Publication Details

Abstract

Classical gnoseology is built up by the method of philosophical speculation, it investigates principles of pure knowledge about istelf. Its theoretical wekanesses become revealed when individual specialized sciences for human cognitive activity begin to develop. Its methodological sterility1 is perceptibly manifest as soon as it has to solve noetic problems through which modern positive sciences in general make themselves known. Two antithetic gnoseological theories, developing in a parallel trend, are endeavouring to find a way out of this crisis: Marxist theory of knowledge and logical positivism. Marxist gnoseology is built up as a philosophical and synthetical discipline: positivistic gnoeseology as an unphilosophical and analytical branch. The former originates in the immanent development of certain ontological postulates and on this basis it endeavours at a philosophical synthesis of the results of scientific disciplines dealing with human cognitive activity, and of achived noetic solutions and methodological approaches in contemporary positive sciences in general. The latter follows the way of logical and semantic analysis of basic elements in scientific research and scientific language. Along with its criticism of positivistic philosophy, Marxist gnoseology has until now refuted indiscriminately also this analytical gnoseolbgy, refusing to take into account many novel stimulating aspects and positive results which it has achieved. It appears that the limits of possibilities of the type of Marxistic synthetical gnoseology practised so far are now about exhausted and that it is imperative to start developing within the Marxist framework also analytical gnoseology which would form a unity with the first one and would systemically complete it. This is the only way of approach towards the solution of many acute theoretical and methodological problems which actually face Marxist gnoseology.