In: International Political Sociology 19(2).

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.

You can access the whole article here.