Which Place for Radical Trial in Genetic Structuralism and in Pragmatic Approach?

Bikbov, Alexander (2021): Which Place for Radical Trial in Genetic Structuralism and in Pragmatic Approach? Published in: SOCIETÀMUTAMENTOPOLITICA , Vol. 12, No. 23 (December 2021): pp. 91-100.

Abstract

The article discusses the use of test / trial as a research tool proposed by different versions of sociology, namely by genetic structuralism owing to Pierre Bourdieu and by pragmatic approach assembled around the work of Luc Boltanski and Laurent Thévenot. The inquiry is contextualized in the author’s study of civic mobilization in Russia taking into consideration sustainability and contingencies of institutional frameworks which shape different types of test. A series of publications produced by both sociological currents and employing the concept of trial is examined in order to retrace its actuation in several research contexts. A special attention is granted to a problem of social structures in which test results are resumed. For this purpose, a more attentive reading is offered to Patrick Champagne’s and Dominique Marchetti’s paper on the affair of ‘contaminated blood’, and to the book by Nicolas Dodier on outcomes of AIDS epidemic. The results let conclude on the compatibility of pragmatic approach with the Foucauldian concept of dispositive, as well as on methodological implications of field theory in study of trials. Making use of examples from Russian protest movement, the article proposes to complete the typology of tests and to account radical tests which target the abnormal reality and the problematic self together with more conventional public trials and controversies mediated by sustainable institutions.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Boltanksi, Bourdieu, economy, science, court, normative grammar, pragmatic approach, sense of one’s place, test, trial
• Subjects: Z - Other Special Topics > Z1 - Cultural Economics ; Economic Sociology ; Economic Anthropology > Z13 - Economic Sociology ; Economic Anthropology ; Social and Economic Stratification

References

Barthe Y., de Blic D., Heurtin J., Lagneau É., Lemieux C., Linhardt D., Moreau de Bellaing C., Rémy C. and Trom D. (2013), “Pragmatic Sociology: A User’s Guide,” Politix, 3(3).

Bénatouïl T. (1999), “Critique et pragmatique en sociologie. Quelques principes de lecture,” Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales. 54ᵉ année, N. 2, 1999. See also the English version: Bénatouïl T. (1999), “A Tale of Two Sociologies. The Critical and the Pragmatic Stance in Contemporary French Sociology,” European Journal of Social Theory, 2(3).

Bikbov A. (2012), “The Methodology of Studying ʺSpontaneousʺ Street Activism (Russian Protests and Street Camps, December 2011—July 2012),” Laboratorium: Russian Review of Social Research, 2.

Bikbov A. (2014a), Grammatika poriadka: Isoricheskaia sotsiologia poniatij, kotorye meniaiut nashu realnost. Moskva, Vysshaia shkola ekonomiki (The Grammar of Order: A Historical Sociology of the Concepts That Change Our Reality).

Bikbov A. (2014b), “Self-trial through Protest,” Moscow Art Magazine. Digest 2007-2014.

Bikbov A. (2017), “Representation and Self-Empowerment: Russian Street Protests, 2011–2012,” Russian Journal of Philosophy and Humanities, 1(1).

Blokker P. and Brighenti A. (2011), “An interview with Laurent Thévenot: On engagement, critique, commonality, and power,” European Journal of Social Theory, 14(3).

Blondeau C. and Sevin J.-C. (2004), “Entretien avec Luc Boltanski, une sociologie toujours mise à l’épreuve,” ethnographiques.org, Numéro 5 [http://www.ethnographiques.org/2004/Blondeau,Sevin.html]

Boltanski L. (2002), “Nécessité et justification,” Revue économique, 2(2).

Boltanski L. and Chiapello E. (2005), The new spirit of capitalism, London – New York, Verso (Original French publication: Le nouvel esprit du capitalisme, Paris, Gallimard, 1999).

Boltanski L. and Thévenot L. (2000), “The reality of moral expectations: A sociology of situated judgement,” Philosophical Explorations, 3(3).

Boltanski L. and Thévenot L. (2006), On Justification: Economies of Worth. Princeton University Press (Original French publication: De la justification. Les économies de la grandeur. Paris, Gallimard, 1991).

Bourdieu P. (1976), “Le champ scientifique,” Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales. Vol. 2, n°2-3 (The first English version: (1975), “The Specificity of the Scientific Field and the Social Conditions of the Progress of Reason,” Social Science Information, 14(6)).

Bourdieu P. (1990), The Logic of Practice, Stanford University Press (Original French publication: Le Sens pratique, Paris, Minuit, 1980).

