Cet article publié par ELSEVIER provient du Dépôt institutionnel de l'Université Libre de Bruxelles, DIfusion http://difusion.ulb.ac.be. Il n'est accessible qu'aux membres de la communauté universitaire de l'ULB sur le réseau sécurisé de l'ULB. Tout utilisateur autorisé peut lire, télécharger ou reproduire cet article à des fins d'usage privé ou à des fins non commerciales d'enseignement ou de recherche scientifique. Il ne peut être atteint à l'intégrité de l'article, et les noms des auteurs et de l'éditeur doivent être conservés. Tout téléchargement systématique des articles publiés par ELSEVIER mis à disposition dans DI-fusion est interdit. This article published by ELSEVIER comes from the Institutional repository of Université Libre de Bruxelles, DI-fusion http://difusion.ulb.ac.be. It is accessible only to the members of the university community of ULB on the ULB secure network. Any authorized user may read, download or reproduce this article for private usage, or for non commercial research or educational purposes. The integrity of the article and identification of the author and copyright owner must be preserved. Systematic downloading of articles published by ELSEVIER that are available in DI-fusion is not permitted.

This article sets out to show that Wittgenstein and Freud have exerted a considerable - though narrow - influence on Bourdieu’s sociology. But their influence also pervades the theoretical development of two other currents that have emerged in French sociology in the last few years, and that were developed by L. Boltanski and L. Thévenot on the one hand, and B. Lahire on the other. Although they do not make it explicit, the advocates of these two currents have nevertheless been influenced by Wittgenstein and Freud. Thus Boltanski has drawn on Wittgenstein to develop a sociology which gives primacy to the social actor’s interpretation of his or her situation through lay theorizing. Lahire’s work clearly pays a debt to Freud with his psychological sociology. It would therefore be interesting, in the first instance, to tease out how Wittgenstein and Freud, respectively, have influenced these two systems to demonstrate that they can indeed be used to generate new sociological currents, other than Bourdieu’s own. This would then allow us to explore how they could be used to fill any gaps in Bourdieu’s work, thus giving the latter renewed relevance and staunching its stagnating tendencies. Ultimately, this analysis aims to show how Wittgenstein’s and Freud’s theoretical influences can lead the way towards a theoretical synthesis between Bourdieu’s critical sociology, Boltanski’s social actor theory and Lahire’s psychological sociology. Currently, these three currents operate independently of each other, without any kind of dialogue. And yet, far from being incompatible, these sociologies offer opportunities for exploring how they might complement and mutually enrich each other.

No abstract

Thank you for choosing to publish with us. This is your final opportunity to ensure your article will be accurate at publication. Please review your proof carefully and respond to the queries using the circled tools in the image below, which are available by clicking "Comment" from the right-side menu in Adobe Reader DC.* Please use only the tools circled in the image, as edits via other tools/methods can be lost during file conversion. For comments, questions, or formatting requests, please use. Please do not use comment bubbles/sticky notes .