The Habitus Made Me Do It: Bourdieu's Key Concept as a Substruction of the Monad

Autores
Belvedere, Carlos Daniel
Año de publicación
2013
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
My claim is that Bourdieu's concept of habitus is not consistent and its ambiguities conceal an imprecision concerning the subject of social action. Indeed, Bourdieu defines habitus in three different ways: as a capacity, as a set of dispositions, and as a scheme for practice. That is why he cannot solve the problem of the duality of agent and habitus and produces a problem of fundamentation, as we can see in his troubles to determine which is the substratum of social actions. Though Bourdieu claims he borrows the concept of habitus from Husserl and other phenomenologists, many divergences can be stated in the way they conceive it. Unlike Bourdieu, phenomenology can establish precise relations of fundamentation between agent, habitus and the ego because it avoids the fallacy of the wrong level involved in the attribution of systemic properties to personal eogic structures. Accordingly, it provides a consistent, precise concept of the habitus.
Fil: Belvedere, Carlos Daniel. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales. Instituto de Investigaciones "Gino Germani"; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Materia
HABITUS
LIFE-WORLD
MONAD
SUBSTRUCTION
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/3714

id CONICETDig_411b8cabb923d7c3e1566a7455016d5a
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/3714
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling The Habitus Made Me Do It: Bourdieu's Key Concept as a Substruction of the MonadBelvedere, Carlos DanielHABITUSLIFE-WORLDMONADSUBSTRUCTIONhttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.4https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5My claim is that Bourdieu's concept of habitus is not consistent and its ambiguities conceal an imprecision concerning the subject of social action. Indeed, Bourdieu defines habitus in three different ways: as a capacity, as a set of dispositions, and as a scheme for practice. That is why he cannot solve the problem of the duality of agent and habitus and produces a problem of fundamentation, as we can see in his troubles to determine which is the substratum of social actions. Though Bourdieu claims he borrows the concept of habitus from Husserl and other phenomenologists, many divergences can be stated in the way they conceive it. Unlike Bourdieu, phenomenology can establish precise relations of fundamentation between agent, habitus and the ego because it avoids the fallacy of the wrong level involved in the attribution of systemic properties to personal eogic structures. Accordingly, it provides a consistent, precise concept of the habitus.Fil: Belvedere, Carlos Daniel. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales. Instituto de Investigaciones "Gino Germani"; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaDavid Publishing Company2013-12info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/3714Belvedere, Carlos Daniel; The Habitus Made Me Do It: Bourdieu's Key Concept as a Substruction of the Monad; David Publishing Company; Philosophy Study; 3; 12; 12-2013; 1094-11082159-5321enginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://www.davidpublishing.com/show.html?15397info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/issn/2159-5321info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T10:12:34Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/3714instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 10:12:34.329CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv The Habitus Made Me Do It: Bourdieu's Key Concept as a Substruction of the Monad
title The Habitus Made Me Do It: Bourdieu's Key Concept as a Substruction of the Monad
spellingShingle The Habitus Made Me Do It: Bourdieu's Key Concept as a Substruction of the Monad
Belvedere, Carlos Daniel
HABITUS
LIFE-WORLD
MONAD
SUBSTRUCTION
title_short The Habitus Made Me Do It: Bourdieu's Key Concept as a Substruction of the Monad
title_full The Habitus Made Me Do It: Bourdieu's Key Concept as a Substruction of the Monad
title_fullStr The Habitus Made Me Do It: Bourdieu's Key Concept as a Substruction of the Monad
title_full_unstemmed The Habitus Made Me Do It: Bourdieu's Key Concept as a Substruction of the Monad
title_sort The Habitus Made Me Do It: Bourdieu's Key Concept as a Substruction of the Monad
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Belvedere, Carlos Daniel
author Belvedere, Carlos Daniel
author_facet Belvedere, Carlos Daniel
author_role author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv HABITUS
LIFE-WORLD
MONAD
SUBSTRUCTION
topic HABITUS
LIFE-WORLD
MONAD
SUBSTRUCTION
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.4
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv My claim is that Bourdieu's concept of habitus is not consistent and its ambiguities conceal an imprecision concerning the subject of social action. Indeed, Bourdieu defines habitus in three different ways: as a capacity, as a set of dispositions, and as a scheme for practice. That is why he cannot solve the problem of the duality of agent and habitus and produces a problem of fundamentation, as we can see in his troubles to determine which is the substratum of social actions. Though Bourdieu claims he borrows the concept of habitus from Husserl and other phenomenologists, many divergences can be stated in the way they conceive it. Unlike Bourdieu, phenomenology can establish precise relations of fundamentation between agent, habitus and the ego because it avoids the fallacy of the wrong level involved in the attribution of systemic properties to personal eogic structures. Accordingly, it provides a consistent, precise concept of the habitus.
Fil: Belvedere, Carlos Daniel. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales. Instituto de Investigaciones "Gino Germani"; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
description My claim is that Bourdieu's concept of habitus is not consistent and its ambiguities conceal an imprecision concerning the subject of social action. Indeed, Bourdieu defines habitus in three different ways: as a capacity, as a set of dispositions, and as a scheme for practice. That is why he cannot solve the problem of the duality of agent and habitus and produces a problem of fundamentation, as we can see in his troubles to determine which is the substratum of social actions. Though Bourdieu claims he borrows the concept of habitus from Husserl and other phenomenologists, many divergences can be stated in the way they conceive it. Unlike Bourdieu, phenomenology can establish precise relations of fundamentation between agent, habitus and the ego because it avoids the fallacy of the wrong level involved in the attribution of systemic properties to personal eogic structures. Accordingly, it provides a consistent, precise concept of the habitus.
publishDate 2013
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2013-12
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/3714
Belvedere, Carlos Daniel; The Habitus Made Me Do It: Bourdieu's Key Concept as a Substruction of the Monad; David Publishing Company; Philosophy Study; 3; 12; 12-2013; 1094-1108
2159-5321
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/3714
identifier_str_mv Belvedere, Carlos Daniel; The Habitus Made Me Do It: Bourdieu's Key Concept as a Substruction of the Monad; David Publishing Company; Philosophy Study; 3; 12; 12-2013; 1094-1108
2159-5321
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://www.davidpublishing.com/show.html?15397
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/issn/2159-5321
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv David Publishing Company
publisher.none.fl_str_mv David Publishing Company
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1844614034703253504
score 13.070432