What do you think?
The Philosophy of Marxism: An Exposition
199 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1967
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
January 12, 2026
Marxism is a political philosophy that has contributed significantly to the outcome of the 20th century. It shifted the outcomes of politics within different countries. Marxism as a philosophy should be studied even if you disagree with Marxism. Which makes The Philosophy of Marxism: An Exposition by John Somerville an excellent resource for studying Marxism. It has two parts; Part I sets out metaphysics and philosophical principles whilst Part II sets out social philosophy and politics.
Part I lays out the groundwork of Marxist metaphysics and logic. Marxism is firmly rooted in materialism, rejecting Platonic idealism as the basis of reality. Objective reality is based of material structures and not ideas. John Somerville argues that Marxism seeks a scientific way of understanding the world rather than ideas and these views are objective. Likewise, Christianity is rejected as being irrational and lacking objective basis. Ideas are shaped by the society in which they are created and do not have some external reality to them. Thus, all ideas have a material basis to them and do not exist external to material world. The society helps create different perceptions of reality. In this regard, Marxism is an empiricist philosophy using the senses to derive reality. There is of course one exception to this; the Marxist view of dialectics.
Dialectics is when two contradictions exist and these contradictions create negation of the contradictions. This follows from Hegelian viewpoints, which means Marx was influenced by Idealism as much as by materialism. John Somerville further argues that Marxism is firmly rooted in Aristotelian logic. This includes the basis of formal logic that Aristotle. The theory of formal logic leads to dialectical logic which seeks to combine dialectics and logic.
The Second part of the book is dedicated to social and political philosophy. This is what Marxism is better known for. The Philosophy of Marxism outlines Marxist ideas including social classes, historical transitions in society and economics. Societies transitioned between slavery, feudalism and then capitalism The problems that Marxism sees in society is that the economy based on capitalism leads to issues that create contradictions. One of these is the contradictions crated by profit. Profit and the search for profit leads to reductions in living standards and unemployment. Then there is the theory of surplus value, that labour inputs greatly increases the value of capital without being fully compensated. Capital thus takes profit directly from the value created by workers. According to Somerville, the only way to rectify this is with a planned economy.
The Philosophy of Marxism also tries to outline applied Marxism in the real world. There is an attempt at what amounts to Marxist Apologetics in how it outlines the failures and problems of Marxist countries. Marxism is not a pacifist philosophy for example and seeks defence of a territory. There cannot be true freedom according to Somerville without the abolition of the free market. Likewise, the violence of Marxism is only in response to the violence of the ruling elites. The last chapter outlines values of Marxism including free will, ethics and aesthetics.
One of the best things about the book is its clarity. The Philosophy of Marxism is one of the shortest books outlining the fundamentals of Marxism. To that end, it should be recommended reading for anyone who is learning about Marxism. It is clearly written, with sharpness and yet intelligently put forward the ideas of Marxism. I would definitely recommend this for understanding Marxism.
However, I can't go buy without criticising the book. After all, if I gave a low grade for Ludwig Von Mises, I have to show critical analysis of Marxism. For starters, the book's analysis on Marxism and logic is wrong. As far as I am aware, Marx wrote very little on logic and indeed Marxism is rooted firmly in the Continental wing of philosophy. Somerville argues that Polish philosophers made breakthroughs in logic throughout the Eastern bloc; but there was no correspondence with Analytical philosophers of the West. The mistake of outlining Marx in Aristotelian logic is in part because of dialectical logic which seeks to separate itself from formal logic.
The second criticism is similar to that of Karl Popper in that the book outlines Marxism as a science but it is firmly unscientific in its perspective. The case in point goes back to dialectics. Dialectics are not a scientific theory. Dialectics does not exist in an empirically provable sense. In this regard, the book outlines the problems of claiming Marxism is a science because it isn't scientific.
The third criticism is that the economic theories of the book show the problems of applied Marxism. Its view of surplus value, has problems because it ignores capital inputs into the value of labour. Labour becomes more valuable and more productive with greater capital inputs. In this regard, the more automated a process, the less surplus value that is created. I don't think there isn't any surplus value within capitalism but I would argue that it is in the low productive jobs which have the greatest surplus value in the discrepancy between wages and profits. Of course that itself is wrong because the profit-margins tend to be smaller in low productive sectors. I would definitely say exploitation exists in capitalism. I am a leftist after all. But the theory of surplus value is much to be desired as it was largely refuted by the 1880s according to The Penguin History of Economics.
The forth criticism is Marxist economics have largely been refuted. With the exception of China, which has adopted Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, Marxist collective ownership and planned economies have largely been a failure. The book was originally written when the USSR was still around. Well, that's gone. The USA won the Cold War with capitalism. With the exception of China, who has ingenuously combined socialism and capitalism in a successful way, the socialist bloc lost. Planned economies rarely work. They are inefficient and wasteful. That isn't to say capitalism is wonderful. It isn't either. A mixed economy is best.
Overall, I have to give this book a 2.5/3 stars as it is a fantastic guide to Marxism which is nevertheless flawed in its own right.
Part I lays out the groundwork of Marxist metaphysics and logic. Marxism is firmly rooted in materialism, rejecting Platonic idealism as the basis of reality. Objective reality is based of material structures and not ideas. John Somerville argues that Marxism seeks a scientific way of understanding the world rather than ideas and these views are objective. Likewise, Christianity is rejected as being irrational and lacking objective basis. Ideas are shaped by the society in which they are created and do not have some external reality to them. Thus, all ideas have a material basis to them and do not exist external to material world. The society helps create different perceptions of reality. In this regard, Marxism is an empiricist philosophy using the senses to derive reality. There is of course one exception to this; the Marxist view of dialectics.
Dialectics is when two contradictions exist and these contradictions create negation of the contradictions. This follows from Hegelian viewpoints, which means Marx was influenced by Idealism as much as by materialism. John Somerville further argues that Marxism is firmly rooted in Aristotelian logic. This includes the basis of formal logic that Aristotle. The theory of formal logic leads to dialectical logic which seeks to combine dialectics and logic.
The Second part of the book is dedicated to social and political philosophy. This is what Marxism is better known for. The Philosophy of Marxism outlines Marxist ideas including social classes, historical transitions in society and economics. Societies transitioned between slavery, feudalism and then capitalism The problems that Marxism sees in society is that the economy based on capitalism leads to issues that create contradictions. One of these is the contradictions crated by profit. Profit and the search for profit leads to reductions in living standards and unemployment. Then there is the theory of surplus value, that labour inputs greatly increases the value of capital without being fully compensated. Capital thus takes profit directly from the value created by workers. According to Somerville, the only way to rectify this is with a planned economy.
The Philosophy of Marxism also tries to outline applied Marxism in the real world. There is an attempt at what amounts to Marxist Apologetics in how it outlines the failures and problems of Marxist countries. Marxism is not a pacifist philosophy for example and seeks defence of a territory. There cannot be true freedom according to Somerville without the abolition of the free market. Likewise, the violence of Marxism is only in response to the violence of the ruling elites. The last chapter outlines values of Marxism including free will, ethics and aesthetics.
One of the best things about the book is its clarity. The Philosophy of Marxism is one of the shortest books outlining the fundamentals of Marxism. To that end, it should be recommended reading for anyone who is learning about Marxism. It is clearly written, with sharpness and yet intelligently put forward the ideas of Marxism. I would definitely recommend this for understanding Marxism.
However, I can't go buy without criticising the book. After all, if I gave a low grade for Ludwig Von Mises, I have to show critical analysis of Marxism. For starters, the book's analysis on Marxism and logic is wrong. As far as I am aware, Marx wrote very little on logic and indeed Marxism is rooted firmly in the Continental wing of philosophy. Somerville argues that Polish philosophers made breakthroughs in logic throughout the Eastern bloc; but there was no correspondence with Analytical philosophers of the West. The mistake of outlining Marx in Aristotelian logic is in part because of dialectical logic which seeks to separate itself from formal logic.
The second criticism is similar to that of Karl Popper in that the book outlines Marxism as a science but it is firmly unscientific in its perspective. The case in point goes back to dialectics. Dialectics are not a scientific theory. Dialectics does not exist in an empirically provable sense. In this regard, the book outlines the problems of claiming Marxism is a science because it isn't scientific.
The third criticism is that the economic theories of the book show the problems of applied Marxism. Its view of surplus value, has problems because it ignores capital inputs into the value of labour. Labour becomes more valuable and more productive with greater capital inputs. In this regard, the more automated a process, the less surplus value that is created. I don't think there isn't any surplus value within capitalism but I would argue that it is in the low productive jobs which have the greatest surplus value in the discrepancy between wages and profits. Of course that itself is wrong because the profit-margins tend to be smaller in low productive sectors. I would definitely say exploitation exists in capitalism. I am a leftist after all. But the theory of surplus value is much to be desired as it was largely refuted by the 1880s according to The Penguin History of Economics.
The forth criticism is Marxist economics have largely been refuted. With the exception of China, which has adopted Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, Marxist collective ownership and planned economies have largely been a failure. The book was originally written when the USSR was still around. Well, that's gone. The USA won the Cold War with capitalism. With the exception of China, who has ingenuously combined socialism and capitalism in a successful way, the socialist bloc lost. Planned economies rarely work. They are inefficient and wasteful. That isn't to say capitalism is wonderful. It isn't either. A mixed economy is best.
Overall, I have to give this book a 2.5/3 stars as it is a fantastic guide to Marxism which is nevertheless flawed in its own right.
February 1, 2020
Very lucid introduction to Marxist thought. Roughly half the book is devoted to political and economic issues while the other engages more with traditional philosophy and metaphysics. As the majority of people (that I know) who are interested in Marxism tend to have a stronger attraction to its political elements, a lot of this book lands somewhat irrelevantly. A good summary nonetheless, especially for a beginner like myself.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews