gathered from outside sources. The best proof of the typicalness of the phenomena selected for analysis is usually obtainable only after the analysis has been completed, the generalization obtained, and the stage of proving the generalization arrived at. The proof of the generalization, if the same be correct, will itself reveal these typical phenomena.
Any analysis will, therefore, be justifiable, which will serve this purpose of arriving at a proper generalization. In making the analysis, therefore, we must not be guided by the "equitable" claims of different phenomena to be analyzed, but merely by the one consideration: to find those facts the analysis of, which will best serve the purpose for which the analysis is undertaken. Usually, it is not the analysis of the greatest number of phenomena, but of the most typical phenomena that will serve the purpose best.
We have already seen in a preceding section that Marx had ample historical and logical justification and warrant to assume that the factory product was the most typical of the exchange-value-possessing commodities, and therefore, the most proper subject for his analysis. Just as, to borrow an example from another province of scientific research, in order to obtain exact knowledge of the chemical composition of water, we must not analyze as many sorts of water as possible, but, on the contrary, only one sort of it, the most typical, that is, pure unalloyed water. The proof, however, of the correctness of his assumption is furnished by the same facts which prove the generalization which is the result of the analysis. For, as we have already stated before, Marx does not depend on this analysis, nor on any other purely logical operation, to prove his theory, but on the facts themselves. In order, however, that the facts should prove anything, all the facts had to be examined and investigated. And if Böhm-Bawerk's statement were true that Marx did not include in his investigation all "goods" possessing exchange-value, his theory would remain unproven,—and if the excluded "goods," upon investigation, would prove
