Scientific socialism
Scientific socialism is a term coined in 1840 by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in his Property is theft! to mean a society ruled by a scientific government, i.e. one whose sovereignty rests upon reason, rather than sheer will:
Thus, in a given society, the authority of man over man is inversely proportional to the stage of intellectual development which that society has reached; and the probable duration of that authority can be calculated from the more or less general desire for a true government, — that is, for a scientific government. And just as the right of force and the right of artifice retreat before the steady advance of justice, and must finally be extinguished in equality, so the sovereignty of the will yields to the sovereignty of the reason, and must at last be lost in scientific socialism.[1]
| Part of a series on |
| Socialism |
|---|
 |
|
| Part of a series on |
| Marxism |
|---|
 |
|
Later in 1880, Friedrich Engels[2] used the term to describe Karl Marx's social-political-economic theory.
Although the term socialism has come to mean specifically a combination of political and economic science, it is also applicable to a broader area of science encompassing what is now considered sociology and the humanities. The distinction between Utopian and scientific socialism originated with Marx, who criticized the Utopian characteristics of French socialism and English and Scottish political economy. Engels later argued that Utopian socialists failed to recognize why it was that socialism arose in the historical context that it did, that it arose as a response to new social contradictions of a new mode of production, i.e. capitalism. In recognizing the nature of socialism as the resolution of this contradiction and applying a thorough scientific understanding of capitalism, Engels asserted that socialism had broken free from a primitive state and become a science.[2] This shift in socialism was seen as complementary to shifts in contemporary biology sparked by Charles Darwin and the understanding of evolution by natural selection—Marx and Engels saw this new understanding of biology as essential to the new understanding of socialism and vice versa.
Similar methods for analyzing social and economic trends and involving socialism as a product of socioeconomic evolution have also been used by non-Marxist theoreticians, such as Joseph Schumpeter and Thorstein Veblen.
Methodology
Scientific socialism refers to a method for understanding and predicting social, economic and material phenomena by examining their historical trends through the use of the scientific method in order to derive probable outcomes and probable future developments. It is in contrast to what later socialists referred to as Utopian socialism—a method based on establishing seemingly rational propositions for organizing society and convincing others of their rationality and/or desirability. It also contrasts with classical liberal notions of natural law, which are grounded in metaphysical notions of morality rather than a dynamic materialist or physicalist conception of the world.[3]
Scientific socialists view social and political developments as being largely determined by economic conditions as opposed to ideas in contrast to Utopian socialists and classical liberals and thus believe that social relations and notions of morality are context-based relative to their specific stage of economic development. Therefore, as economic systems both socialism and capitalism are not social constructs that can be established at any time based on the subjective will and desires of the population, but instead are products of social evolution. An example of this was the advent of agriculture which enabled human communities to produce a surplus—this change in material and economic development led to a change in social relations and rendered the old form of social organization based on subsistence-living obsolete and a hindrance to further material progress. Changing economic conditions necessitated a change in social organization.[2]
Critique
In his book The Open Society and Its Enemies, the philosopher of science Karl Popper characterized scientific socialism as a pseudoscience. He argues that its method is what he calls "historicism", i.e. the method of analyzing historical trends and deriving universal laws from them. He criticizes this approach as unscientific as its claims cannot be tested and in particular are not subject to being disproven.
See also
- Critique of Dialectical Reason
- Evolutionary economics
- Historical materialism
- Socialism with Chinese characteristics, the official ideology of the Communist Party of China
- Scientific Outlook on Development, a socio-economic concept of the Communist Party of China
- Scientific communism, the Soviet Union curriculum requirements for understanding Soviet orthodoxy on the subject.
- Siad Barre, who called his mixture of Marxism-Leninism and Islam "scientific socialism".
- Socialism: Utopian and Scientific
- Socialist mode of production
References
- Proudhon, Pierre-Joseph (1994-02-25). Proudhon: What is Property?. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521405560.
- Engels, Friedrich (1880). Socialism: Utopian and Scientific. marxists.org. Marxists Internet Archive. Retrieved 10 February 2016.
- Ferri, Enrico (1912). Socialism and Modern Science. From "Evolution and Socialism" (p. 79): "Upon what point are orthodox political economy and socialism in absolute conflict? Political economy has held and holds that the economic laws governing the production and distribution of wealth which it has established are natural laws ... not in the sense that they are laws naturally determined by the condition of the social organism (which would be correct), but that they are absolute laws, that is to say that they apply to humanity at all times and in all places, and consequently, that they are immutable in their principal points, though they may be subject to modification in details. Scientific socialism holds, on the contrary, that the laws established by classical political economy, since the time of Adam Smith, are laws peculiar to the present period in the history of civilized humanity, and that they are, consequently, laws essentially relative to the period of their analysis and discovery".