Materialism versus idealism - an ongoing battle

2 min read


This dichotomy is probably as old as philosophy itself. In the Western tradition, it can be traced most clearly to Democritus and Plato, but it is understandable that lesser-known thinkers (Leucippus) had also formulated this opposition before. Democritus was a materialist and the main exponent of ancient atomism. His atom theory states that the whole nature is composed of smallest invisible, indivisible units (elementary particles), the atoms.

Aristotle's theorem of supersummativity (the whole is more than the sum of its parts) points out, for example in biology, that life phenomena cannot be reduced to physical and chemical processes, i.e. cannot be decomposed in the sense of atomism. This shows vividly that a mere reductionism to the smallest particles cannot do justice to a complex system of constant interaction.

Idealism and materialism are thus rather groupings of theories used to describe social events. Materialism, as the name implies, is about the importance of materials or matter, while idealism assigns the central importance in life to reality.

But what is the difference between hard and soft materialism, as described in the meme? Soft materialism agrees with hard materialism that the only substances are material objects, but claims that some of these objects (e.g., persons) have mental properties that are different from physical properties. Brain events certainly often cause mental events and vice versa.

This dualism has unfolded in modern times, and not only theoretically. For Marx and Engels, materialism meant that the material world, perceptible by the senses, has an objective reality that is independent of spirit or mind. They did not deny the reality of mental or spiritual processes, but maintained that ideas can therefore arise only as products and reflections of material conditions. They are thus representatives of a soft materialism.

The latter-day antagonist to this theory has been Hegel's idealism, though Hegel's philosophy preceded Marxism in time, and Marx and Engels were strongly influenced by Hegel's theorizations. Marx, however, literally turned Hegel upside down by transforming the idealist dialectic into a materialist one, that is, by proposing that material circumstances shape ideas and not vice versa. This is to be related primarily to the philosophy of history, or the general socio-cultural effect on what we call progress.

So, you've just finished reading the funniest and most enlightening blog article ever written (we simply like exaggerations). Your mind is blown, your sides ache from laughing, and you would like to enjoy this experience regularly. Here's the kicker: you can simply subscribe to our free memesletter to get just such memes and their explanation delivered to your inbox on a weekly basis. Simply sign up at the bottom of this page!

Additionally you realize that you absolutely need some merch to commemorate this momentous occasion. Well, lucky for you, we've got the perfect selection of witty t-shirts, hilarious mugs, and sassy stickers that will forever remind you of that time you read that incredible blog post. And here's the cherry on top - use the promo code "BLOGREADER" at checkout to get a whopping 15% off your entire order! It's like getting a discount on instant joy and everlasting awesomeness. So go ahead and snag some swag, my friend. You deserve it.


You liked this blog post and don't want to miss any new articles? Receive a weekly update with the best philosophy memes on the internet for free and directly by email.

Back to blog

1 comment

I prefer Dialectical Materialism which views this world in flux and the uses the term “Process” instead of “thing” since the word “thing” or “stuff” implies compartmentalised reality, isolated event, and static nature of the subject. Using the term “process” lets us perceive reality in its totality. Example, the shirt we wear is a process, it was a seed, then a piece of cotton, then piece of clothe and it transformed into a shirt and it will be littered tomorrow. It is a “process” and all these transformations either quantitative ones or qualitative ones come to being with different “internal relations”, for example with “relation” of the worker the cotton was transformed into the piece of clothe. So there are processes and relations not “things”. Replacing this simple word makes one perceive the reality in a dynamically new way. :)

Prof. Mushahid Syed

Prof Mushahid Syed

Leave a comment

Please note, comments need to be approved before they are published.