- ソシオロジ (ISSN:05841380)
- vol.52, no.3, pp.35-51,236, 2008-02-29 (Released:2015-06-06)
This paper aims to reconsider the concept of practice (pratique) in a present that is filled with uncertainty. To accomplish this, it will be useful to examine Bourdieu’s theory of practice (la théorie de la pratique) and his concept of habitus. According to Bourdieu, practice is produced by an embodied habitus, which includes practical hypotheses (hypotheses pratiques) accompanied by the past and the future, and which is engendered by social structures. Hence, habitus is the key to an understanding of practice, not only for Bourdieu, but for us as well. However, it seems that his definition of the relation between habitus and practice excessively restricts the range of practical action (practice). In fact, Bourdieu’s habitus finds its reality in an embodied past, and for this reason he is unable to sufficiently consider the significance of an uncertain present in practice. In contrast, Mead claims that “reality exists in a present” and recognizes that the uncertain present is important to our understanding of practice. According to Mead, past and future are oriented in the present, and novelty is found in it. That is, the present is also a site for the reformulation of meaning. In particular, this will be true for problematic situations which cannot be adequately illustrated using Bourdieu’s habitus. Through this examination of practice from the perspective of an uncertain present, I will try to demonstrate that habitus must be connected with the novelty of the present, and that practical hypotheses are questioned and reconstructed through the novelty that is in the present.