I find this interesting but hard to really evaluate. Pretty much any time I see a philosophical thesis that is chalk full of words/phrases like "capitalism", "modernity", "praxis", I think it is helpful to try to rewrite your thesis in as simple and straightforward language as possible and see if a) it still makes sense, and b) it isn't a trivial truth.

You'll see this issue even with famous philosophers (usually French philosophers that aren't read much in philosophy departments but worshipped in some other humanities). They'll say something like "Under late capitalism, the wisdom of modernity falls into the crux of folly, for only if we deconstruct capitalist production itself can existence be retained in the post-structural sense" and it's like oooh it sounds so deep but when forced to state the point simply it's just an obvious simple thing like "some forms of industry are bad for the environment".