned with here is that in synthesizing cognition, the empirical cognition of particular aspects and forms of being, we should synthesize them into a single harmonious whole, moving toward the general, the Universum, with its universal relationships and laws. This, however, also means moving toward philosophy, toward its highest and most modern form, the philosophy of dialectical materialism” (Bukharin 2005, pp. 342–343).
References
Bogdanov, A. (2003). Empiriomonism (1904–1906). Moskva: Respublika.
Bukharin, N. I. (1925). Historical Materialism: A System of Sociology. New York: International Publishers.
Bukharin, N. I. (2005). Philosophical Arabesques. Translated by Renfrey Clarke. New York: Monthly Review Press.
Cohen, S. (1980). Bukharin and the Bolshevik Revolution: A Political Biography, 1888–1938. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time. Translated by John Macquerrie & Edward Robinson, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Jensen, K. M. (1978). Beyond Marx and Mach: Alexander Bogdanov’s Philosophy of Living Experience. Dordrecht: Reidel Publishing Company.
Oittinen, V. (2006). Nikolai Bucharin: Philosophische Arabesken. Dialektische Skizzen (Gefängnisschriften, Bd. 2), hg., übersetzt und kommentiert von Dieter Uhlig und Wladislaw Hedeler, Berlin: Karl Dietz Verlag 2005, 463 S. Das Argument: Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Sozialwissenschaften, 265, pp. 287–291.
Pavlov, E. (2016). Comrade Hegel: Absolute Spirit Goes East. Crisis & Critique, 3(1), pp. 157–190.
Sheehan, H. (2005). Introduction. In: Bukharin, Nikolai. Philosophical Arabesques. Translated by Renfrey Clarke. New York: Monthly Review Press, pp. 7–31
Soboleva, M. (2007). Aleksandr Bogdanov und der philosophische Diskurs in Russland zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts. Zur Geschichte des russischen Positivismus. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag.
Yakhot, Y. (1930s). The Suppression of Philosophy in the USSR (The 1920s & 1930s). Oak Park, Michigan: Mehring Books.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Soboleva, M. Ontologism in the Theoretical Philosophy of Nikolai Bukharin. Stud East Eur Thought 73, 193–204 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11212-020-09365-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11212-020-09365-3