Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 15:27:46 +0000
From: Karl Maton <karl.maton-AT-dtn.ntl.com>
Subject: Re: comprendre


As listmembers will know already, whilst finding Bourdieu extremely
insightful, useful etc etc, the relationship between data and theory
(and vice versa) is for me one of the areas that requires development
and clarification.  All to often such questions are responded to by
rather esoteric and philosophic replies that really avoid the question.  

Taking for granted the great usefulness of his approach etc (i.e. trying
to avoid the pavlovian response of aggressive defence which is
understandable elsewhere, but helps little on a list where we all
appreciate his work), I think Detlev struck home rather when writing.....

"It seems that either Bourdieu has not written much explicitly on the
"technology of data analysis" or that the list is not very interested in
discussing the topic. From my conversations with colleagues and
professors 

I gather that method and data analysis seem to be much more a concern for
PhD students, the dominated of the dominant academic class. And maybe it
"should be" that way as it is not  a very exciting part of social science
research, I think (but nevertheless important when writing a
dissertation)."

This is very true.  It is often PhD researchers who are faced most
obviously with the question of the relations between a theory and
empirical research in conditions where they cannot avoid the issue.  Too
often such problems are responded to by other academics with the lazy
and unhelpful replies of 'Well, you just have to do the work and see how
it works out' - the empiricist reply; or the theoreticist reply which
semi-quotes quasi-philosophic, multi-claused sentences denouncing the
question as wanting closure or hard and fast definitions etc.  One
avoids the question, the other tries to make the lack of an answer a
virtue.  Both often make the one who asks it feel stupid for doing so. 
However, such basic questions touch on the fundamental and most
important parts of research.  
  
In terms of texts, though, one has to remember that academic texts tend
not to have explicit methodological discussion - this isn't a Bourdieu
issue.  The place to expect to find it would be in articles.  As far as
I can recall, off the top of my head and recovering from various
ailments, Bourdieu doesn't discuss all this in any real detail in
articles.  

When reading Homo Academicus, Distinction, etc., I recall a feeling that
there Bourdieu was hinting that the only reason he didn't deal with data
and analysis etc in more detail was space and that he'd do it in a
further publication.  (This is a memory - anyone else recall this?).  If
he did suggest this (and it's not just an impression I got) then either
we're about to be swamped by books on this or he was strategically
sidestepping the issue rather cleverly.  

Re quoting other references.  One wouldn't expect to find many in
Bourdieu as in France it seems that major thinkers don't like to
acknowledge the existence of anyone else, especially those who occupy
similar positions in the intellectual field.  I can't agree that
referencing is simply an attempt to sound academic.  And if you think
social science does it a lot, you should read a History paper.  These
tend to something like:
'The (OED 1999: 887) first (Jones 1988, Junes 1995)' etc.

As a last thought: perhaps the lack of discussion of the theory-data and
methodology issue (beyond abstract declarations) is one of the reasons
for the comparative lack of studies which use Bourdieu's approach. 
(There is in Anglophone sociology more studies being puiblished
recently, but many of these seem to me to graft on Bourdieu's concepts
to studies, rather than being studies which use his approach).  Without
an explicit methodology, a study cannot be repeated, except
mechanically.  

With best wishes,

Karl 

Karl Maton
School of Education, University of Cambridge

Correspondence address:
108 Avenue Road Extension, Leicester LE2 3EH
Tel: 0116 220 1066
Email: karl.maton-AT-dtn.ntl.com
Email: karl-AT-criticalrealism.com

I am certain of nothing but the holiness of the heart’s affections and
the truth of the imagination
Keats
**********************************************************************
Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu