How The Transcendent Morality Is Possible In The Empirical History

Since Marxism came on the social and historical stage, people concentrate on the empirical dimension of Marx's philosophy (the difference between Marx's philosophy and Marxism is that the former is mainly the philosophical thought while the later is the theory system initiated by Marx and Engels), but its transcendent one is usally overlooked, even some scholars do not think that Marx's philosophy doesn't have the transcendent feature at all. In fact, Marx's philosophy looks the contradiction between transcendent and empirical in order to check the world, then to resolve it logically and historically in practice. The reason why the transcendent dimension of Marx's philosophy is that Marx said philolophy and metaphysics disappear and the empirical is important, and this tends to make people think that he had already threw the transcendent and philosophy away completely; another reason is that the angle of empiricism henders to see the transcendent of Marx's philosophy clearly and empiricism put everything into the empirical so that there is nothing transcendent so Marx's philosophy is also empirical completely.The key factor of the discussion about the intellectual relationship between Marx and Engels is whether or not Marx's philosophy has the transcendent dimension. The Scholars who hold that Marx and Engels were opposite and who hold that they were different think that Marx's philosophy has transcendent dimension and Engels'doesn't, while who hold they were in conformity with each other think that their philosophies don't have transcendent dimension so that they are the same. In fact, Marx consciously recognized the transcendent and explored and changed the world in the contradiction between transcendent and empirical, while Engels denied transcendent and he didn't recognize on ontological level that the transcendent dimension is the factor which cannot be removed, so that his theory has some kind of "hole". That is to say, Marx's philosophy has transcendent and empirical dimensions at the same time and the two conflict each other.In practice, Marx's Antitheism doesn't go into the pure transcendent field, so the transcendent originates in (freedom and) morality. When the transcendent dimension of Marx's philosophy connects with morality, the contradiction between two dimensions turns into that between transcendent morality and empirical history, and in turn into transcendent and empirical, so Marx's philosophy gets large theory space. So, if you mention the relationship between the two dimensions you are talking about the relationship between morality and history, between transcendent and empirical, and vice versa. Practice puts the two dimensions together and during the two conflict each other (that is practice unfolds itself), opposition between them will disappear. Practice is moving and it is not only (abstract practice is) the root-cause of the contradiction but also the way to settle it, and this is the reason why practice is the ontology of Marx's philosophy.In the western philosophical history, discussion about the relationship between transcendent and empirical has existed for a long period of time. It originated in the antagonism between Platonism and Aristotelianism; it is showed in the discussion between realism and nominalism, spiritualism and empiricism, idealism and materialism of the old type. And it shows that transcendent and empirical leave and oppose each other. Kant's Dualism makes the fight clear and he made transcendent and empirical unified on Epistemological level with the transcendental concepts working in the empirical confines but didn't achieve it on Ontological level for he failed to find the way for transcendent morality becoming real in the empirical world. The moral practice is transcendental, but the transcendental is only an idea and isn't actuality. In order to unify transcendent and empirical, he raised the scientifically future metaphysics.In the context of Kant's philosophy, transcendent and empirical are correspondingly essence and phenomenon, freedom and nature, morality and science etc. The essence is the God, world and man's field, and man has will and soul. Though freedom and morality are definite on transcendental and transcendent sense, they must actualize themselves in the empirical world, so transcendent and empirical need to meet with each other. Practice is essentially moral practice, on freedom and morality sense practice gets the transcendent dimension at the same time as experiencing action practice gets the empirical dimension. So transcendent and empirical are unified in practice. Transcendent and empirical are fighting, and during the fight practice actualizes itself and goes into the history, and during actualizing history and Marx's philosophy achieve at the same time, and this makes practice become the ontology of Marx's philosophy.From the practical point of view, it is "self split up of secular base" that make transcendent and empirical leave and contradict each other and during splitting up purely transcendent God and purely empirical nature (having nothing to do with human), and transcendent and empirical dimensions of practice are obstructed so practice becomes abstract. When the transcendent dimension is obstructed materialism of the old type appears and when the empirical one obstructed idealism does and in the abstract to keep both transcendent and empirical develops dualism. Practice that its transcendent and empirical dimensions are both manifested is concrete so that it can make the two become a unit, so that Kant's future metaphysics can be achieved. But achievement is also critique and disappearance because Marx criticized splitting secular world so that all the philosophic and closed systems which only depend on abstract speculation die.The freedom concept which was established in Marx's "Doctoral Thesis" is definite, and he searched the way for definite freedom to actualize itself in the empirical world so freedom is transcendental. Kant held morality which bases on transcendent freedom is transcendent. Marx's moral concept came from Kant. Marx didn't talk about the transcendent feature but this does not prove that he denied the feature and does not prove he rejected morality. Only because the transcendent of morality is pure so that it cannot actualize itself in the empirical world he rejected it. Facing the capital's sin, he tried to make morality be truly put into effect and he was not satisfied with morally censuring. So Marx turned the opposition between transcendent and empirical into the question how the transcendent morality possible in the empirical history.Morality is absent from the capital society because the capital deprives morality of the transcendent feature. Transcendent morality must empirically unfold itself to become real but the empirical makes empiricists freak out and deny the transcendent of morality and Marx's philosophy. The transcendent feature of morality and it empirically unfolding are conflicting and this makes the history develop. Marx stood on the conflict to research the world then to empirically settle the conflict and this makes morality be possible in history. From the transcendent morality's point of view, history is the subjective process that human being "changes the world"; from the empirical history's point of view, history is the objective process that the contradiction unfolds itself to form a rule. During practice, the two processes are one for they are the different conclusions when you investigate one thing in different ways.But for Marx, there is no morality which is outside history because morality is the product of history. As expression of human being's free and social nature, morality is in history. History is that practice unfolds itself, and in practice people find their free nature and find they are "class things that exist" and "social animals" but the object-oriented nature in turn rules people. When people were primarily with their nature they didn't see morality while when they lose it (that is they are ruled by the object-oriented nature) people begin concentrating on morality and it becomes concept going onto the stage of philosophy and history. Morality is absent as soon as it appears on the stage so that it is the essential content of practice of modern society that to investigate how to make morality truly put into effect, that is practice is the real way for human being to get its class nature.For that matter, in this paper we will unfold according to the relationship between transcendent and empirical dimensions of Marx's philosophy. There are some levels among different parts, such as after talking about the two dimensions we go into the relationship between them. At the same time, on some sense different parts are also at the same level for when we talk about the transcendent we can't leave the empirical, and vice versa. There is another thing that some titles of sections do not seem to conform to the content very well even the answer after a title will be enhanced and replenished because Marx's philosophy is a whole so if you go into it from a part you will touch upon the whole and answer a partial question thoroughly you can't leave the whole, and if you want to show clearly the whole you must be from some part.