From: "Simon Emsley" <S.Emsley-AT-unsw.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Karl: Autonomy, Academia and Market Forces
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1998 13:06:02 +1000


Dear Karl and list,

Karl wrote: "I'm not sure I agree here.  How would one characterise (in
these terms)
his concern with nineteenth century literature?  Or with Algerian houses?
Or with his theoretical discussions of the logic of practice?"

The subject of the French colonisation of Algeria gives Bourdieu's focus on
that subject a specificity for him. On his discussion of nineteenth century
literature I'm completely ignorant though I am convinced his questions on
this must have arisen from practical problems. However, there is no doubt
that the illogicality of the relationship between theory and practice, its
practical rather than ideal basis, keeps the question of a theory of
practice dripping through the hole in theory, onto our heads and splashing
all over the emails we write. I remain unconvinced in respect to your
critique of epistemology. What would be your model?  You appear about to
recommend a better way. Perhaps this would help me  understand your
position?

This is not to say I agree (or am able to apply) all the ideas that B puts
forward. 

Simon
----------
> From: Karl <kam13-AT-hermes.cam.ac.uk>
> To: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> Subject: Re: Karl: Autonomy, Academia and Market Forces
> Date: Sunday, September 06, 1998 4:47 AM
> 
> 
> Dear Simon and all,
> 
> > A busy week. Thank you for your clear explanation. Why do I find myself
> > wanting to defend Bourdieu's approach? Perhaps I'll find out by giving
you
> > a response.
> 
> Personally I am not wanting to attack Bourdieu's approach, but to develop
> it, to avoid the 'my mother drunk or sober' approach which (whilst in no
> way referring to your good self here) often seems to pertain in matters
> relating to particular thinkers.  Bourdieu might say that we should make
> his concepts 'groan and protest' in empirical application, but this is
> insufficiently Bourdieuan.  Firstly, it seems to suggest that although
> slightly bent out of shape, the theory can remain as it was, it doesn't
> suggest theoretical development (indeed, an argument could be made that
> the conceptual framework hasn't developed in a very long time). 
Secondly,
> it might lend itself to reproducing what he argues against: the social
> division of intellectual labour - 'Bourdieu's theory and my empirical
> research'.  
> 
> So in raising this and other issues as problematic, I'm trying to
> strengthen his approach rather than bury it.
> 
> > Firstly, I think there is a problem with extending the infinite
regression
> > of the relationship X(y). To reduce the complex set of relationships
> > involved in the discussion of an issue and the observation of that
> > discussion to this it pretty risky. 
> 
> Of course.  It was not intended as an account of research in action, but
> merely a heuristic shorthand to make a point.  
> 
> To extend it as XXXX etc. is possibly
> > losing the plot. 
> 
> In what way?  (It wasn't 'XXXX', to be pedantic).  I didn't wish to write
> a post which would go on forever.  Also, this is merely the direction
> which Bourdieu's approach indicates.
> 
> I think I understand what your trying to emphasise here.
> > However, I would say that in practical terms of conducting an
investigation
> > about something, the physical context of the problem giving rise to the
> > investigation generally has a habit of remaining dominant. In fact, it
> > would seem to me that this would have to be the case. Otherwise it
wouldn't
> > constitute a problem, wouldn't disturb the philosopher's XXXXXXX as it
> > were. 
> 
> Yes, in action it probably would, I agree.  I don't think we are at cross
> purposes here.  But because that is how it might be sidestepped in
> practice does not mean it is an epistemological basis for research. After
> all, social science proceeded quite happily before Bourdieu (to use a
> relevant example) began highlighting problems and issues and defining
> solutions.
> 
> > The immediate and most concrete problems are therefore of great
interest.
> > This is how I understand Bourdieu's interest in the educational
> > institution, the immediate field in which he is immersed. 
> 
> I'm not sure I agree here.  How would one characterise (in these terms)
> his concern with nineteenth century literature?  Or with Algerian houses?
> Or with his theoretical discussions of the logic of practice?
> 
> > In relation to another point you raise, there is a question about the
way
> > an investigation is to be reflected upon. Perhaps here Bourdieu's
> > recommendation of a reflexive sociology of knowledge may be seen in
terms
> > of an advocacy for the power and social productivity of his discipline.
I
> > remember reading him in advocate mode on this though I can't cite the
> > source. In some ways this second point may be linked to the first, in
that
> > Bourdieu may want to argue science is at this historical moment
suffering
> > as a result of a dearth of reflexive sociology. His practice might
> > therefore be said to be derived to address a problem in knowledge
specific
> > to the historical moment. 
> 
> This may be right.  But I still insist that reflexivity is not
> epistemology, however virtous it is and whatever errors (in terms of
logic
> of model for logic of reality argument) it may help to avoid.  On its own
> it does not save the sociology of knowledge from a slow slide towards
> relativism.  (Perhaps the only thing arresting this slide in Bourdieu's
> approach is the fact that his claims to science seem to be taken at face
> value by many.  Did not Bourdieu teach us to make a break with
> participants' own accounts of their actions?).
> 
> With best wishes,
> 
> Karl Maton
> 
> 
> **********************************************************************
> Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
**********************************************************************
Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu