Chapter 25 Section 3 A Philosophical Debate to Correct the Ideological Line

On May 11, 1978, "Guangming Daily" published the article "Practice is the only criterion for testing truth".As soon as the article was published, it attracted great attention.Soon there was a heated discussion in the academic circles and the press. From that year to now, more than 20 years have passed.Over the past 20 years or so, the disputes of different opinions on the line, policy and major measures have also been tested by practice. The correctness and necessity of the proposal and discussion of the standard of truth more than 20 years ago must also be tested by this test.The conclusion after inspection should be that this discussion was completely correct and necessary for the time, solved the most pressing problems at that time, and had extremely important historical and theoretical significance.

The nearly 30 years of reform and opening up created by this discussion have greatly improved our country's social productivity, enhanced our country's overall strength, and improved people's lives.This discussion raised the awareness of the broad masses of cadres, intellectuals, and the masses, and enhanced their ideological ability to resist mistakes.We can also say that this discussion is of great significance not only historically but also today.For this point, there should be a clear understanding in today's commemoration.I think we must not commemorate now for the sake of commemoration, our commemoration should focus on current and future work.

Although more than 20 years is not a long time, I was only 63 years old at the time, and now I am 91 years old.Today, there are not many people who have personally experienced the events of that year and are still alive.In order to commemorate, it is very necessary to master relevant historical materials in various aspects, conduct serious thinking, and draw useful lessons from them.People who know the situation and participate in the discussion like me have a greater responsibility to introduce the situation and viewpoints they know to people.It is impossible for me to do this kind of introduction exhaustively in this short article, I can only briefly introduce an outline.

Everyone knows that "truth" is a great word.Therefore, everyone wants to grab this banner.Those of us who are determined to promote social progress must of course hold high the banner of truth, and unite and forge ahead courageously under this banner.Organizations and individuals that hinder the progress of society, even the evil organization like the Japanese organization that engages in pseudoscience and kills innocents, also use the name "Aum Shinrikyo."Therefore, "what is the real truth"—that is, the question of the standard of truth is very important.Different social groups, different political forces, and different schools of thought have different views of truth standards.We Marxists have our own standard of truth. "Practice is the only criterion for testing truth", this is the standard view of truth of our Marxists, and it is the most important component of the Marxist view of truth.

In the great discussion on the standard of truth, the title of the article that triggered that discussion was "Practice is the only standard for testing truth".When I saw the word "unique" in the title of the article published in Guangming Daily on May 11, I was very happy.I pay special attention to the word "unique".I know that when Marx talked about "standards of practice", he actually meant uniqueness, but he did not use the word "uniqueness".Mao Zedong wrote in his "On Practice": "Judging whether a cognition or theory is true or not is not based on what one feels subjectively, but on the objective results of social practice. The criterion of truth can only be social practice."

There is also no word "unique" in this sentence expressing the standard of truth. Who was the first to add the word "unique"?At the time I thought it was added by the author of the article that sparked the debate on the standard of truth.A long time later, someone found out that in the "Five Commentaries" in the "Nine Commentaries" series of articles, in the sentence "Social practice is the standard for testing truth", there is the word "unique" before the word "standard". People who read the original manuscript said that Mao Zedong added it to the proof of the manuscript written by others, so the word "unique" in the title of the article in May 1978 was not the earliest.

However, it is still unclear who first added the word "unique".If we conduct a general survey of libraries and archives in our country and around the world, we may be able to find out from the works of a certain philosopher or politician that someone used the word "unique" earlier than the "Five Commentaries".A comrade told me that he knew that a politician in our country used the sentence "practice is the only criterion for testing truth" in 1956. I think the original expression of the standard of truth contains the meaning of "unique", and the meaning of adding the word "unique" is nothing more than emphasizing that the practical standard is exclusive, pertinent, and unitary.If we insist that the standard of truth is "dualistic" or "pluralistic", then we are either confused about the standard of truth, or we are playing tricks of eclecticism on purpose.

