Abstract
The debate on Bourdieu's relationship with neoclassical economic theory has become more apparent especially with the advancement of the neoliberalization process. In this debate, the question was whether the conceptual framework developed by Bourdieu (which is based on the notions of “habitus”, “field” and “different types of capital”) consisted of a simple extension of the neo-classical economic theory in social theory or rather a radical critique of it. Thus, some saw him as one of the representatives of “economic imperialism” in the discipline of sociology; while others considered his work as a “counterhegemonic project” against the neoclassical theory. Unlike the majority of favorable and unfavorable parts of the debate, in this article, it is proposed to consider the same issue by situating it in its historical and social context. In order to do this, we refer mainly to the Bourdieu's anthropological field studies on Algeria and on “the bank and its customers” in the late 1950s and early 1960s and also to his empirical exploration about the commercialization of individual house market during the 1980s. As a result, we would like to present that Bourdieu's approach not only shares its epistemological framework with neoclassical theory, but that this affinity in no way decreases its capacity of criticism, but rather, enhances it.
Paper version not known (Free)
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.