To fully understand the truth of a thesis, it must be considered as a process. As Giddens (1984, p. 23) notes, this is because it came from somewhere and is going somewhere in the context of the conditions that developed it and the conditions that are not coordinating with it, leading to its destruction. Ollman (1993) emphasizes that understanding the dialectical nature of a thesis is crucial in grasping its changing nature. The interactions between a thesis and other systems are conditioned by it, and vice versa, in a dialectical relation, as Bourdieu (1977, p. 56) suggests. Therefore, every thesis must be understood as a process because of its changing and dialectical nature and as a "relation" because it changes in interactions with other systems, as Habermas (1981, p. 78) argues. To fully grasp these interactions, a relational analysis is required, as Foucault (1980, p. 45) suggests, and to understand its developmental history, as Bauman (1989, p. 67) states and Ollman (1991) emphasizes.
1. Bauman, Z. (1989). Modernity and Ambivalence. Cambridge: Polity Press.
2. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. Foucault, M. (1980). Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972-1977. New York: Pantheon Books.
4. Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Berkeley: University of California Press.
5. Habermas, J. (1981). The Theory of Communicative Action. Vol. 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Boston: Beacon Press.
6. Ollman, B. (1976). Alienation: Marx's Conception of Man in Capitalist Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Ollman, B. (1991). Dialectical Investigations. New York: Routledge.
8. Ollman, B. (1993). Market socialism or socialization of the market?, Rethinking Marxism, 6(1), pp.1-18.