not use the neutral description "conventional". The Marxist method that is a practice is counter posed to the dualist (or "bourgeois") method to be practiced. However, although Newman and his colleagues locate themselves decisively as Marxists and revolutionaries, little ink is wasted polemicizing against capitalism. The oppressiveness of capitalism is taken for granted, and the argument is relatively free of leftist rhetoric. The question of Marxist method is pursued, making use of The German Ideology, The Grundrisse, The 1844 Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts, Theses on Feuerbach, and Capital, as well as some of Vygotsky's observations. A third provocation is that Newman and his colleagues disclaim the role of bourgeois radical, or "dissident", along with the related activities of consciousness-raising, radical therapy, and "socialist therapy". These roles and activities (sometimes predicated on a nominal Marxism) are rejected, despite being well intentioned, because they are premised on the negation, rather than the overthrow, of bourgeois methodology and ideology. (It turns out that the difference between negation and overthrow turns decisively on the question of method.) To sum up, the authors locate The Practice of Method in what might be called (after Lukács) the actuality of the revolution. As a result, to anti-Marxists and dissidents indifferent to Marx, it may seem dogmatic. Marxists and revolutionaries, on the other hand, may find themselves impatient with the modest goals of the book. They will be struck by the contrast between the world-historic perspective of Marx on the one hand, and the subtle distinctions and nuances that characterize the practice of method and the painstaking detail of social therapeutic practice on the other. They may even disdain altogether the attempt at a Marxist treatment of subjectivity as "idealism". Newman and his colleagues make no effort to reconcile these points of view. On their view, social therapy is not socialist, but it is Marxist. If the world is not actually (historically) in a transition to socialism, then social therapy and the practice of method are historically invalid. On the other hand, if the world is in such a transition, all other methods and therapies are invalid. The Practice of Method is self-reflexive, and this is one of the challenges in reading it. Its form is expressive of its content. One feels, from the first page, in medias res. It slowly becomes clear that this anti-foundationalism is indeed part of what is meant by the practice of method.