The proposition that practice is the criterion for testing truth is familiar to those who have studied dialectical materialist philosophy. If you talk about it in a straightforward way like in philosophy class, it can be said to be "commonplace".Even if it is used as in the "Five Commentaries", it can be said that it still does not break away from the "cliché".However, in the discussion in 1978, it was pointedly and exclusively proposed that practice is the "only" standard, which is not a cliché, but a strong reality. Where there are clear opposites, the questions are raised prominently, sharply, and thoroughly.At that time, I was well aware of the political background of the debates of different opinions within the party, and I applauded when I saw these two words.Especially after raising this question, Wu Lengxi immediately called Comrade Hu Jiwei and sharply opposed the title.This further shows that the proposition that "practice is the only criterion for testing truth" is no longer a cliché.So I said at that time that the comrade who made the phone call also made a great "contribution" to this discussion, and his "contribution" should not be denied.

Of course, when this standard was proposed at that time, the things it aimed at were indeed very sharp, because what it aimed at was nothing but Mao Zedong's "instructions."At that time, people were very serious about Mao Zedong's personality superstition, and "everything he said was the truth" and was "the highest instruction."At that time, Mao Zedong himself was unable to communicate with the society and the masses and even many cadres due to old age and frailty. He was surrounded by the "Gang of Four", Mao Yuanxin and others, and he did not understand the real situation.For example, he has almost no idea what happened in Tiananmen Square during the Ching Ming Festival in 1976.After listening to Mao Yuanxin's report, he made up his mind to remove Deng Xiaoping from both inside and outside the party.Such "instructions" are also regarded as gods by some people, and they are considered to be resolutely followed.This is the so-called "two whatevers".

What the "only" standard should exclude is this "two whatevers" standard.Moreover, apart from the instructions on the "Tiananmen Incident", there are many Mao Zedong's "instructions" that should not be resolutely implemented.Especially in his last few years, some of his practices have been messed up. For example, he tolerated his own views on theoretical issues as "instructions".At that time, if the "two whatevers" were not opposed to practical standards, things in China would be very bad, and as Deng Xiaoping said, the party and the country would perish. Therefore, "practical standards" must be proposed and discussed.Only in this way can people's minds be liberated and China's future can be brightened.

