《论战斗唯物主义的意义》（节选）

【导读】

1922年3月，列宁为论述马克思主义哲学的战斗任务而撰写了这部著作。刊载于1922年《在马克思主义旗帜下》杂志第3期。当时正值苏维埃俄国实行新经济政策时期，一方面，国内外的资产阶级和反动势力企图复辟资本主义；另一方面，“无产阶级文化派”主张对人类文化遗产采取虚无主义。思想意识形态领域内的斗争十分激烈和复杂。

【箴言】

必须记住：正因为现代自然科学经历着急剧的变革，所以往往会产生一些大大小小的反动的哲学学派和流派。

我们必须懂得，任何自然科学，任何唯物主义，如果没有坚实的哲学论据，是无法对资产阶级思想的侵袭和资产阶级世界观的复辟坚持斗争的。

【正文】

一个马克思主义者如果认为，被整个现代社会置于愚昧无知和囿于偏见这种境地的千百万人民群众（特别是农民和手工业者）只有通过纯粹马克思主义的教育这条直路，才能摆脱愚昧状态，那就是最大的而且是最坏的错误。应该把各种无神论的宣传材料供给他们，把实际生活各个方面的事实告诉它们，用各种办法来影响他们，以引起他们的兴趣，唤醒他们的宗教迷梦，用种种方法从各方面使他们振作起来。

十八世纪老无神论者所写的那些锋利的、生动的、有才华的政论，机智地公开地打击了当时盛行的憎侣主义。那些政论在唤醒人们的宗教迷梦方面，往往要比充斥在我们出版物中的常常歪曲（这是不容讳言的）马克思主义的文字更适合千万倍，因为这些文字写得枯燥无味，仅仅转述马克思主义，几乎完全没有选择适当的事实来加以说明。……

必须记住：正因为现代自然科学经历着急剧的变革，所以往往会产生一些大大小小的反动的哲学学派和流派。因此，现在的任务就是要注意自然科学领域里最新革命所提出的种种问题，并吸收自然科学家参加哲学杂志所进行的这一工作。如果不解决这个任务，战斗唯物主义根本就既没有战斗性，也不是唯物主义。季米里亚捷夫在杂志第1期上不得不声明，各国已有一大批资产阶级知识分子抓住了爱因斯坦的理论，而爱因斯坦本人，用季米里亚捷夫的话来说，并没有对唯物主义原理进行任何主动的攻击。这不仅是爱因斯坦一人的遭遇，也是19世纪末以来自然科学的许多大革新家，甚至是多数大革新家的遭遇。

为了避免不自觉地对待此类现象，我们必须懂得，任何自然科学，任何唯物主义，如果没有坚实的哲学论据，是无法对资产阶级思想的侵袭和资产阶级世界观的复辟坚持斗争的。为了坚持这个斗争，为了把它进行到底并取得完全胜利，自然科学家就应该做一个现代唯物主义者，做一个以马克思为代表的唯物主义的自觉拥护者，也就是说，应当做一个辩证唯物主义者。

英文鉴赏

It would be the biggest and most grievous mistake a Marxist could make to think that the millions of the people (especially the peasants and artisans), who have been condemned by all modern society to darkness, ignorance and superstitions — can extricate themselves from this darkness only along the straight line of a purely Marxist education. These masses should be supplied with the most varied atheist propaganda material, they should be made familiar with facts from the most diverse spheres of life, they should be approached in every possible way, so as to interest them, rouse them from their religious torpor, stir them from the most varied angles and by the most varied methods, and so forth.

The keen, vivacious and talented writings of the old eighteenth-century atheists wittily and openly attacked the prevailing clericalism and will very often prove a thousand times more suitable for arousing people from their religious torpor than the dull and dry paraphrases of Marxism, almost completely unillustrated by skillfully selected facts, which predominate in our literature and which (it is no use hiding the fact) frequently distort Marxism.

It should be remembered that the sharp upheaval which modern natural science is undergoing very often gives rise to reactionary philosophical schools and minor schools. trends and minor trends. Unless, therefore, the problems raised by the recent revolution in natural science are followed, and unless natural scientists are enlisted in the work of a philosophical journal, militant materialism can be neither militant nor materialism. Timiryazev was obliged to observe in the first issue of the journal that the theory of Einstein, who, according to Timiryazev, is himself not making any active attack on the foundations of materialism, has already been seized upon by a vast number of bourgeois intellectuals of all countries; it should be noted that this applies not only to Einstein, but to a number, if not to the majority, of the great reformers of natural science since the end of the nineteenth century.

For our attitude towards this phenomenon to be a politically conscious one, it must be realised that no natural science and no materialism can hold its own in the struggle against the onslaught of bourgeois ideas and the restoration of the bourgeois world outlook unless it stands on solid philosophical ground. In order to hold his own in this struggle and carry it to a victorious finish, the natural scientist must be a modern materialist, a conscious adherent of the materialism represented by Marx, i.e., he must be a dialectical materialist.