a) The Concept of Possibility and Reality

p When exploring the essence of the object under study, cognition goes back to the past and traces the history of its inception and development. Once the essence is revealed, cognition may anticipate the future and find out, in addition to what the object was in the past and what it is now, what it will be in the future. In other words, once a phenomenon’s essence i.e. the totality of its necessary aspects and connections (laws) is established we may draw conclusions as to its real and possible states.

p Reality is that which actually exists, whereas possibility is that which may occur under relevant circumstances.

p One may argue that if reality is that which actually exists, it cannot be distinguished from possibility, inasmuch as possibility, too, actually 238 exists. Indeed, possibility exists actually, but only as a capacity of matter to change, under certain conditions, from one thing or qualitative state into another. In this sense, i.e. when it is able to change into something else, possibility constitutes an aspect of reality and, naturally, possesses an intrinsic quality, such as real existence.

p When, on the other hand, we treat possibility as something not yet existent, we mean qualitative states or characteristics into which the given phenomenon must change under relevant conditions, not the ability of one phenomenon to change into another. These characteristics do not possess the property of real being, they are as yet nonexistent in reality, but they may appear.

p Thus, by possibility we mean properties, states, processes and things that are non-existent, but which may appear owing to the fact that reality possesses the intrinsic ability to change from one thing into another.

Having materialised, possibility becomes reality, so reality may be defined as materialised possibility, whereas possibility may be defined as potential reality.

b) A Critique of Idealist and Metaphysical Views
of Possibility and Reality

p The question of possibility and reality has been attracting philosophers’ attention since ancient times. Plato’s solution, for instance, was to distinguish possible from actual or real existence. He held that the world of ideas and ideal essences 239 possessed the property of real being, whereas the world of things possessed possible being. Since it is in a state of possibility, the world of things could not change into reality and acquire real existence. There was, Plato believed, a necessary division between real and possible being.

p In contrast to Plato, Aristotle rejected the existence of an insurmountable wall between possibility and reality, although he acknowledged the separate, independent existence of these two categories. He believed that the possible can turn into the real, and vice versa. He considered primordial matter to be pure possibility, while the form that ultimately merged with God, who was the form of forms, was in his view pure reality. The blending of form with matter resulted in the appearance of qualitatively definite things possessing possible and real existence and changing when one opposite (possibility) changed into another (reality).

p According to Aristotle, the transition of possibility into reality did not occur as a result of forces and tendencies inherent in a thing-it was connected with the action of external factors, of outside force, i.e. of a certain really existing thing. From a thing existing as a possibility, he believed, there always emerged a thing existing in reality, as a result of the action of another thing, also existing in reality.

p Proceeding from Aristotle’s proposition, Thomas Aquinas substantiated the necessary existence of pure reality acting in such a way that a particular possibility turns into reality. Only 240 God, he said, can perform the role of this (pure) reality.

p The metaphysical separation of possibility from reality and their absolutisation inevitably lead to idealism, to a search for a doer who can blend possibility and reality and thereby create the multitude of things and phenomena we observe in the surrounding world.

p Giordano Bruno resolutely opposed attempts to divorce possibility from reality. In his view, possibility cannot exist outside and independently of reality-it is inherent in it.

p Hobbes developed this idea. He proved that possibility and reality are closely interconnected and stressed that they have one and the same origin.

p Kant, however, was of another opinion. Possibility and reality, he said, are not inherent in things or the outside world-they are just the characteristic features of the human mind, of its cognitive faculties. “...The difference of possible from real things,” he wrote, “is one that counts only subjectively for the human understanding.”  [240•1 

p Hegel thoroughly criticised Kant’s subjectivist view of possibility and reality. He showed that as applied to the development of thought possibility stems from reality. He demonstrated the dialectics of the transformation of one into the other.

Dialectical materialism gave a materialist 241 explanation and scientific substantiation to the laws governing the interconnection of possibility and reality, which Hegel had guessed.

c) The Interconnection Between Possibility and Reality.
Types of Possibility

p A possibility turns into reality only under certain conditions. The possibility of a socialist revolution in capitalist countries, for instance, may only turn into reality if a general crisis breaks out in a particular country, if the lower strata no longer wish to live as before and the upper layers can no longer govern as before, when the poverty and hardships of the oppressed classes are more intense than usual and their activity rises, and, lastly, when the revolutionary class becomes ab’.e “to take revolutionary mass action strong enough to break (or dislocate) the old government".  [241•1 

p Conditions are the totality of factors necessary for translating possibility into reality.

