?
The School of Analytical Marxism versus the School of Ilyenkov: A Comparison of Historical Research Methodologies in the 1960s-1980s
The School of Analytical Marxism and the School of Ilyenkov aim to enhance Marx’s materialist conception of history. Analytical Marxism challenges it by utilising methodologies from analytical philosophy specifically designed to study particular cases, either focusing on individual reasons behind social phenomena (individualistic methodology, which is usually based on game theory, i.e. on subjective teleology, but without being reduced to methodological atomism) or on the functions of supra-individual entities (functionalist methodology, which studies the specific objective teleology of social entities, without, however, reducing itself to methodological radical holism). Meanwhile, the School of Ilyenkov tries to explain positively the original method used but not elucidated by Marx (materialist dialectics, which focuses on the essence of the social whole) and to improve it by confronting it with ideas of classical philosophical thought (Hegel, Spinoza, Plato, etc.). Analytical Marxism (Cohen, Elster, Przeworski, Roemer, van Parijs, Wright, Levine, Sober, etc.) has provided critical insights into specific social phenomena and empirical validation, while the School of Ilyenkov (Ilyenkov, Naumenko, Potemkin, and others, within the framework of Soviet Hegelian Marxism founded by Lenin and Deborin) underscores the importance of understanding systemic unity and the foundational critique of capitalism. This article critically compares these two Marxist currents, highlighting their strengths, weaknesses, similarities and differences. The article ultimately underlines the importance of both currents in the history of Marxism and their value for contemporary historical analysis.