This volume is concerned with the re-evaluation and criticism of Capital itself. It is in three parts, each covering a specific area of Marxist theory. The first part contains an investigation into Marx’s theory of value and considers the types of questions and modes of analysis to which this theory leads. In the second part the nature and implications of necessary economic ‘laws of tendency’ in the capitalist mode of production are covered. Finally there is an analysis of the role of class structure and economic agents in Marxist theory.
First published in 1976, this book is concerned with the nature of classification in the social sciences. Its thesis is that classifications are dependent upon and are derived from theoretical explanations. Classification is not a theoretically neutral typification or ordering of social forms. This is because objects classified – societies, social institutions – are not given to knowledge independently of the categories which construct them and because the categories of classification are themselves the products of theories.
This volume is concerned with the re-evaluation and criticism of Capital itself. It is in three parts, each covering a specific area of Marxist theory. The first part contains an investigation into Marx’s theory of value and considers the types of questions and modes of analysis to which this theory leads. In the second part the nature and implications of necessary economic ‘laws of tendency’ in the capitalist mode of production are covered. Finally there is an analysis of the role of class structure and economic agents in Marxist theory.
This book explores the political and legal institutions necessary for a democratic socialism in advanced industrial societies. It argues that a democratic socialist society needs a firm framework of public law, and a formal constitution. Populist conceptions of direct democracy and informal justice are argued to be inadequate as the primary means of democratic control in a complex society; likewise Marxist views of the "withering away of the state" are challenged as utopian. The book maintains that radical reforms in political institutions are necessary in order to effect social change.
This title, first published in 1975, contains two complimentary studies by Paul Q. Hirst: the first based on Claude Bernard’s theory of scientific knowledge, and the second concerning Emile Durkheim’s attempt to provide a philosophical foundation for a scientific sociology in The Rules of Sociological Method. The author’s primary concern is to answer the question: is Durkheim’s theory of knowledge logically consistent and philosophically viable? His principal conclusion is that the epistemology developed in the Rules is an impossible one and that its inherent contradictions are proof that sociology as it is commonly understood can never be a scientific discipline.
In this reissued collection of essays, first published in 1985, Paul Q. Hirst assesses the limits of the Marxist theory of history in its various versions. It begins with an extended critical discussion of Perry Anderson and Edward Thompson, and includes chapters on G.A Cohen’s attempt to re-state the Marxist theory of history in terms compatible with analytic philosophy, on R.G. Collingwood’s theory of history, on Anderson’s work on Absolutism, on Thompson’s Poverty of Theory, and on the contemporary politics of democratic socialism.
First published in 1975, this book investigates the various pre-capitalist modes of production briefly indicated in the works of Marx and Engels, and gives an examination of the conditions of the transition from one mode of production to another. The fundamental concepts used in these investigations, including those of mode of production, of necessary labour and surpass labour, of politics and state, are derived from Capital and from other works of Marxist theory. The primary aim of the analysis is to raise the conceptualisation of pre-capitalist modes of production and of transition to a more rigorous level. This book will appear controversial to both Marxists and non-Marxists alike.
Addressing a host of hot-button issues, from the barring of Christian student groups and military recruiters from law schools and universities to churches’ immunity from civil rights legislation in hiring and firing ministers, Paul Horwitz proposes a radical reformation of First Amendment law. Arguing that rigidly doctrinal approaches can’t account for messy, real-world situations, he suggests that the courts loosen their reins and let those institutions with a stake in First Amendment freedoms do more of the work of enforcing them. Universities, the press, libraries, churches, and various other institutions and associations are a fundamental part of the infrastructure of public discourse. Rather than subject them to ill-fitting, top-down rules and legal categories, courts should make them partners in shaping public discourse and First Amendment law, giving these institutions substantial autonomy to regulate their own affairs. Self-regulation and public criticism should be the key restraints on these institutions, not judicial fiat. Horwitz suggests that this approach would help the law enhance the contribution of our “First Amendment institutions” to social and political life. It would also move us toward a conception of the state as a participating member of our social framework, rather than a reigning and often overbearing sovereign. First Amendment Institutions offers a new vantage point from which to evaluate ongoing debates over topics ranging from campaign finance reform to campus hate speech and affirmative action in higher education. This book promises to promote—and provoke—important new discussions about the shape and future of the First Amendment.
In this reissued collection of essays, first published in 1985, Paul Q. Hirst assesses the limits of the Marxist theory of history in its various versions. It begins with an extended critical discussion of Perry Anderson and Edward Thompson, and includes chapters on G.A Cohen’s attempt to re-state the Marxist theory of history in terms compatible with analytic philosophy, on R.G. Collingwood’s theory of history, on Anderson’s work on Absolutism, on Thompson’s Poverty of Theory, and on the contemporary politics of democratic socialism.
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Good Day! , the critically-acclaimed biography about the legendary Paul Harvey, is now in paperback! In this heartwarming book, author Paul J. Batura tells the all-American story of one of the best-known radio voices in history. From his humble beginnings to his unparalleled career of more than 50 years with ABC radio, Paul Harvey narrated America's story day by day, through wars and peace, through the threat of communism and the crumbling of old colonial powers, through consumer booms and eventual busts.
This title, first published in 1975, contains two complimentary studies by Paul Q. Hirst: the first based on Claude Bernard’s theory of scientific knowledge, and the second concerning Emile Durkheim’s attempt to provide a philosophical foundation for a scientific sociology in The Rules of Sociological Method. The author’s primary concern is to answer the question: is Durkheim’s theory of knowledge logically consistent and philosophically viable? His principal conclusion is that the epistemology developed in the Rules is an impossible one and that its inherent contradictions are proof that sociology as it is commonly understood can never be a scientific discipline.
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.