How about this: revolutionary practice helps create revolutionary theory. Julio, the fundamental conceptual mistake here--and this is a point that Marx made incessantly, so I certainly can't claim any original insight here--is the notion that thought precedes pracice.
Miles
^^^^^^^ CB: If it's not too "bipartisan", how about a complicated reciprocal relationship between practice and theory. Also, maybe we could substitute the word "plan" for "theory".
In the Thesis on Feuerbach, Marx speaks explicitly on the relationship between practice and theory. He says practice is the test of theory ( Thesis number 2) For practice to test theory,some theory would have to exist at the time practice takes place. Or it implies that Marx thinks some practice should be deduced from theory in order to test the theory; all with the ultimate purpose of changing the world (See Thesis 11)which can only be done by practice
However, the next development of theory or creation of theory, as Miles says above, would likely be the result of a theory failing the test of practice creating the demand for a new theory or a modification of theory or a new plan for the social movement.
Practice as the source of theory is somewhat empirical and inductive. But can't we agree that most practice is based on some theory or on a plan ? Few just dive into practice utterly sponteneously and intuitively. Their theory or plan, no matter how slight, is tested , empirically, and can give rise to new theory or a new plan inductively.
On the other hand, the practice mentioned above is related to some kind of theory/plan deductively. Otherwise, how could practice test the theory/plan ?
Please forgive this platitude: the relationship between practice and theory(planning) is dia-u-know -what-tical