Autore
Zuolo, Federico

Titolo
Pensare l'efficacia. Jullien, Bourdieu e Latour a confronto
Periodico
Politica & società
Anno: 2020 - Volume: 27 - Fascicolo: 3 - Pagina iniziale: 341 - Pagina finale: 362

How can we properly theorize successful actions of social change? Standard analyticalaccounts in theory of action and rational choice adopt a (broadly conceived)individualistic approach which reduces collective actions to individuals. In this paper,I investigate and critically assess some alternatives to individualistic approachesthat understand rationality as context sensitive and individual action as structurallydetermined by non-individual factors. In particular, I discuss Jullien’s account ofefficacy, Bourdieu’s theory of heretic ruptures, and Latour’s theory of action witha view to assessing their capacity to understand efficacy in social change. I arguethat all these theories are unconvincing in their own terms. Jullien’s account of efficacyeventually collapses into the idea of efficiency; Bourdieu’s theory grapples withthe theoretical difficulty of making room for social change enacted by alternative(oppressed) actors; and although Latour’s approach focuses on chance, it does sowithout criteria to discern acceptable from non-acceptable ones. However, I concludethat some elements of these theories (the focus on strategy, the diversity of practicalcapacities of social actors, and the idea that action occurs through mediators)should be retained in the outline of a rich and plausible theory of efficacy in socialchange.



SICI: 2240-7901(2020)27:3<341:PLJBEL>2.0.ZU;2-S
Testo completo: https://www.rivisteweb.it/download/article/10.4476/98614
Testo completo alternativo: https://www.rivisteweb.it/doi/10.4476/98614

Esportazione dati in Refworks (solo per utenti abilitati)

Biblioteche ACNP che possiedono il periodico