p The transformation of certain possibilities into reality does not mean that the number of possibilities is reduced. The realisation of some possibilities brings about the emergence of others. They are engendered by a new reality; Reality cannot exhaust its possibilities by changing from one qualitative state into another, because they are limitless.

p Any phenomenon constitutes the unity of a multitude of different and opposing aspects and 242 tendencies, each of which possesses the ability of change, under certain conditions, into another or into its opposite. Every phenomenon therefore has many different possibilities. Taking into account their characteristic features, these possibilities may be divided into the following types: real and formal, abstract and concrete, reversible and irreversible, co-existing and excluding, pertaining to essence and to phenomenon.

p Possibilities stemming horn, the necessary aspects and connections of an object and from the laws governing its functioning and development are called real; possibilities stemming from accidental connections and relations are called formal.

p The possibility of organising the economies of socialist countries on a planned basis is an example of a real possibility. It stems from the dominant position of public ownership of the means of production-a necessary factor in socialist countries. The possibility of a worker becoming a capitalist is an example of a formal possibility. It is not based on necessity, nor does it follow from the laws governing the functioning of the capitalist mode of production-it stems from external factors and an accidental concurrence of circumstances. The laws of capitalism presuppose, in fact, quite the opposite-a worker in capitalist society must always remain a worker.

p Being engendered by the necessary aspects and connections of reality, real possibilities differ as regards their connection with the conditions necessary for their materialisation. Depending on this 243 connection, they are divided into abstract and concrete possibilities.

p A possibility is called concrete when the relevant conditions tor its materialisation have appeared or may appear, and abstract when such conditions are absent. For an abstract possibility to materialise, a phenomenon that possesses it must pass through a number of stages of development.

p The possibility of economic crises under capitalism is a graphic illustration of a concrete possibility. Relevant conditions may and do form-as reality proves-in developed capitalist countries for this possibility to materialise. While it is concrete with respect to a mature capitalist society, it is abstract if applied to simple commodity production. The conditions necessary for translating this possibility into reality were absent in the framework of simple commodity production which had to pass through a number of development stages for these conditions to form. Simple commodity production had to change into capitalist commodity production, and the latter, in turn, had to reach a certain level of development. It is not accidental, therefore, that the first economic crisis of capitalism broke out as late as 1825.

p All possibilities may be divided up into reversible and irreversible, depending on the specific features of the process by which they become reality.

p A possibility whose transformation into reality means that the initial reality becomes a possibility in relation to itself is called reversible. A 244 possibility whose materialisation brings about the conversion of the initial reality into an impossibility is called irreversible.

p The possibility of mechanical motion being converted into heat is an example of a reversible possibility, in so far as, once it has materialised, that which was reality before (mechanical motion) becomes a possibility. Indeed, heat contains the possibility of being converted into mechanical motion. The possibility of the chemical energy of coal being converted into electricity is irreversible, since, once it has been so converted, the initial reality becomes an impossibility-electricity cannot be reconverted into coal.

p Being inherent in one and the same phenomenon, different possibilities are interconnected and interdependent. Depending on the nature of their interconnection, possibilities may be divided into co-existing and exclusive.

p A possibility whose materialisation does not entail the disappearance ot another possibility is called co-existing (in relation to the latter). A possibility whose materialisation brings about the disappearance ot another possibility is called exclusive.

p The possibility of a peasant becoming a kulak, for example, is co-existing in relation to that of his becoming a farm-hand. Having turned into a kulak exploiter, the peasant may not stand the competition and be ruined, thus becoming a hired farm labourer. The possibility of private capitalist ownership becoming public socialist property, on the other hand, is exclusive in relation to the 245 possibility of one man exploiting another. The materialisation of the former brings about the disappearance of the latter-the establishment of socialist property rules out the possibility of exploitation in the given country.

p The materialisation of the different possibilities inherent in an object has different effects on its essence. The realisation of some of them does not change the essence, while the realisation of others has the opposite effect-it entails the transformation of the object into another object.

p A possibility whose materialisation does not change the essence ot an object is called the possibility of a phenomenon. A possibility whose realisation entails a change in the essence ot an object and its transformation into another object is called the possibility ot the essence.

For example, the possibility for the workers in a certain industry to secure a wage rise as a result of their struggle with the capitalists is the possibility of a phenomenon, inasmuch as its realisation does not change the social essence of the given social groups. The workers remain what they have been before-people deprived of ownership of the means of production, removed from power, and exploited by the bourgeoisie. On the other hand, the possibility of a socialist revolution in a capitalist country is the possibility of the essence. Its realisation results in a change in the essence of the social system-capitalist society turns into socialist society.