I participated in this discussion mainly at the Third Plenary Session and the previous Central Work Conference.Before this meeting, I was busy with other aspects of ordering out the chaos, and I saw that many comrades were writing articles and making speeches on the issue of the standard of truth. I did not write any articles, nor did I make systematic speeches on this issue in public.At the Central Working Conference, I directly spoke eleven times on issues related to the standard of truth, three of which were joint speeches with Yang Xiguang and Wang Huide.Only at the Central Work Conference did I fully express my views on this issue.These statements have not been made public until now.It should be pointed out here that the speeches on the standard of truth at the Central Work Conference and the Third Plenary Session are universal. Many comrades have expressed very good and weighty opinions at the group meetings, otherwise there would be no above-mentioned speeches. The kind of decisive victory. It should be pointed out that one of the reasons for the success of the Central Working Conference and the Third Plenary Session of the Central Committee is that a large number of cadres have been liberated and have assumed leadership in various central departments and provinces and cities.The Third Plenary Session of the Central Committee could not have achieved a historic victory simply by raising the standard of truth without the active participation of this group of cadres and without the struggle at the Central Work Conference. Before the discussion on the standard of truth started, I was committed to setting things right in the field of economics, such as the issue of distribution according to work and the issue of opposing and criticizing the "productivity theory".At that time, I felt that because many people were deeply bound by Mao Zedong's personality cult, it was very difficult to solve this problem, so I hoped that the field of philosophy would cooperate.Therefore, I hope to change the situation of "economic (study) prosperity, but philosophy poverty" at that time.So when I see the question of the criterion of truth being raised, I'm happy to say, "Here's the thing in charge." Philosophy is indeed important, it is a guiding subject, and it is something that can play a leading role.Comrade Feng Lanrui was the main writer in our State Council Research Office. The article on distribution according to work written in early 1978 was read by Deng Xiaoping and published in the "People's Daily" after being revised according to Deng Xiaoping's opinions.After it was published, it was also attacked by people who engaged in "two whatevers", saying, "Which central government's opinion is this?"Without philosophy, without discussing the standard of truth, it is impossible to thoroughly solve problems such as distribution according to work.Ideological shackles can only be resolved by this philosophical discussion on the standard of truth.Of course, philosophy cannot replace concrete science, nor can it replace concrete analysis of concrete things.It was also necessary to straighten things out on issues such as distribution according to work, and it played an important role at the time.After the Third Plenum of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, my country's reform and opening up has started, and it is even more necessary to study specific economic issues.However, the importance of philosophy cannot be forgotten when studying specific issues. Over the years, the research on economics has been very active, while the discussion on philosophy seems to be relatively quiet, and it seems that there is a situation of "economics (study) is prosperous, but philosophy is impoverished".I think people have a tendency to dislike philosophy.At an international conference on "Government Functions Under Market Economy", I made a speech entitled ""Doing Nothing"—A Philosophy About "Government Functions Under Market Economy".In this speech, I talked about the "inaction" that Lao Tzu mentioned in "Inaction", not "negative inaction", but to achieve "action" through "inaction".So we have to "do nothing".I told the foreign scholars present at the meeting that the language I use is ancient Chinese, but the content is modern and cosmopolitan.In this speech, I said that under the conditions of a market economy, our government needs to "do nothing" for this kind of "inaction", that is, it needs to adopt an "active non-intervention" approach to many issues.And I added that it is only by this course that a cheap and clean government can be established.I said that 20 laborers in China now support one official, how can they afford it?Not to mention "supporting honesty with salary".I sent this speech to an economics journal in Beijing, thanking the editorial department of this journal for publishing my speech, but the editor of the journal did not discuss with me to delete the word "doing nothing" from the title of my speech.Of course I am not so happy, I see a tendency in my economics profession to belittle philosophy.I hope that after so many years of commemorating the discussion of the standard of truth, the philosophical discussion will be alive. Today's commemorative practice is a discussion on the standard of testing truth, and of course it must be related to today's reality.There is a problem, that is, according to the principle that "practice is the only criterion for testing truth", what things that cannot be used as standards should be excluded today.Research theories, focus on reality, and focus on how we look at today.We need to figure out what kind of things we have to abandon today in order to emancipate our minds and seek truth from facts.I don’t have an answer to this question right now. I think it’s a question that needs to be carefully considered and raised, and I think it’s time to do some research and think about it, and then bring this question to the academic world. Note: I checked the article "Five Commentaries on the Open Letter of the Central Committee of the CPSU".The title of this article is "Two Lines on the Issue of War and Peace", signed by the editorial boards of "People's Daily" and "Red Flag" magazine.The main purpose of this article is to expose the Soviet Communist Party's promotion of a "pacifist" line, to cover up the peace deceit of imperialism, instead of implementing the principle that "war can only be eliminated by eliminating imperialism", and not actively supporting the people of all countries. Revolutionary War and capitulation to imperialism.At the end of this article, there are more than 100 words: "The aggression and war behavior of the imperialists and the reactionaries of various countries are educating the people of the world to gradually wake up. Social practice is the only criterion for testing truth. Those who understand the issues of war and peace People with erroneous views, under the negative education of imperialism and reactionaries, we believe that many people will change. We have great hopes for this." I was told by someone in the "Five Commentaries" After the word "unique", I checked it out on purpose.At first I searched twice and couldn't find this sentence. Finally, I read the full text from beginning to end, word by word, and found the 14 words "Social practice is the only criterion for testing truth" in the penultimate paragraph of the full text.I had read the Five Commentaries at the time, but I turned a blind eye to this sentence, which shows that it did not have any social impact.As for the significance of using this proposition in that article, it is even more different from the significance of the discussion more than 20 years ago.