<論文>はじまりの認識論のために : モース「身体技法論」に見る認識の発生論

Abstract

This paper heuristically examines the anecdotes in Marcel Mauss's essay, 'Techniques of the Body', for the purpose of producing an alternative theory of reflexive epistemology to that found in Pierre Bourdieu's reflexive sociology. Bourdeiu's conceptualizations of the social, namely 'social space' and 'field', prevent him from focusing on the actual relationship between the social scientist and the agent, since they are constructed upon the concept of capital. As Marx points out in The Capital, capital is not an objective entity, but merely a form given to a certain kind of content, which is value. Contrary to what Bourdieu maintains, value originates not from the scarcity of capital, but ex post facto from the actual trade of commodities. When Bourdieu identifies both the scientist and agent according to the amount of capital they possess, he reduces the scientist's observation, which is essentialy an inductive formalization of the agent's act, to another a priori form, capital. Thus, his method of reflection has no choice but to neglect the heuristic properties of the scientist's observation. In order to avoid the reductionism (not necessarily economic reductionism, but reductionism of the capital) inherent in Bourdieu's theory of reflexivity, we must inquire into the emergent quality of the form given to the agent's act in the observation itself. As in economic trade, the value (content) of capital (form) can only be determined ex post facto the interaction between the seller and the buyer, so in sociological observation, the value (content) of an observation (formalization) can only be determined in relation to the observation, which is a unique event involving both the scientist and the agent. Mauss was practicing this kind of reflection when he gave anecdotes on how he came to realize the existence and the importance of 'The Techniques of the Body'. Of particular importance is that Mauss did not merely reflect on his subjectivity that enabled his observation of acts, but also on his own body that decisively influenced his subjectivity upon determining the common content of the acts, in other words their commensuration, which is a logical precondition of giving different forms to previously unrelated acts. If the scientist wishes to appreciate the emergent property of his sociological observation, his reflection is not complete without his shedding light to the uniqueness of his physical limits, tendencies, and possibilities that enabled the observation in the first place.