ABSTRACT
In part, Gouldner’s keen sensitivity to a wide variety of unreconciled binary oppositions immanent in Marxism may have come from his own unreflected proclivity for dualistic models. His personal paleosymbolic code, the deep structure of his work, favored what he liked to call “binary fissions” between, for example, Marxism and sociology or Critical and Scientific Marxism.3 There were few dialectical triadic syntheses, balanced quaternities or disseminating pluralities in his analyses, which almost always tended to revolve around nuclear contradictions instead. Against Fragmentation, despite its call for a holistic overcoming of partial and incomplete perspectives, proves no exception to this rule.
