Notes sur un développement critique de la sociologie de Pierre Bourdieu

Bourdieu’s sociology could transcend its limitations by taking into account the wide fields explored by those authors he quotes to build his own theories yet which he hauntingly disregards. His thinking ought to be diversified and new research areas should be opened. The authors whose works he drew upon can be presented on a spectrum: from Freud (he accepts his concept of the “unconscious,” but goes beyond it) to Wittgenstein (whom he quotes as an absolute authority and never calls into question). Between these, we can place the authors we mentioned above (Weber, Durkheim, Levi-Strauss, Bachelard, Marx, Merleau-Ponty, etc.). They are all close to some extent to one of these poles. Some of these authors (such as Husserl) are quoted and criticized. In this case, they are treated in a way which is similar to the way Bourdieu treated Freud. Others (such as Austin or Bachelard) are used without being challenged, which is the way Bourdieu approached Wittgenstein. Unfortunately, we lack the necessary time to detail these intermediary positions. I will therefore limit the scope of this presentation to the treatment of Freud’s and Wittgenstein’s works, and I will try to show that a different usage of these authors’ achievements might lead to a diversification of Bourdieu’s sociology