皮埃尔·布迪厄:《国际关系中的殖民经验与方法论反思》

IF 3.5 2区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Leonie Holthaus
{"title":"皮埃尔·布迪厄:《国际关系中的殖民经验与方法论反思》","authors":"Leonie Holthaus","doi":"10.1093/ips/olaf013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article asks what reflexive practices one can learn from, with and against Pierre Bourdieu’s works on and in Algeria and later contributions. Addressing the question enables a revision of Bourdieusian reflexivity and a new contribution to the methodological reflexivity debate in international relations (IR) and International Political Sociology (IPS). It furthers the identification of three reflexive practices: avoidance of theoretical and conceptual fetishism, methodological experimentation and operationalization of methodological polytheism, or what is often called multi-method research, and alternations between engaged research and critical distancing; it is often forgotten that Bourdieu’s research encourages assumptions of epistemic asymmetry and suspicion of power struggles and emotionally engaged research. I include examples of how the practices can be performed from current IR and sociology to enhance the pedagogical value of this intervention. Even if the practices originated in colonial research situations privileging researchers from colonizing societies, the examples show that researchers with different positions can use the practices if they mind varying patterns of symbolic violence. In the tradition of Bourdieu’s early research and considering research I am familiar with, I selected examples dealing with “Global South” themes or themes evolving in the researcher’s own milieu.","PeriodicalId":47361,"journal":{"name":"International Political Sociology","volume":"55 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pierre Bourdieu, Colonial Experiences, and Methodological Reflexivity in International Relations\",\"authors\":\"Leonie Holthaus\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ips/olaf013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article asks what reflexive practices one can learn from, with and against Pierre Bourdieu’s works on and in Algeria and later contributions. Addressing the question enables a revision of Bourdieusian reflexivity and a new contribution to the methodological reflexivity debate in international relations (IR) and International Political Sociology (IPS). It furthers the identification of three reflexive practices: avoidance of theoretical and conceptual fetishism, methodological experimentation and operationalization of methodological polytheism, or what is often called multi-method research, and alternations between engaged research and critical distancing; it is often forgotten that Bourdieu’s research encourages assumptions of epistemic asymmetry and suspicion of power struggles and emotionally engaged research. I include examples of how the practices can be performed from current IR and sociology to enhance the pedagogical value of this intervention. Even if the practices originated in colonial research situations privileging researchers from colonizing societies, the examples show that researchers with different positions can use the practices if they mind varying patterns of symbolic violence. In the tradition of Bourdieu’s early research and considering research I am familiar with, I selected examples dealing with “Global South” themes or themes evolving in the researcher’s own milieu.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Political Sociology\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Political Sociology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olaf013\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Political Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olaf013","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了我们可以从皮埃尔·布迪厄关于阿尔及利亚的作品以及他后来的贡献中学习到什么反思性实践,以及对他的研究和反对。解决这个问题可以对布尔迪厄反思性进行修订,并对国际关系(IR)和国际政治社会学(IPS)中的方法论反思性辩论做出新的贡献。它进一步确定了三种反思性实践:避免理论和概念的拜物教,方法论实验和方法论多神论的操作化,或通常被称为多方法研究,以及参与研究和关键距离之间的交替;人们常常忘记,布迪厄的研究鼓励了认知不对称的假设,以及对权力斗争和情感投入研究的怀疑。我列举了一些例子,说明如何从当前的国际关系和社会学角度实施这些实践,以增强这种干预的教学价值。即使这些做法起源于殖民研究情境,使研究人员从殖民社会中获得特权,这些例子表明,如果不同立场的研究人员介意不同的象征性暴力模式,他们也可以使用这些做法。在布迪厄早期研究的传统中,考虑到我所熟悉的研究,我选择了处理“全球南方”主题或在研究者自己的环境中发展的主题的例子。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pierre Bourdieu, Colonial Experiences, and Methodological Reflexivity in International Relations
This article asks what reflexive practices one can learn from, with and against Pierre Bourdieu’s works on and in Algeria and later contributions. Addressing the question enables a revision of Bourdieusian reflexivity and a new contribution to the methodological reflexivity debate in international relations (IR) and International Political Sociology (IPS). It furthers the identification of three reflexive practices: avoidance of theoretical and conceptual fetishism, methodological experimentation and operationalization of methodological polytheism, or what is often called multi-method research, and alternations between engaged research and critical distancing; it is often forgotten that Bourdieu’s research encourages assumptions of epistemic asymmetry and suspicion of power struggles and emotionally engaged research. I include examples of how the practices can be performed from current IR and sociology to enhance the pedagogical value of this intervention. Even if the practices originated in colonial research situations privileging researchers from colonizing societies, the examples show that researchers with different positions can use the practices if they mind varying patterns of symbolic violence. In the tradition of Bourdieu’s early research and considering research I am familiar with, I selected examples dealing with “Global South” themes or themes evolving in the researcher’s own milieu.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: International Political Sociology (IPS), responds to the need for more productive collaboration among political sociologists, international relations specialists and sociopolitical theorists. It is especially concerned with challenges arising from contemporary transformations of social, political, and global orders given the statist forms of traditional sociologies and the marginalization of social processes in many approaches to international relations. IPS is committed to theoretical innovation, new modes of empirical research and the geographical and cultural diversification of research beyond the usual circuits of European and North-American scholarship.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信