Read more So there would have been two Bourdieus! The first, a sociologist, (almost) acceptable, who would have been a rigorous scientist until the early 1990s. The second, from the publication of La Misère du monde (Seuil, 1993), a large volume bringing together testimonies on an increasingly impoverished French society, and a major document on the effect of domination and neoliberal policies, when Keynesian collective protections are gradually diminishing. From there, Bourdieu would have become an "engaged" intellectual, an "activist", or even "an activist" pure and simple. And, of course, unapproachable. This presentation is hard to shake: from the moment Bourdieu became involved in public debate, particularly during the great social movement of November-December 1995, the professor at the Collège de France became a dangerous activist, abandoning his chair of sociology. This is what we find in particular in the work of Nathalie Heinich, a sociologist trained by Bourdieu who later joined the reactionary camp, who denounces a (hypothetical) "importation of the 'political fight' into the scientific space". Unlike the strong popular mobilization against the current "reform" of the pension system, "the strikes of November-December [1995] sparked a strong mobilization among French intellectuals". This was noted by a group of young sociologists in Le « décembre » des intellectuels français (1), an essay published by the publishing house founded at the time by Pierre Bourdieu, Liber-Raisons d'agir. In particular, they traced the deep divide that developed among French intellectuals, symbolised by the opposition between two petitions. One, in support of the "Juppé reform" (and the position of Nicole Notat, then head of the CFDT), was entitled "Pour une réforme de fond de la Sécurité sociale" and counted among its main signatories Alain Touraine and a good part of the editorial staff of the journal Esprit. The other, "Appeal of intellectuals in support of the strikers", brought together a large part of the "progressive" intellectuals, with Pierre Bourdieu as its figurehead. He and the other signatories were described as "irresponsible", "leftists" and "totalitarians". However, this divide left deep traces in the intellectual world: "Two decades of theoretical and political conflicts, of individual and collective enterprises, of rapprochements and estrangements crystallized" then, write the five authors of this little book. The title of Gérard Mauger's new essay, A sociological journey, immediately denies the thesis, which Want to finish this article? We offer it to you!
So there would have been two Bourdieus! The first, a sociologist, (almost) frequentable, who was supposedly a rigorous scientist until the early 1990s. The second, from the publication of La Misère du monde (Seuil, 1993), a large volume bringing together testimonies on an increasingly impoverished French society, and a major document on the effect of domination and neoliberal policies, when Keynesian collective protections are gradually diminishing.
From then on, Bourdieu would have become an "engaged" intellectual, an "activist", or even just an "activist". And, of course, unapproachable. This presentation is hard to shake: from the moment Bourdieu became involved in public debate, particularly during the great social movement of November-December 1995, the professor at the Collège de France became a dangerous activist, abandoning his chair of sociology.
This is what we find in particular in the work of Nathalie Heinich, a sociologist trained by Bourdieu who then joined the reactionary camp, who denounces a (hypothetical) "importation of the 'political combat' into the scientific space".
Unlike the strong popular mobilization against the current "reform" of the pension system, "the strikes of November-December [1995] have aroused a strong mobilization among French intellectuals." This is what a group of young sociologists noted in Le « décembre » des intellectuels français (1), an essay published by the publishing house founded at the time by Pierre Bourdieu, Liber-Raisons d'agir.
They particularly traced the deep cleavage which was established among French intellectuals, symbolized by the opposition between two petitions. One, in support of the "Juppé reform" (and the position of Nicole Notat, then head of the CFDT), was entitled "For a fundamental reform of Social Security" and counted among its main signatories Alain Touraine and a good part of the editorial staff of the magazine Esprit.
The other, "Appeal of intellectuals in support of the strikers", brought together a large part of the "progressive" intellectuals, with Pierre Bourdieu as its figurehead. He and the other signatories were described as "irresponsible", "leftists" and "totalitarians". However, this division left traces deep in the intellectual world: "Two decades of theoretical and political conflicts, of individual and collective enterprises, of rapprochements and estrangements crystallize" then, write the five authors of this little book.
The title of Gérard Mauger's new essay, A Sociological Journey, immediately refutes the thesis, which
"This post is a summary of information from our information monitoring"
