Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 17:39:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: George Free <aw570-AT-freenet.toronto.on.ca>
Subject: Re: Bourdieu and Reformism


On Mon, 12 Jul 1999, kent strock wrote:

> make his position more "understandable" he succumbs to what he critiques in 
> earlier work..this passage seem to me to be nothing but structuralism and 
> leaves me baffled:
> "But the essential point is that, when percieved through these social 
> categores of perception, these principles of vision and division, the 
> differences in practices, in the goods possesed, or in the opinions 
> expressed become symbolic differences and constitute a veritable 
> language...in the same way as differences which constitute symbolic systems, 
> such as the set of phonemes of a language"

I haven't read Practical Reason, so I can't comment on this quote, but I 
would want to emphasize that Bourdieu is--and always has been--very much 
a "structuralist." Doesnt he call himself a genetic structuralist? With 
his critique of the objectivism of the earlier structuralism, Bourdieu 
does not seek to dispense with the structuralist tradition at all. 
Rather, he is just developing the the theory of practice within it.

Personally, I have always been a little uncomfortable with Bourdieu's
representation of himself as overcoming the antinomy of objectivism and
subjectivism. I see him as improving sociology's objectifying (scientific)
powers, that is, correcting some of the limitations of "objectivism".
....but I guess I'm more sympathetic to the structuralist tradition than
most are today. 


cheers,
George

P.S. We had an interesting discussion about Bourdieu and Derrida a year 
or two ago. You might like to check the archives.
**********************************************************************
Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu