• W. Peter Archibald


There may well be as much controversy surrounding Marx’s theory of knowledge and related phenomena such as ideology as there is about his views on human nature more generally. Did Marx reject “the classical definition of truth” and replace it with a conception of truth about reality, indeed, of reality itself, as constructed and proven in the process of modifying nature through praxis? Are individuals’ observation and experience of reality direct or immediate, as philosophical “empiricists” have usually claimed, or only mediated through collective and individual praxes? If the latter is the case, what are these praxes and precisely how do they relate to individuals’ knowledge?


Human Nature Social Process Capitalist Relation External Reality Surplus Labour 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    For example, consider Leszek Kolakowski’s “Karl Marx and the classical definition of truth” (pp. 58–86 in Marxism and Beyond (London: Pall Mall Press, 1968).Google Scholar
  2. 29.
    Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday (Anchor), 1967) pp. 58–9.Google Scholar
  3. 41.
    The existentialist and phenomenological/“symbolic interactionist” roots, respectively, for the latter interpretations can be found in, for example, Jean-Paul Sartre’s Being and Nothingness (New York: Simon and Schuster (Pocket Books, Washington Square Press, 1966),Google Scholar
  4. and Herbert Blumer’s Symbolic Interactionism (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1969).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© W. Peter Archibald 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • W. Peter Archibald
    • 1
  1. 1.McMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada

Personalised recommendations