The Linear History Of Scientific Reason Pierre Bourdieu Analysis

Pierre Bourdieu’s “The Peculiar History of Scientific Reason” is a brief article full of lengthy words and complex notions. Throughout the paper, Bourdieu seems to be making multiple arguments when he is in fact making a single assertion: despite the preferred view that science is created in a vacuum, there are numerous social factors that define the essence and history of science, and the study of these social definitions is perhaps the best way for sociologists to discover the nature of social determinants. Now, to unravel that thesis: there are multiple places where Bourdieu mentions his objection to the “science is created in a vacuum” concept. On page ten he states that science does not develop according to its own inherent logic. Coupled …show more content…
“Specific capital” can and does include money (how much and from where), competition within the institution, scientific or social authority, capital and power over capital, and degrees of autonomy. Again, he does not employ citations very often, but this will be discussed …show more content…
A few merits were that Bourdieu had a definite voice, composed with a clear structure, and employed a precise vocabulary. Conversely, the demerits: at no point did Bourdieu wholly state his argument, or an argument at all really. His statements resembled opinions more than arguments seeing as the majority of the paper referenced nothing aside from whatever statement he had made previously; while the assertions seemed correct by virtue of common knowledge, prevailing philosophy does not a valid source make. He also wrote his sentences incredibly long: each paragraph (½-⅓ page long) contained around 2-3 sentences. On page nineteen, there is a single sentence that is eleven text lines in