Date: Tue, 08 Apr 1997 00:57:37 +0200 From: Paul Bayer <pbayer-AT-ibm.net> Subject: Re: Distinction and explanation Carles Martínez wrote: > > -- snip -- > > When I read Bourdieu's "Distinction" I liked it very much but I had a > strange sensation: everything was circular and self-evident; therefore, it > was like a circular discourse (and indeed a very interesting one) with a > lack of clarity and, is some way, without a clearly accessible information. > It's true that reality is complex and not static, but I also think that > reductionism is one science strategy and that trying to speak and think > clearly has some advandatges. > Dear Carles, as you remark, Bourdieu uses a system of interwoven concepts like capital, field, strategy, habitus ... which are difficult to understand and to explain with ordinary language or with mainstream sociological terms amd concepts. But within his system (or language) all these consepts are quite precise and meaningful and therefore quite clear. Bourdieu uses his concepts/language in a very precise, well thought-out and homogeneous way. They don`t change much significance within his works, even from "distinction" to "les regles de l'art". In some of B.'s interviews he described his efforts of the past 25 years as one to get his concepts clearer and more precise. He tries to achieve this by more investigating and explaining. So B. himself concedes that 20 years ago his concepts weren't so clear as they are now. But I repeat: in substance they didn't change meaning. So eg. it makes sense and things clearer to reread "distinction" with the knowledge of B.'s explanations given, say in "raisons partiques" (of 1994). Some further remarks: a) B's concepts become unclear and mysterious if one tries to apply them selectively without using the related concepts. Eg. if one tries to speak of habitus without considering the concepts of field and capital, B's "habitus-concept" suddenly becomes unclear. But in this use, it isn't *his* "habitus-concept" anymore. So the reproach of unclearness is more a reproach against certain interpretations of B's theory. b) B. with his concepts tries to tackle the "logic of practice". This isn't a logic someone could describe within a "clear" mathematical system. So he has to wander through his field, to illuminate his subjects from different aspects and angles, to turn around his subject without beeing able to "catch" it with single and linear definitions. c) B. isn't a theoretician. Theory for him is a tool to think and to investigate social relations in social fields etc. So clearness is similar with usefulness or applicability of theoretical concepts within sociological fieldwork. This is the only acceptible scientific standard for him, and he rejects definitiones ex cathedram, which may seem clearer, but fail when applied to social reality. d) Certainly B. has a high position in french and international scientific field, he knows that his books get read and become objects of nit-picking attacks of concurrent position-holders of this field. B. is known to be very concerned about his scientific reputation and so in his books he tries to avoid too compromising or pointed statements. He often carefully tries to prevent all possible misinterpretations, so often making things less "clear". His interviews are better for someone, who tries to access his ideas. e) As holder of a position in scientific field B. has to differenciate himself from other positions, so he has to develop a distinct language, his own concepts, to immunize his position against attacks (your "circularity"). Someone not having a position in scientific field and not partecipating in its struggles and fights may ask, if all differenciations and demarcations from other theories, B. makes with his concepts are all useful for understanding and clearness. PS: I hope, I didn't fall into your trap and that I didn't make things even more unclear as you critizised them to be. Therefore--preventively--I excuse myself for any eventual unclearnesses remaining in my statements. ;-) cheers, Paul Bayer, Munic, Germany ********************************************************************** Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005