MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-22
Часть–2_ Март –2025
352
ONTOLOGICAL PROBLEMS OF THE
PHILOSOPHY OF ECONOMICS
Valiyev B.N.
Associate Professor,
Department of "Social Sciences and Law",
International Islamic academy of Uzbekistan
Abstract: This article delves into the ontological foundations of economic
being, situating it within the broader philosophical inquiry into the nature of
existence. Two contrasting perspectives frame the analysis: being as a primordial,
unchanging element and being as the totality of all that exists, capable of becoming
and development. Adopting the latter view, the study explores the systemic
interconnections among natural, social, and ideal being, emphasizing the pivotal role
of economic being in social life. Through a materialist framework informed by
Marxist principles—materialism, interdependence, development, and the existence of
objective laws—the article argues that labor constitutes the social substance
underpinning economic being across its historical manifestations. Addressing
fundamental questions about existence, relationships, and processes of becoming, this
work offers a dialectical understanding of economic being’s foundational
significance, engaging with critiques from Durkheim, Weber, and others to refine its
conclusions.
Key words: Ontological Problems, Philosophy of Economics, Economic
Being, Materialism, Interdependence, Development, Objective Laws, Labor, Social
Substance, Dialectical Understanding, Natural Being, Social Being, Ideal Being,
Base and Superstructure, Transformational Processes, Historical Materialism
Introduction
The question of being lies at the heart of philosophical inquiry, serving as a
perennial touchstone for understanding the essence, structure, and dynamics of
MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-22
Часть–2_ Март –2025
353
existence. In the philosophy of economics, this ontological exploration takes on a
specific urgency, as it seeks to clarify the nature of economic being and its
relationship to other dimensions of reality. Historically, philosophers have
approached being through two primary lenses: one that identifies it with a
foundational, eternal element—such as Democritus’s atom or Plato’s idea—and
another that encompasses all that exists, embracing its capacity for transformation and
development. These perspectives offer distinct starting points for examining
economic phenomena, with implications for how we understand the interplay of
material and ideal factors in human life.
This article adopts the broader, developmental conception of being to
investigate the systemic unity of natural, social, and ideal being, with a particular
focus on the economic sphere within social existence. Economic being, understood as
the domain of material production and exchange, emerges as a critical nexus for
addressing foundational ontological questions: what exists, how it exists, what
interconnections bind the existent, and how it becomes what it is. By employing a
materialist framework rooted in the works of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, this
study posits that economic being, grounded in labor as a social substance, occupies a
determining role in the structure and evolution of society. The analysis unfolds across
three main sections: a theoretical framework that establishes the conceptual
groundwork, a discussion that engages with implications and critiques, and a
summary that synthesizes key insights. Through this structure, the article aims to
contribute to the philosophy of economics by illuminating the ontological
underpinnings of economic life and its broader significance within the tapestry of
being.
Theoretical Framework
The investigation begins with an exposition of two competing ontological
conceptions of being, each with profound implications for the philosophy of
economics. The first perspective, traceable to ancient Greek philosophy, interprets
being as the existence of a primordial, unchanging element that underpins the
transient world. For Democritus, this element was the atom—an indivisible, eternal
MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-22
Часть–2_ Март –2025
354
unit whose interactions generate the observable cosmos. For Plato, it was the idea—
a timeless, ideal form that conditions the imperfect, mutable reality of sensory
experience. In both cases, being is contrasted with the world of becoming, with the
latter’s ephemerality dependent on the stability of the former. This view implies a
hierarchical ontology, where an eternal foundation anchors the flux of existence,
preventing its descent into absolute chaos.
The second perspective, which this article adopts, defines being as the totality
of all that exists, encompassing both stability and change. Rather than positing a
single, unchanging origin, this conception endows being with the capacity for
becoming—transitioning into other states, evolving into complex structures, and
developing across qualitatively distinct levels. This systemic approach emphasizes
the interconnections among different domains of existence, framing being as a
dynamic unity of diversity. Historically, this view finds resonance in dialectical
traditions, notably in Hegel’s philosophy and its materialist reinterpretation by Marx
and Engels. For the philosophy of economics, this perspective shifts the focus from
static essences to processes of transformation, foregrounding the role of economic
activity in shaping and being shaped by broader existential structures.
Within this framework, being is conceptualized as a systemic unity of
developing diversity, giving rise to four interrelated questions: (1) what exists, (2)
how it exists, (3) what is the nature of the interconnections among what exists, and
(4) what is the nature of the process of becoming? To address the first question, three
primary types of being are identified: natural being (the material world of nature),
social being (human societal relations), and ideal being (consciousness, thought, and
cultural forms). These categories, however, remain abstract without further
specification. Concretization requires an analysis of the relationships between these
types—e.g., how natural being underpins social being, or how ideal being emerges
from social interactions—as well as the internal dynamics within each type, such as
the interplay between individuals and society or between material conditions and
consciousness.
MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-22
Часть–2_ Март –2025
355
A materialist approach, drawing on Engels’s developmental schema and
Marx’s historical materialism, provides the theoretical scaffolding for this analysis.
