There are two strands in Bourdieu's sociological writings. On the one hand, Bourdieu argues for a theoretical position one might term his “practical theory” which emphasizes virtuosic interactions between individuals. On the other hand, and most frequently, Bourdieu appeals to the concept of the habitus according to which society consists of objective structures and determined—and isolated—individuals. Although Bourdieu believes that the habitus is compatible with his practical theory and overcomes the impasse of objectivism and subjectivism in social theory, neither claim is the case; the habitus is incompatible with his practical theory, and it retreats quickly into objectivism. However, Bourdieu's practical theory does offer a way out of the impasse of objectivism and subjectivism by focussing on the intersubjective interactions between individuals.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArcherM.1983. “Process without system.”, Archives Européennes de sociologie24(1):196–221.
2.
ArcherM.1988. Culture and Agency: the place of culture in social theory. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
3.
ArcherM.1995. Realist Social Theory: the morphogenetic approach. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
4.
ArcherM.1996. “Social Integration and System Integration: Developing the distinction,”Sociology, Vol. 30, No. 4, Nov: 679–699.
5.
BhaskarR.1978. A Realist Theory of Science. Sussex, U.K.: Harvester.
6.
BhaskarR.1979. The Possibility of Naturalism. Sussex, U.K.: Harvester.
7.
BhaskarR.1986. Scientific Realism and Human Emancipation. London: Verso.
8.
BhaskarR.1991. Philosophy and the Idea of Freedom. Oxford: Blackwell.
9.
BhaskarR.1993. Dialectic: The Pulse of Freedom. London: Verso.
10.
BidetJ.1979. “Questions to Pierre Bourdieu.”Critique of Anthropology13–14 (Summer):203–8.
11.
BourdieuP.1977a. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
12.
BourdieuP.1977b. Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture. London: Sage.
13.
BourdieuP.1979. Algeria 1960. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
14.
BourdieuP.1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
15.
BourdieuP.1988a. The Political Ontology of Martin Heidegger. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.
16.
BourdieuP.1988b. “Vive la Crise! For Heterodoxy in Social Science,”Theory and Society, 17(5):773–787.
17.
BourdieuP.1990a. The Logic of Practices. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.
18.
BourdieuP.1990b. In Other Words. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.
19.
BourdieuP.WacquantL.1992. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology.London: University of Chicago Press.
20.
BourdieuP.1996a. Homo Academicus. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.
21.
BourdieuP.1996b. The State Nobility. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.
22.
BouveresseJ.1995. “Rules, Dispositions and Habitus,”Critique, 51:579–80, 573–94.
23.
BrubakerR.1985. “Rethinking Classical Sociology: The sociological vision of Pierre Bourdieu.”Theory and Society, 14(6):745–75.
24.
BrubakerR.1993. “Social Theory as Habitus.” In Bourdieu: Critical Perspectives, edited by CalhounC.LiPumaE.PostoneM.Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.
25.
de CerteauM.1988. The Practice of Everyday Life. London: University of California.
CollinsR.1989. “Review of Homo Academicus”. American Journal of Sociology. 95(2):460–63.
28.
DiMaggioP.1979. “Review Essay: On Pierre Bourdieu.”American Journal of Sociology. 84(6):1460–74.
29.
DreyfusH.RabinowP.1993. “Can there be a Science of Existential Structure and Social Meaning?” In Bourdieu: Critical Perspectives, edited by CalhounC.LiPumaE.PostoneM.Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.
30.
EliasN.1978. What is Sociology?New York: Columbia University Press.
31.
EvensT.1999. “Bourdieu and the Logic of Practice: Is all Giving Indian-Giving or is ‘Generalized Materialism’ not enough?”Sociological Theory. 17(1):3–31.
32.
FowlerB.1996. “An Introduction to Pierre Bourdieu's ‘Understanding.’”Theory, Culture and Society. 13(2): 1–16.
33.
FowlerB.1997. Pierre Bourdieu and Cultural Theory. London: Sage.
34.
GadamerH-G.1975. Truth and Method. London: Sheed and Ward.
GarnhamN.WilliamsR.1980. “Pierre Bourdieu and the Sociology of Culture: An Introduction.”Media, Culture and Society. 2(3):209–223.
37.
GartmannD.1991.“Culture as Class Symbolization or Mass Reification? A Critique of Bourdieu's Distinction.”American Journal of Sociology. 97(2):421–47.
38.
GiddensA.1979. Central Problems in Social Theory. London: Macmillan.
39.
GiddensA.1984. The Constitution of Society. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.
40.
GorderK.1980. “Understanding School Knowledge: A Critical Appraisal of Basil Bernstein and Pierre Bourdieu.”Educational Theory, 30(4):335–46.
41.
Habermas, 1987a. The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.
42.
HabermasJ.1987b. The Theory of Communicative Action: Vol. 2 Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.
43.
HarkerR.1984. “On Reproduction, Habitus and Education.”British Journal of Sociology of Education. 5(2): 117–127.
44.
JenkinsR.1982. “Pierre Bourdieu and the Reproduction of Determinism.”Sociology. 16(2):270–81.
45.
JenkinsR.1993. Pierre Bourdieu. London: Routledge.
46.
KingA.1999a. “Against Structure: A Critique of Morphogenetic Social Theory.”Sociological Review. 47(2): 199–227.
47.
KingA.1999b. “The Impossibility of Naturalism: The Antinomies of Bhaskar's Realism.”Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour. 29(3):267–288.
48.
KingA.2000. “The Accidental Derogation of the Lay Actor: A Critique of Giddens’ Concept of Structure.”Philosophy of the Social Sciences. 30(3):362–83.
49.
LamontM.1989. “Slipping the World Back in: Bourdieu on Heidegger.”Contemporary Sociology. 18(5): 781–83.
50.
LamontM.LareauA.1988. “Cultural Capital: Allusion, Gaps and Glissandos in Recent Theoretical Developments.”Sociological Theory. 6:2 Fall:153–168.
51.
LayderD.1981. Structure, Interaction and Social Theory. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
52.
MouzelisN.1995. Sociological Theory: What Went Wrong? Diagnosis and Remedies. London: Routledge.
53.
PostoneM.LiPumaE.CalhounC.1993. “Introduction: Bourdieu and Social Theory.”Bourdieu: Critical Perspectives. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.
54.
RobbinsD.1991. The Work of Pierre Bourdieu. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
55.
SchatzkiT.1987. “Overdue Analysis of Bourdieu's Theory of Practice.”Inquiry. 30(1–2):113–35.
56.
SchatzkiT.1997. “Practices and Actions: A Wittgensteinian Critique of Bourdieu and Giddens.”Philosophy of the Social Sciences. 27(3):283–308.
57.
SulkunenP.1982. “Society made Visible—on the cultural sociology of Pierre Bourdieu.”, Acta Sociologica25(2):102–15.
58.
SwartzD.1977. “Pierre Bourdieu: The Cultural Transmission of Social Inequality.”Harvard Educational Review. 47(4):545–55.
59.
TaylorC.1993. “To Follow a Rule …,” In Bourdieu: Critical Perspectives, edited by CalhounC.LiPumaE.PostoneM.Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.
60.
TaylorC.1995. “Interpretation and the Sciences of Man” in Philosophy and the Human Sciences: Philosophical Papers 2.Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
61.
WacquantL.1987. “Symbolic Violence and the Making of the French Agriculturalist: An Enquiry into Pierre Bourdieu's Sociology.”Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology. 23(1):65–88.
62.
WinchP.1977. The Idea of a Social Science and its Relation to Philosophy. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
