Abstract
This article criticizes Bourdieu's and Giddens's overintellectualizing accounts of human activity on the basis of Wittgenstein's insights into practical understanding. Part 1 describes these two theorists' conceptions of a homology between the organization of practices (spatial-temporal manifolds of action) and the governance of individual actions. Part 2 draws on Wittgenstein's discussions of linguistic definition and following a rule to criticize these conceptions for ascribing content to the practical understanding they claim governs action. Part 3 then suggests an alternative, Wittgensteinian account of the homology between practices and actions that avoids this pitfall.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 283-308 |
| Number of pages | 26 |
| Journal | Philosophy of the Social Sciences |
| Volume | 27 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Sep 1997 |
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Philosophy
- Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Practices and Actions: A Wittgensteinian Critique of Bourdieu and Giddens'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver