Practice

Rewriting the opening words of Outline of a Theory of Practice (Bourdieu 1972).

Original:
"The practical privilege in which all scientific activity arises never more subtly governs that activity (insofar as science presupposes not only an epistemological break but also a social separation) than when, unrecognised as privilege, it leads to an implicit theory of practice which is the corollary of neglect of the social conditions in which science is possible."

Revision 1:
"All scientific activity arises in a state of practical privilege, and thus presupposes not only an epistemological break, but also a social separation. However, science is never more subtly governed by this fact than when privilege passes unrecognised as such. This leads to an implicit theory of practice which is the corollary of neglect of the social conditions in which science is possible."

Revision 2:
"All scientific activity arises in a situation which is - in practical terms - privileged. Science thus presupposes not only an epistemological break away from common sense assumptions, but also the existence of a separate social sphere divorced from the world in which such assumptions are taken for granted. The nature and content of all scientific endeavour is subtly governed by this fact - but never more so than when the privilege of science passes unrecognised as such. This leads both the scientist and his audience to entertain an implicit theory of practice which neglects the fact that science is only possible under certain - quite specific - social conditions."

Revision 3:
"Scientists don't only think differently from their fellow men - their lives are also different: Salaries, family back-ground, habits... To be blunt about it - there'd be no science if scientists weren't privileged. It seems to me that this self-evident circumstance neatly disposes of the myth of neutral, objective research. Like it or not - every "scientific" choice is subtly governed by the privileged position of the scientific establishment: What to do research on, how to do it - not to speak of the conclusions the researcher arrives at! But in spite of this inevitable and rather obvious fact, it's considered quite comme il faut to believe in the myth - not only among scientists themselves, but in governments, schools, the media. In fact, at times I suspect that the "common people" are more easily fooled than anyone! I'm convinced that this is an undesirable situation from the point of view of science itself, because it confuses such a lot of issues. True enough, as scientists we must take many assumptions for granted - but when we ignore this basic fact, our whole enterprise is permeated with a distorted view of what science does and is - an implicit (and false) theory of practice."