LEADER 03995nam a22005415i 4500
001 808784
003 TR_AnAIT
005 20260131025321
007 cr nn 008mamaa
008 130130s1964 ne | s |||| 0|eng d
020 |a9789401730365|9978-94-017-3036-5
024 7 |a10.1007/978-94-017-3036-5|2doi
041 |aeng
049 |aTürk Tarih Kurumu Kütüphanesi
050 4|aGN550-674
072 7|aJFC|2bicssc
072 7|aSOC053000|2bisacsh
072 7|aJBCC|2thema
082 04|a306.091|223
090 |aDK/10073
100 1 |aBlakeley, J.E.|eauthor.|4aut|4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut
245 10|aSoviet Theory of Knowledge|h[electronic resource] /|cby J.E. Blakeley.
250 |a1st ed. 1964.
264 1|aDordrecht :|bSpringer Netherlands :|bImprint: Springer,|c1964.
300 |aVIII, 203 p.|bonline resource.
336 |atext|btxt|2rdacontent
337 |acomputer|bc|2rdamedia
338 |aonline resource|bcr|2rdacarrier
347 |atext file|bPDF|2rda
490 1 |aSovietica ;|v16
505 0 |aI The Development of Soviet Theory of Knowledge and Its Main Representatives -- II General Characteristics of Marxist Leninist Theory of Knowledge -- III The Main Tenets of the Theory of Knowledge of Dialectical Materialism -- IV Basic Cognitive Functions -- V Basic Cognitive Modes -- VI Methods and Methodologies -- VII Critique of ‘Bourgeois’ Theories of Knowledge -- VIII Soviet Historiography of Knowledge -- IX Evaluation -- Index of Names -- Index of Subjects.
520 |aThis book offers a complete survey of contemporary Soviet theory of knowledge. It is by no means meant to replace De Vries' excellent treatise on the same subject. Since De Vries depended mainly on the 'classics of Marxism' and the few contemporary Soviet works which were available in German translation, his account is at best an in troduction to the contemporary period. In a sense this book is com plementary to his: he presents the doctrines of the classics and criticizes them, this book recounts what came after and what is going on now. Epistemology and theory of knowledge are taken here as equivalent terms, representing the Soviet gnose%gija and teorija poznanija. No attempt to justify the existence of such a philosophical discipline will be attempted here. Even outside of this question of the legitimacy of epistemo logy, it is not easy to delimit the domain of its purvey. We have, therefore, taken it in a wider rather than narrow sense. This means that some ques tions of logic and psychology have been taken up - to the extent that they overlap with the field of philosophical consideration of knowledge.
532 8 |aAccessibility summary: This PDF is not accessible. It is based on scanned pages and does not support features such as screen reader compatibility or described non-text content (images, graphs etc). However, it likely supports searchable and selectable text based on OCR (Optical Character Recognition). Users with accessibility needs may not be able to use this content effectively. Please contact us at accessibilitysupport@springernature.com if you require assistance or an alternative format.
532 8 |aInaccessible, or known limited accessibility
532 8 |aNo reading system accessibility options actively disabled
532 8 |aPublisher contact for further accessibility information: accessibilitysupport@springernature.com
650 0|aEthnology.
650 0|aCulture.
650 14|aRegional Cultural Studies.
710 2 |aSpringerLink (Online service)
773 0 |tSpringer Nature eBook
776 08|iPrinted edition:|z9789027700407
776 08|iPrinted edition:|z9789048183258
776 08|iPrinted edition:|z9789401730372
830 0|aSovietica ;|v16
856 40|uhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3036-5
912 |aZDB-2-SHU
912 |aZDB-2-SXL
912 |aZDB-2-BAE
950 |aHumanities, Social Sciences and Law (SpringerNature-11648)
950 |aLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0) (SpringerNature-43723)
