Universal

Vseo?bshcheye, the form existence of all special and single the phenomena, the regular form of their interrelation in the composition of concrete whole. Abstract- universal and concrete- universal are distinguished. Is abstract -vseob5ee  - reflected in the contemplation and the idea similarity, similarity, identity of all sensual- received phenomena, the equally characteristic of each of them, undertaken separately, "sign" (certainty generally). Is concrete -vseob5ee  - that reflected in the concept the internally necessary connection (interdependence) of different and opposite phenomena, the law of their passage and transformation into each other, that come out on the surface of appearances not in the form of their similarity, the similarity and the identity, while, on the contrary, through their difference, special feature, opposition.

Controversy between different solutions of the problem of universal pierces entire history . Initially for the philosophy the characteristically direct- object interpretation of vseobshchego  - as waters, fire, apeyrona, air, i.e., as the special substance, of which consist all things, as their substance. This understanding resists the interpretation of universal as the immaterial prototype of single things as "pure form". In the attempts to connect two aspects indicated "is confused" and "is beaten", according to the expression v. I. Lenin, the thought (see It is complete. sobr. SOCh., 5 izd., t. 29, s. 327 and 316). The difficulties, connected with the ratio of universal to the special and the single, lie also at the basis of the dispute between two philosophical of napravleniyami  - by the realism and by the nominalism in the Middle Ages. The presence of universal in the consciousness (in the thinking, the language) is undoubted for of all directions, and dispute goes exclusively about the objective reality of universal out of the consciousness, out of the thinking. The subjective-psychological interpretation of universal as the "value of sign" as abstractions from all objective empirical data differences, finds its completion in the the contemporary to neopozitivizme, in understanding of universal as purely linguistic category as the fact of "language". The objective value of universal as the law, which controls the motion of single things, defend, from the different positions, the representatives of materialism (b. Spinoza, L. ) and objective the idealism (g. Leibnitz, G. Hegel). Dialectics the relation of universal k special and single it is most fully represented in the logician Hegel.

In the philosophy of the dialectic materialism universal in the thinking is understood as the form of the reflection of the objective unity of the varied phenomena of nature and society in the consciousness the man. As such it is evinced by consciousness not in the form of the abstraction, which fixes the identity of all single and special phenomena to each other in the abstraction from all their obvious differences, but in the form of the system of the abstract definitions, which reflect the identity of differences, the identity of the oppositions, of motion of which only and consists the real (concrete) unity of all varied things (phenomena) in the composition of some whole. Abstract- universal (i.e., universal, isolated via comparison and fixed by term) plays in the knowledge the important, but limited role of moment, the aspect the understanding of concrete- universal and it is faster the principle the formation of general idea. As the logical (methodological) principle of the formation of concept come out always concrete- universal, that expresses the "assumed indivisibility of moments in their difference", but not in their abstract identity to each other. "... to"Ne is only is abstractly universal, but universal such, which personifies in itself wealth of special, individual, separate "(entire wealth of special and separate!)... "  - - noted Lenin (there, s. 90). "it personifies into sebe"  - it means here: it expresses directly in its concrete determinations and besides in the double sense. First, in the fact that it inside itself is dismembered at the special moments, and, in the second place,   - in the fact that this form of reality, being completely "special" in a number of other special forms of the same concrete whole, yavlyaetsya  - and precisely in view of its of osobennosti  - by the universal base of all others. So, the concept of cost in the political economy comes out as universal not as the abstraction, which fixes the identity of all phenomena of developed commodity economy, but as the specific concept, which reflects the internal dialectics of simple commodity form in its special feature and even singlenesses (X of goods linen = in goods frock-coat). Specifically, by this method is located the universal expression of all other categories of phenomena, them historically and logically simplest form.

Universal in the dialectics is understood not as the abstract- general rule, under which can and must bring without the contradiction each special and single case, but as the law of the transformation (passage) of different and opposite phenomena into each other as tendency, as the overall need, which opens to itself the road through the chances, through its own "negation" and "negation of negation". Другими словами, каждый частный (особенный и единичный) случай, взятый порознь, может формально «опровергать», отрицать абстрактные определения всеобщего, и только вся масса таких случаев, взаимно корректирующих друг друга, реализует и доказывает («утверждает») своё собственное всеобщее. Abstractly understood universal therefore can become in the antinomian relation to the forms of its own manifestation, to its own "special" forms (for example, the law of cost in his universal form and the fact of profit, surplus value). Coming out in "existence" (in nature and social development) as law, as the need for mutual polaganiya (passage, transformation) of various and opposite forms of the development of material, universal is revealed in the knowledge through the concrete analysis of the entire chain of such passages and transformations, but not through the abstraction (abstraction) from their concreteness, from their special features, not through the fixation of identical, abstract- identical in them. Form of universality, according to Engels, "... is a connection of many final things into the infinite "(Marx k. and Engels F., SOCh., 2 izd., t. 20, s. 548 - 49) and for this very reason compose their form "internal perfection" (there), internal (dialectical) opposition of their extremity, their special feature, their singleness, their internal incompletness, supposed by other from without things, other particular moments in the continuous connection of development. For this very reason human thinking is capable of revealing the universal as the internally necessary moment "special", i.e., on the need for that limited in the time and the space of the circle of phenomena, without requiring for this a study of all phenomena in the infinite space and time, all without the exception of special cases. For the development of vseobshche.uzh it occurs sufficiently that exhausting the analysis the typical "particular" case, checked by practice, .

Article is based on the materials .