By Lesz Nowak
Much is related in Marxist literature approximately Marxist method that's speculated to be fullyyt unique - differing greatly from all different developments within the glossy philosophy of technology. however, besides the fact that, it truly is unfallacious to country that there aren't any humans outdoor Marxism who wish to deny this assertion. This has to place those that rather think that Marxism has anything vital to assert in philosophy of technology on defend: if somebody says whatever very important others are likely to be susceptible to protest. yet who's vulnerable to protest whilst it really is acknowledged that Marx em ployed either induction and deduction, a ancient technique and a logical one to boot, synthesis, but additionally research, and so forth? who's prone to protest whilst it's not recognized what inside of this framework 'induction', 'deduction' 'history' or 'logic' suggest? who's vulnerable to protest while 'Marxist meth odology' is gifted no longer due to unique definitions and transparent hypotheses yet via a jungle of quotations? i believe that the most malfeasance of the present 'Marxist methodology', is that of ecclecticism. The technique of Marx is gifted as a col lection of trivial and/or imprecise principles yet now not as a approach of statements subordinated to any transparent, sure perspective offering a brand new grab ofthe nature of clinical cognition. look for reconstruction of Marxian meth odology as a process of the type is the most target of this book.