68 SOCIAL SCIENTIST Engels in Anti- Duhring directed his chief criticism against a philosopher (Duhring) for not being materialist, while in Dialectics of Nature he, more in passing, admonished scientists (such as Karl Vogt, Ludwig Buchner, and Jacob Moleschott) for not being dialectial. But in both works Engels attempted to locate a balance point ... In Anti'Duhring the reputedly postivistic work, Engels also presented some of his best known discussion of the dialectic in nature, while in Dialectics of Nature the work supposedly heavily Hegelian in inspiration, he stoutly defended the concept of the materiality of the Universe9'.8 At places the bias of the author in favour of a critical realistic position leads him to look for an ambiguity in Lenin's work through which he would like to maintain that Lenin's adherence to materialism is of an assumptive character. Graham goes on to compare the Marxist position on the materiality of the Universe, as arrived at through the investigations of the sciences, with that of the empiricist philosopher Quine. According to the latter the concept of physical objects is a ^superior myth' validated by pragmatic success. The intention is to illustrate the complementary character of the two positions. Such comparisons result from an inadequate appreciation of the role of the relationship between theory and practice in Marxist philosophy. Graham, characteristically a ^realist' holds the erroneous opinion that the aspect of the unity of theory and practice e 'is not so much an integral part of the intellectual structure of the system as it is a methodological principle."9 Stalin's Intellectual Leadership The unity of theory and practice is central to Marxist epistemo-logy. Graham wrongly and in a rather simplistic manner identified this concept with the exigency of practical return from theoretical endeavours. For Marx "the question whether objective truth can be attributed to human thinking is not a question of theory but is a practical question. In practce man must prove the truth, that is the reality and power, the this-sidedness of his thinking. The dispute over the reality or non-reality of thinking which is isolated from practice is a purely scholastic question".! ° For dialectical materialist epistemology "all mysteries which mislead theory to mysticism find their rational solution in human practice and in the comprehension of this practice".11 The unity of theory and practice is the point of departure for Marxist philosophy as is evident from Marx^s famous assertion: "Philosophers have interpreted the world, the point however is to change it." For Marxist philosophy, a thought that is not equipped with the requisites for changing reality is impotent. The denial of this unity as organic to Marxist thought leads Graham to abhor the idea of centralized political power wedded with the philosophic thought of dialectical materialism and in it he finds the roots of all that he considers undesirable. His lack of appreciation of the development and growth of science and society under the political and intellectual