MARXISM AS SCIENCE
Classical sociology consistently belittled
Marxism's claim to science (Hughes 1958,
Chapter 3). Weber, Durkheim, Pareto, and more
rerecently,
Parsons assailed Marxism for substitut- quires,
however, that we first turn to philosophy
ing moral passion and Hegelian metaphysics for to
clarify the possible meanings of science.
scientific reason, for not treating evidence seriously,
and for failing to adopt thk techniques of
modem social science. Marxists themselves have
battled fiercelv over Marxism's scientific status.
much so that they are conventionally divided
into two opposed camps -scientific Marxists
who attempt to establish laws of economic de-
velopment in analogy to the laws of the natural
sciences, and critical Marxists who deny the ex-
sciistence
of any fixed determinism and concen-
trate on the irrationality of capitalism, the gap
Lakabetween
what is and what could be. Determin-
ism versus voluntarism, science versus revolu-
tion, materialism versus idealism, the old versus
young Marx, have been enduring antinomies
Marxism (Gouldner 1980, Chapter 2).
However, whether from the perspective of soci-
ology or within Marxism itself, the critiques of
Marxist science have rarely been carefully expli-
cated, let alone subjected to empirical exarnina-
tion. That is the task of this essay. This task rerecently,
quires, however, that we first turn to philosophy
to clarify the possible meanings of science.
Classical sociology consistently belittled
Marxism's claim to science (Hughes 1958,
Chapter 3). Weber, Durkheim, Pareto, and more
rerecently,
Parsons assailed Marxism for substitut- quires,
however, that we first turn to philosophy
ing moral passion and Hegelian metaphysics for to
clarify the possible meanings of science.
scientific reason, for not treating evidence seriously,
and for failing to adopt thk techniques of
modem social science. Marxists themselves have
battled fiercelv over Marxism's scientific status.
much so that they are conventionally divided
into two opposed camps -scientific Marxists
who attempt to establish laws of economic de-
velopment in analogy to the laws of the natural
sciences, and critical Marxists who deny the ex-
sciistence
of any fixed determinism and concen-
trate on the irrationality of capitalism, the gap
Lakabetween
what is and what could be. Determin-
ism versus voluntarism, science versus revolu-
tion, materialism versus idealism, the old versus
young Marx, have been enduring antinomies
Marxism (Gouldner 1980, Chapter 2).
However, whether from the perspective of soci-
ology or within Marxism itself, the critiques of
Marxist science have rarely been carefully expli-
cated, let alone subjected to empirical exarnina-
tion. That is the task of this essay. This task rerecently,
quires, however, that we first turn to philosophy
to clarify the possible meanings of science.
No comments:
Post a Comment