Historical materialism and capital

Topoi 5 (2):187-196 (1986)
  Copy   BIBTEX


It is commonly supposed that Marx's Capital is part and parcel of his theory of historical materialism. It is argued here, however, that this view is incorrect, and that Capital is distinguished from the more general theory of historical materialism in its standing as a work of social science. This conclusion rests on several grounds. First, Capital is substantially more specialized than the theory of historical materialism, since it is concerned only with one aspect of one mode of production. As a result, Capital provides a more rigorous treatment of its subject matter. Second, Capital is based on a fund of empirical evidence which is substantially more detailed than that offered in support of the theses of historical materialism. And third, given the preceding points, Capital is a developed empirical theory, whereas historical materialism is best construed as a general program of research. For these reasons Capital is epistemically distinct from historical materialism: unlike the latter, it is a substantive contribution to social science.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 86,273

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library


Added to PP

94 (#156,541)

6 months
1 (#864,772)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Understanding society: an interview with Daniel Little.Daniel Little & Jamie Morgan - 2022 - Journal of Critical Realism 22 (2):293-345.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references