Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 12:12:04 +0100 From: "karl.maton" <karl.maton-AT-pop.ntlworld.com> Subject: Re: [BOU:] Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 20:54:54 -0600 p.s. So I don't think the fundamental difference is about structure / agency or about temporality. It can be argued that Bourdieu's field approach isn't very dynamic (the tendency at times is to do snapshots almost like a before / after photograph comparison). It's more - I think - how they construct the object of study. Maybe I am wrong in my sleepy state but I don't recall episteme as involving an analysis of relational social positions. It tends to analyse what. Bourdieu tends to analyse who, where, how. -- With best wishes, Karl WHEN REPLYING: PLEASE MAKE SURE MY EMAIL ADDRESS HAS NO POP IN IT. Karl Maton School of Education, University of Cambridge Email: karl.maton-AT-ntlworld.com Email: matonianuk-AT-yahoo.co.uk URL: http://www.KarlMaton.com Correspondence address: 108 Avenue Road Extension, Leicester LE2 3EH, England. Tel: +44 (0) 116 220 1066 This is your life and its ending one minute at a time. ********************************************************************** 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