Engels outlines a trajectory from natural being to social and ideal being, rooted in the
evolution of material existence. Natural being, initially inanimate, progresses to
biological life and eventually to the preconditions for human society, marked by the
emergence of labor and thought. Labor, as socio-labor activity, facilitates the
transition from nature to society, enabling humans to shape their environment and
develop consciousness. This process is governed by four interrelated principles:
1.
Materialism
: Social being is objective, existing independently of
subjective will, and is fundamentally shaped by material conditions. Economic
activity, as the production of material life, forms the bedrock of this objectivity.
2.
Interdependence
: The relationships between individuals and society are
dialectically intertwined, emerging from and shaping the process of material
production. Society is neither a mere aggregate of individuals nor an external
imposition but a system of relations conditioned by economic necessity.
3.
Development
: Social being evolves through internal contradictions,
notably between productive forces (tools, skills, and technologies) and production
relations (forms of ownership and distribution). These contradictions drive historical
change, from primitive communism to capitalism and beyond.
4.
Objective Laws
: Societal laws arise spontaneously from human activity,
reflecting the necessity of material production rather than conscious design. These
laws govern the dynamics of economic being, manifesting as stable, essential
relationships.
Economic being, as a subset of social being, is defined by the production of
material life, with labor as its foundational substance. Marx’s assertion that "the first
historical act is the production of the means necessary to satisfy these needs" (Marx,
34, p. 26) highlights the primacy of economic activity in human existence. This
primacy is further elaborated through the dialectic of base and superstructure: the
base, comprising material relations of production, determines the superstructure of
legal, political, and ideological forms, though the latter exerts reciprocal influence.
MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-22
Часть–2_ Март –2025
356
The interplay of productive forces and production relations—e.g., technological
advances prompting shifts in ownership patterns—underpins the developmental
trajectory of economic being, positioning it as the linchpin of social life.
Discussion
The theoretical framework outlined above establishes economic being as a
central pillar of social existence, a claim that warrants detailed exploration and critical
engagement. The principle of materialism anchors this analysis, asserting that social
being, including its economic dimension, is grounded in objective material conditions
rather than subjective consciousness or ideal forms. Marx’s reversal of idealist
ontology—"it is not the consciousness of people that determines their being, but, on
the contrary, their social being that determines their consciousness"
1
—challenges
traditional philosophy by prioritizing material production over mental constructs.
This inversion is concretized in the necessity of labor, which Marx describes as "an
eternal natural necessity" enabling the metabolism between humanity and nature
2
.
Labor, as the substance of economic being, transcends its concrete historical forms—
whether the communal labor of hunter-gatherers, the coerced labor of slaves, or the
wage labor of industrial workers—unifying them as manifestations of a single,
immanent process of self-development.
The principle of interdependence illuminates the dialectical relationship
between individuals and society, a dynamic Hegel first articulated and Marx later
grounded in material production. Hegel observes that "neither the universal has
significance nor can it be realized without particular interest, knowledge, and volition;
nor do individuals live solely for their particular interest as private persons, but they
also will the universal and act for it"
3
. Marx extends this insight by rooting the
dialectic in economic activity: society emerges as a system of relations shaped by the
production of material life, which, in turn, shapes individuals. For example, the
transition from feudalism to capitalism involved not just individual innovations but a
1
Маркс, К. Сочинения. Т. 13. К критике политической экономии / К. Маркс, Ф. Энгельс. – 2-е изд. – М.:
Политиздат, 1959. – С. 1 – 167
2
Маркс, К. Сочинения. Т. 23: Капитал. Критика политической экономии. Том первый / К. Маркс, Ф. Энгельс. –
2-е изд. – М.: Политиздат, 1960. – 907 с
3
Гегель, Г.В.Ф. Философия права /Г.Ф.В. Гегель. – М.: Мысль, 1990. – 524 с.
MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-22
Часть–2_ Март –2025
357
reconfiguration of production relations—from serfdom to wage labor—that redefined
societal structures and individual identities. This interdependence underscores the
qualitative specificity of society as a whole, possessing characteristics (e.g., class
structures) absent in isolated individuals.
The principle of development highlights the dynamic, contradictory nature of
economic being, driven by the tension between productive forces and production
relations. Marx identifies this contradiction as the root of "all historical conflicts"
4
, a
process observable in historical shifts such as the Industrial Revolution, where
mechanization (productive forces) outpaced feudal ownership (production relations),
precipitating capitalist transformation. The base-superstructure dialectic further
enriches this analysis: changes in the base—e.g., the invention of the steam engine—
initiate new developmental cycles, while the superstructure—e.g., liberal
ideologies—reinforces and reshapes these changes. Revolutionary movements, such
as the French Revolution, exemplify this interplay, where economic shifts (e.g.,
enclosures) fueled ideological critiques that, in turn, catalyzed further material
transformations.
Critics of this materialist framework offer substantial challenges that merit
consideration. Émile Durkheim rejects the primacy of economic factors, arguing that
"the economic factor is secondary and derivative" to religious life, which he sees as
"abundant and all-encompassing" in primitive societies
5
. He questions how religion
could derive from a "rudimentary" economic base, suggesting instead that economic
activity depends on prior social cohesion fostered by religion. This critique, however,
overlooks the material preconditions for religious thought: humans must first secure
their survival through labor, a necessity that precedes and enables cultural elaboration.
Moreover, Engels counters that early religious notions, while not directly reducible
to economic causes, reflect "the low economic development of the prehistoric
4
Маркс, К. Сочинения. Т. 3. Немецкая идеология / К. Маркс, Ф. Энгельс. – 2-е изд. – М.: Политиздат, 1955. – С.
7 – 544.
5
Дюркгейм, Э. Метод социологии 1895. Работы разных лет.1887-1911 / Э. Дюркгейм // Цифровая библиотека
по философии. – http://filosof.historic.ru/ books/item/f00/s00/z0000689/index.shtml
MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-22
Часть–2_ Март –2025
358
period"
6
, as seen in animistic beliefs tied to natural resource dependence. The
materialist response thus posits a mediated relationship, where economic conditions
shape political and cultural forms indirectly, as in the link between surplus production,
slavery, and the rise of monotheistic ideologies.
Max Weber, in contrast, argues that the "spirit of capitalism"—a cultural ethos
of thrift and profit—preceded capitalist economic development
7
. Citing Benjamin
Franklin’s New England, where this spirit emerged by 1632, Weber suggests that
ideas drove material change. Yet this overlooks the historical context: New England’s
settlers imported ideas from England, where capitalist production had been advancing
since the 16th century, driven by enclosures and mercantile expansion. Earlier
examples, such as the 12th-century Albigensian heresy in southern France, further
illustrate economic influence: urban growth and artisan labor fostered demands for
religious reform (e.g., abolishing tithes), prefiguring Protestantism’s economic
critiques. These cases suggest that cultural shifts often follow, rather than precede,
material developments.
The principle of objective laws reinforces the materialist thesis by framing
societal dynamics as spontaneous outcomes of human activity. Unlike natural laws,
social laws depend on human existence—emerging through labor and interaction—
yet operate independently of conscious intent. For instance, the rise of class divisions
from surplus production was not planned but resulted from practical responses to
material needs. This spontaneity underscores labor’s role as the immanent force of
economic being, linking humanity with nature ("man–nature") and each other ("man–
man") in a historically contingent yet necessary process. The law of correspondence
between productive forces and production relations exemplifies this objectivity:
technological advances (e.g., the printing press) necessitate new social forms (e.g.,
mass literacy and markets), driving history forward beyond individual volition.
Summary
6
Энгельс, Ф. Письма об историческом материализме 1890-1894 / Ф. Энгельс // Цифровая библиотека по
философии. – http://filosof.historic.ru/ books/item/f00/s01/z0001014/index.shtml.
7
Вебер, М. Избранные произведения / М. Вебер. – М.: Прогресс, 1990. – 808 с
MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-22
Часть–2_ Март –2025
359
This article has undertaken a comprehensive exploration of the ontological
problems of the philosophy of economics, situating economic being within the
systemic unity of natural, social, and ideal being. Adopting a materialist framework
informed by Marxist principles—materialism, interdependence, development, and
objective laws—the analysis establishes economic being as the foundational
dimension of social life. Labor emerges as the social substance, unifying diverse
historical forms (e.g., feudal serfdom, industrial wage labor) and propelling their
evolution through contradictions between productive forces and production relations.
The dialectic of base and superstructure elucidates this process, with economic
conditions serving as the determining, though not sole, cause of social change.
Engagement with critiques from Durkheim and Weber enriches the
discussion, revealing the complexity of economic being’s role. While Durkheim’s
emphasis on religion highlights cultural factors, it underestimates the material
preconditions of human existence; Weber’s focus on the "spirit of capitalism"
misattributes primacy to ideas over economic shifts, as historical evidence suggests
otherwise. The principle of objective laws reconciles these tensions, affirming that
economic being operates through spontaneous, necessary processes rooted in labor’s
metabolism with nature and society.
In conclusion, this study underscores the determining significance of
economic being within the broader ontology of existence, offering a dialectical
understanding of its interplay with natural and ideal dimensions. Labor, as the eternal
necessity of human life, links the "man–nature" and "man–man" relationships, driving
the self-development of social forms. This analysis not only clarifies the qualitative
specificity of economic being but also provides a philosophical foundation for further
research into specific economic phenomena, from historical modes of production to
contemporary global systems.
REFERENCES
Engels, F. (1883).
Dialectics of Nature
. Progress Publishers.
Hegel, G. W. F. (1821).
Philosophy of Right
. Oxford University Press.
Marx, K. (1845).
The German Ideology
. International Publishers.
MODERN EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT
Выпуск журнала №-22
Часть–2_ Март –2025
360
Marx, K. (1859).
A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy
. Progress
Publishers.
Marx, K. (1867).
Capital, Volume I
. Penguin Classics.
Durkheim, E. (1912).
The Elementary Forms of Religious Life
. Free Press.
Weber, M. (1905).
The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism
.
Routledge.
