From: "Marshall Feldman" <marsh-AT-uri.edu> Subject: BHA: RE: Bourdieu and CR Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 09:04:26 -0400 Roy, I, for one, would be interested. I also wonder about something more general regarding this list. As some others have mentioned recently, I too am sometimes put off the unique focus on Bhaskar's work. I've been lurking on the DPF discussion because I do not have the time right now to read the book myself. Nonetheless, this list's potential as a forum to discuss important scholarly work on CR seems to me one of its main virtues. Would it be appropriate to take an article-length reading dealing with CR, such as the one Roy mentions, give ourselves say 3-4 weeks to obtain and read it, and then use this list to discuss it? At this time, I for one would find it much easier to read and discuss an article than a book. This might widen our scope beyond Bhaskar per se and, since the readings are important for CR, help us generate a better, perhaps more insightful and critical, perspective on Bhaskar's own work. What do the rest of you think? Marsh Feldman > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu > [mailto:owner-bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu]On Behalf Of Roy Wilson > Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 11:17 AM > To: bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu > Subject: BHA: Bourdieu and CR > > > Hi, > > The proposed link between Bourdieu and CR might be strengthened by the > following: > > Fararo, T, J. & Butts, C. (1999). Advances in generative structuralism: > Structured agency and multilevel dynamics. Journal of > Mathematical Sociology, > Vol. (24)1, pp. 1-65. > > The authors give a formal interpretion of Gidden's notion of "duality of > structure" and Boudieu's concept of habitus. Bhaskar has himself > acknowledged > broad similarities between his Transformational Model of Social Action and > Structuration Theory (while Acher has highlighted the differences > between Realist > Social Theory as she conceives it and Structuration Theory). In > particular, > Fararo gives considerable attention to the emergent reality of > social relations > and "duality of structure". I can say more about this paper and > prior work if > anyone is interested. Assuming no one is, can anyone suggest a > different list > (like ARCHER)? > > Roy Wilson > designrw-AT-bellatlantic.net > > ERIK WEISSENGRUBER wrote: > > > I have been mulling over strategies to get CR accepted as a new kind of > > interdisciplinary "common sense," and the postings of the last few weeks > > have been quite stimulating > > > > A recent author wrote ... > > > > >the bulk of the social scientific community simply can't be bothered > > >to get to grips with RTS. This would involve getting to grips with the > > >philosophy of science and their knowledge of that seem reluctant to go > > >beyond Lakatos, Popper and Kuhn with the odd reference to > Feyerabend thrown > > >in. > > > > A key part of Pierre Bourdieu's project seems to be informing the > > formulation of social scientific questions with epistemological > questions, > > particularly in the philosophy of science. > > > > Bourdieu (at least in "The Craft of Sociology") discusses the > work of the > > sociologist as a kind of practice, an intervention in the real > that (under > > ideal conditions) creates a dynamic interplay between theoretical > > constructs and empirical observation, a practice that has > effects (good or > > bad/desirable or undesirable) in the entire field of social practices. > > > > Despite Bourdieu's avowed anti-ontological stance, he seems to > be close to > > a lot of CR ideas about the social sciences, the historical > situatedness of > > knowledge construction and the intransitive aspects of the real that > > condition it etc. > > > > So Bourdieu's innovations in reflexive sociology might be one > tangent for > > the introduction of CR ideas to the social sciences. > > > > NOTE: Bourdieu does this amazing dissection of the > > postivisist/intutitionist debate, asserting that both extremes > actuall call > > for and enforce the presuppositions of one another. > > > > Moreover, he tackles the individual/collectivist dyad by suggesting that > > both persons and large groups are observable entities -- but > that the real > > difficulty for sociology lies in finding the hidden RELATIONS > between these > > types of observable/measurable entities. > > > > Bourdieu would see relations existing on the same ontological > plane as the > > observed entities (if he were pushed into an ontological > corner), whereas > > the CR tradition would look at the causal mechanisms that, > because they are > > more fundamental, permit observable entities to come into > being, yet there > > seems to be a great similarity between the two traditions > > > > END OF SERMON > > If a French sociologist in the 60's and contemporary CR seem to be > > operating on the same wavelength, perhaps we can begin to look at other > > fields of knowlegdge that are experiencing a reformulation of their > > fundamental assumptions, and suggest that CR is a way of > addresing many of > > these. > > > > Anyway (must be read with a very postmodern ironic tone), "we" all know > > >what positivism is anyway and any approach to social inquiry > that wants to > > >play with science (however defined) can only be a form of smuggled in > > >positivism (end irony). > > > > > >So CR is really a (begin irony) form of positivism and since > we are all so > > >far beyond that science stuff and well into our various form > of relativism > > >we can neglect all that stuff and embrace our indeterminacy > (end irony). Of > > >course, this all takes place within an institutional context which has > > >constructed these categories, and as such there is a lot of > various forms of > > >"capital" bundled up with the categories (science vs hermeneutics for > > >example) and CR's attempt to disrupt them is always liable to > fall on deaf > > >ears. But, of course, it is not all deaf ears and there are > some prepared to > > >make the journey (i.e. the list and others). However, given the current > > >structural constraints of PhD submission rates (certainly in a > UK context > > >where if you don't submit within the 4 year framework you get > de-registered) > > >it is always going to be a very brave supervisor that sends > his/her student > > >wanting to study X through a CR framework, scurrying off to study the > > >philosophy of science. > > > > > >Beyond all that, and totally contradicting myself, I'm not that worried > > >about it. The last thing I think CR should be doing is > developing anything > > >like a "school of thought" al la postmodernism. I see a lot of research > > >informed by CR without necessarily wearing its CRness emblazoned on its > > >sleeve. I'm probably with Heikki on this and (begin irony) we > of the cult > > >(end irony), probably just need to get on and put it into practice. If > > >others reject a piece of research because they have skimmed > the bibliography > > >and seen that (begin irony) the obscurantist fool Bhaskar is cited (end > > >irony), then what can you do? I certainly will lose no sleep about it. > > > > > >I did come across an article that addressed the issue of > Bhaskar's neglect > > >and I'll try and hunt out the reference if I can find it. > > > > > >Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > > >=================================> > >Dr. Colin Wight > > >Department of International Politics > > >University of Wales, Aberystwyth > > >Tel: 01970 621769 > > >http://www.aber.ac.uk/~cow > > >==================================> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- > > > > > > > > Professor Erik Weissengruber > > University of Waterloo > > Department of Drama and Speech Communication > > ML 226 > > eweissen-AT-watarts.uwaterloo.ca > > (519) 888-4567 ex. 2855 > > > > --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- > --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005