File spoon-archives/bourdieu.archive/bourdieu_1997/bourdieu.9709, message 12


Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1904 02:33:49 +0200
From: kent.lofgren-AT-pedag.umu.se (kent =?iso-8859-1?Q?l=F6fgren?= )
Subject: Phenomenology and Bourdieu


Hello!
Here, I'll toss out a few scribbled lines. If someone cares to comment, it
would be nice.
I interpret phenomenology as a broad term for research focussing on
individuals' opinions. How individuals comprehend the world and social
phenomenon. For the researcher, there are various ways to be
"phenomenological" in one's research, e.g. in the analysis of interview
texts. Ference Marton, Gothenburg, Sweden, is an example of a reseacher who
uses a kind of phenomenological approach in his work (he calls it "a
phenomenographical methodology").

Now, when it comes to Bourdieu, it it to me obvious that Bourdieu is
inspired by phenomenological ideas. There are some charateristics to
Bourdieus phenomenological epistemology: a) he is a firm believer in
"relational knowledge". Knowledge about social phenomenon is best obtained
through the analysis of observed data in relation to other data. I'll
clarify: Individuals notions or opinions about, let's say jogging, can be
understood in a better, more adequate way if other data is taken into
account, e.g. the individual's notion about physical activities, sport in
general etc. The aim of the research is thus to form relational
descriptions rather than concrete models. b) Somehow I get the feeling that
Bourdieu wants to analyse indivual notions about social phenomenon in
relation to external, physical contexts. Bourdieu likes to analyse
individuals notions in relation to income, housing, lifestyle etc.

Let us look at b): This is an interesting idea. Phenomenology, in general,
does not imply that you, as a researcher must do this (Take external
"physical facts" into account). This is Bourdieus contribution.

To end this message, I'll say something about "the lack of generalization".
Bourdieus states that the relational analysis and descriptions of notions
are unique for the investigation in question (Do not ask me to find the
reference. I am just writing down my blurry thoughts from reading several
of his books). The idea is that from the findings, from a study of
individuals' notions, we (as readers) can not draw immediate, general
conclutions about "eternal" or "stable" notions in populations or larger
groups. Is this so, or am I missing something?
Lastly, I'd like to confront this last paragraph above with the following:
Is it not so, that some approaches, e.g. the phenomenographical approach
(Marton), implies that there are stable notions "out there"? Marton and his
colleagues, in my interpretation, say that it is the researchers job to
look for stable notions concerning social phenomena, and to categorize and
analyse these notions. Contrary to Bourdieu's epistemology, as described
above.

Kent Lofgren
student

University of Umea
Pedagogiska Institutionen
S-901 87 Umea
Sweden

Tel: 46 + (0)90 - 786 64 32 (office)
Fax: 46 + (0)90 - 786 66 93


**********************************************************************
Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005