Bourdieu P. and Passeron J.-C. (1977), Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture, Sage (Original French publication: La Reproduction. Éléments d’une théorie du système d’enseignement. Minuit, 1970).

Bourdieu P. and de Saint Martin M. (1975), “Les catégories de l'entendement professoral,” Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, 3.

Burke P. (2008), What is Cultural History? Polity.

Bussolini J. (2010), “What is a Dispositive?,” Foucault Studies, 10.

Cefaï D. (2009), “Comment se mobilise-t-on? L’apport d’une approche pragmatiste à la sociologie de l’action collective,” Sociologie et sociétés, 41(2).

Champagne P. and Marchetti D. (1994), “L'information médicale sous contrainte. A propos du "scandale du sang contaminé",” Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, 101-102.

Chateauraynaud F. (1991), La Faute professionnelle: Une sociologie des conflits de responsabilité. Paris, Éditions Métailié.

de Blic D. and Lemieux C. (2005), “The Scandal as Test: Elements of Pragmatic Sociology,” Politix, 3(3).

Dewey J. (1910), How we think. Boston, New York, Chicago : D.C. Heath & Co.

Dodier N. (1993), L'expertise médicale. Essai de sociologie sur l’exercice du jugement. Paris, Métailié.

Dodier N. (2003), Leçons politiques de l'épidémie de SIDA. Paris, Éditions de l’École des hautes études en sciences sociales.

Dodier N. (2005), “L'espace et le mouvement du sens critique,” Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales, 1(1).

Fabiani J.-L. (1988), Les philosophes de la République. Paris, Minuit.

Foucaul M. (1985), “La vie, l’expérience et la science,” Revue de métaphisique et de morale. n. 1.

Gabowitsch M. (2017), Protest in Putin's Russia, Polity.

Garfinkel H. (1967), Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall.

Gingras Y., Lamy J. and Saint-Martin A. (2014), “Faire de la sociologie des sciences avec un marteau: Science et éthique en action,” Savoir/Agir, 1(1).

Guggenheim M. and Potthast J. (2012), “Symmetrical Twins: On the Relationship between Actor-Network Theory and the Sociology of Critical Capacities,” European Journal of Social Theory, 15(2).

Kuhn T. (1970) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd Edition). London, The University of Chicago Press.

Latour B. (1984), Microbes: guerre et paix, suivi de Irréductions, Paris, Découverte.

Latour B. (2005), Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory, Oxford University Press.

Lemieux C. (2000), Mauvaise presse. Une sociologie compréhensive du travail journalistique et de ses critiques. Paris, Métailié.

Lemieux C. (2007), “À quoi sert l'analyse des controverses?” Mil neuf cent. Revue d'histoire intellectuelle, 1(1).

Lemieux C. (2018), La sociologie pragmatique. Paris, La Découverte.

Lemieux C. (2021), “Uno sguardo altro sulla politicizzazione dei rapporti sociali. A proposito del lavoro concettuale della sociologia pragmatica,” SocietàMutamentoPolitica, 1.

Linhardt D. (2009), “L’État et ses épreuves. Éléments d’une sociologie des agencements étatiques,” Clio@Thémis, 1.

Martuccelli D. (2015), “Les deux voies de la notion d’épreuve en sociologie,” Sociologie, 1(1).

Paulhan F. (1900), “Contemporary Philosophy in France,” The Philosophical Review, Vol. 9, No. 1, (Cited by: Fabiani 1988).

Sapiro G. (2007), “The Writer’s Responsibility in France: From Flaubert to Sartre,” French Politics, Culture and Society, 25(1).

Sapiro G. (2014), The French Writers' War, 1940-1953, Duke University Press (Original French publication: La guerre des écrivains 1940-1953. Fayard, 1999).

Thévenot L. (2007), “The plurality of cognitive formats and engagements: moving between the familiar and the public,” European journal of social theory, 10(3).

Thévenot L. (2011), “Power and Oppression from the Perspective of the Sociology of Engagements: A Comparison with Bourdieu’s and Dewey’s Critical Approaches to Practical Activities,” Irish Journal of Sociology, 19(1).

Quéré L. and Terzi C. (2014), “Did You Say ‘Pragmatic’? Luc Boltanski’s Sociology from a Pragmatist Perspective,” in: Susen S. and Turner B. (eds.), The Spirit of Luc Boltanski: Essays on the ‘Pragmatic Sociology of Critique’. Anthem Press.

Vandenberghe F. (2006), “The Age of Epigones: Post-Bourdieusian Social Theory in France,” in: Delanty G. (ed.), Handbook of Contemporary European Social Theory, Routledge.