If one actually reads The Political and Man there is absolutely no doubt that Kondylis was not a Marxist.
"Social ontology provides no ultimate or exclusive substantive or normative criterion for examining human society and history; it only furnishes that foundational analysis from which it becomes evident why the establishment of such a criterion is impossible."
Btw I find his conception of human reality in this book quite puzzling. It seems to me that he is trying to do ontology without doing it, if that makes any sense. Or, to put it in other words, it seems to me that he is trying to dissolve human social reality entirely into history and in doing so to say the minimum to describe the maximum. In this sense, his social ontology is also closer to history than to sociology. But these are all preliminary thoughts.
If one actually reads The Political and Man there is absolutely no doubt that Kondylis was not a Marxist.
"Social ontology provides no ultimate or exclusive substantive or normative criterion for examining human society and history; it only furnishes that foundational analysis from which it becomes evident why the establishment of such a criterion is impossible."
Btw I find his conception of human reality in this book quite puzzling. It seems to me that he is trying to do ontology without doing it, if that makes any sense. Or, to put it in other words, it seems to me that he is trying to dissolve human social reality entirely into history and in doing so to say the minimum to describe the maximum. In this sense, his social ontology is also closer to history than to sociology. But these are all preliminary thoughts.