From: "Paul Dillon" <dillonph-AT-northcoast.com> Subject: Re: comprendre Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2000 18:14:08 -0800 Simon, Your post certainly made me laugh although that meant I was laughing at myself since I use statistics, charts, etc. and also cite people when I quote them or use a concept I first learned from something they wrote. Actually, I like this aspect of academic writing since it allows me to follow various threads, discover new writers, and sometimes previously unknown literatures and discourses that speak to something that concerns me. But I also recognize that citing often has the functions you point out. As to " the use of statistics, charts, and other such trappings and paraphernalia of scientificity " I tend to see quantitative methods as additional tools. Perhaps you're right about Bourdieu's use of statistics in Distincion at some level, but he was working with survey material and I can't think of how you would have him analyze so many surveys (1000+) without some recourse to quantitative methods. Bourdieu uses statistics descriptively and makes no pretension to mathematically "model" social reality. I statistical analysis very useful for assimilating and also for demonstrating certain kinds of patterns, even modeling can be suggestive although I don't think social fields or habitus could be meaningfully represented in a mathematical model, like the rotational mechanics of a galaxy, and I'm sure Bourdieu doesn't either.. What do you think. Paul H. Dillon ********************************************************************** 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