This article attempts a summarized presentation of the problem of subjectness as a problem of restoring the functions of subjectness to history (if we can speak of subjectness in the singular at all), primarily in the case of abductive inference as one of the pre-deductive forms of inference in the endogenous practical logics of the dialectical. Since the latter can hardly be thought of effectively in the theories of structures of mediation without the modality of the exogenous non-classical logic of the dialectical, the article will proceed from the more general problem of the conditions of possibility for its introduction, first and foremost the successful contentful formalization of the Marxian syllogistic. That is why the first sections of the article are based on a critical examination of the productivity of two formalizations of the Marxian syllogistic adhering to Capital: David Harvey’s, on the one hand, and Deyan Deyanov’s on the other. This will allow us to explicate, in the next sections of the article, why the second contentful formalization is essential in the non-classical logic of the dialectical. This logic’s main characteristics will be presented in the third and fourth sections as a necessary condition for understanding the problem of subjectness in abductive inference as a practical logic not only in the narrow sense, as in the case of scientific discoveries, but also in a wider sense – as a logic in technological inventions and economic innovations (or generally in innovative labor). Precisely against this background and in contrast to the critical consideration of other analyses of subjectness – such as those by Georg Lukács and Louis Althusser, both inspired by Marx’s revolutionary form of science – the final section of the article outlines some important specific features of the theoretical approach to the problem of subjectness (in abductive reasoning in particular) in the theories of structures of self-mediation.
Martina Mineva (Sun,) studied this question.