Skip to main content

If Theodicy is Always Sociodicy: Bourdieu and the Marxian Critique of Religion

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Bourdieu and Marx

Part of the book series: Marx, Engels, and Marxisms ((MAENMA))

Abstract

For all his critics against Marxism, Bourdieu’s work shows intimate familiarity with the work of Marx, whose ideas pop up in several writings. Bourdieu’s Marx is first and foremost the early Marx of The Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 and The German Ideology. One of the key concepts Marx provides for Bourdieu’s thinking is surely alienation, but there is something more. The aim of this contribution is to highlight the still partially neglected couple theodicy/sociodicy, which also has its roots in the same writings of Marx. The first paragraph contains an analysis of the relationship between the two terms as established by Bourdieu. Then I will show how this terminological pair becomes salient only by granting Marx the primacy in the triad that he composes with Weber and Durkheim, and which represents Bourdieu’s constant dialectical reference. Once foregrounded these two aspects, religion will appear not just as an essential element in the definition of Bourdieu’s notion of field, but also as an object of permanent critique because it is the foundation of every critique of society and its structures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    I am grateful to Bridget Fowler and Emiliano R. Urciuoli for helpful comments on a previous draft.

  2. 2.

    Actually, as far as I know, the very first attestation of the term is found in an article’s title published by Daniel Bell (1966). However, the author does not develop the concept further, taking its meaning for granted. It is therefore difficult to argue that Bell produced the seminal essay on sociodicy that the title seemed to announce (Giner 2014: 292). I am grateful to Vincenzo Romania for drawing my attention to Bell’s article.

  3. 3.

    ‘IQ racism is a racism of the dominant class that differs in a host of ways from what is generally called racism, that’s to say the petit-bourgeois racism which is the central target of most classic critiques of racism, including the most vigorous of them, such as that by Sartre. This racism is characteristic of a dominant class whose reproduction depends to a large extent on the transmission of cultural capital, an inherited capital that has the property of being an embodied, and therefore apparently natural, innate, capital. […] It is what causes the dominant class to feel justified in being dominant: they feel themselves to be essentially superior’ (Bourdieu 1993: 177).

  4. 4.

    ‘It is by arming itself with mathematics (and media power) that neo-liberalism has become the supreme form of the conservative sociodicy that has been announcing itself, for the past 30 years, under the name of ‘the end of ideologies’, or, more recently, of ‘the end of history’ (Bourdieu 1998: 1; translation is mine).

  5. 5.

    ‘The particular strength of the masculine sociodicy comes from the fact that it combines and condenses two operations: it legitimates a relationship of domination by embedding it in a biological nature that is itself a naturalized social construction’ (Bourdieu 2001: 23).

  6. 6.

    ‘One could say—without forcing the issue, I think—that Weber very consciously took historical materialism to the areas where historical materialism was particularly weak, that is, to the area of the symbolic. Where, in Marx, we had a sentence that was both fundamental and a bit simple (‘Religion is the opium of the people’), and a few analyses of the superstructure, Weber did the whole construction of the theory of religion and of the priesthood, which—it seems to me—consisted in pushing to its last consequences a materialist theory of symbolic forms’ (Bourdieu 2016: 771; translation is mine). But the relationship between Marx and Weber had already come into focus a few years earlier, for example: ‘I must say that, on this decisive point, my reading of Max Weber—who, far from opposing Marx, as is generally thought, with a spiritualist theory of history, in fact carries the materialist mode of thought into areas which Marxist materialism effectively abandons to spiritualism—helped me greatly in arriving at this kind of generalized materialism; this will be a paradox only to those who have an over-simple view of Weber’s thought, owing to the combined effect of the rarity of translations, the one-sidedness of the early French and American interpretations, and the perfunctory anathemas pronounced by ‘Marxist’ orthodoxy’ (Bourdieu 1990: 17).

  7. 7.

    According to Bridget Fowler, for example, the tools Bourdieu forged to understand how domination works and how it reproduces itself are a clear sign of this theoretical approach (Fowler 2011, 2018).

  8. 8.

    ‘To understand how ideologies dominate, the process of universalization is very important. It consists in transforming a discourse valid for a few into a universal discourse, valid for all’ (Bourdieu 2016: 795; translation is mine).

  9. 9.

    Indeed, Marx also maintains something similar, when he writes that ‘the production of the ideas, of conceptions, of consciousness, is at first directly interwoven with the material activity and the material intercourse of men—the language of real life’ (Marx and Engels 1998: 42).

References

  • Adair-Toteff, Christopher. 2013. ‘Sinn der Welt’: Max Weber and the Problem of Theodicy. Max Weber Studies 13: 87–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, Ullrich, and Uwe H. Bittlingmayer. 2014. Pierre Bourdieu und die Frankfurter Schule: Eine Fortsetzung der Kritischen Theorie mit anderen Mitteln? In Bourdieu und die Frankfurter Schule: Kritische Gesellschaftstheorie im Zeitalter des Neoliberalismus, ed. Ullrich Bauer, Uwe H. Bittlingmayer, Carsten Keller, and Franz Schultheis, 43–82. Bielefeld: Transcript.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, Daniel. 1966. Sociodicy: A Guide to Modern Usage. The American Scholar 35: 696–714.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, Pierre. 1991 [1971]. Genesis and Structure of the Religious Field. Comparative Social Research 13, 1–44. Trans. Jenny B. Burnside, Craig Calhoun and Leah Florence.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1987 [1971]. Legitimation and Structured Interests in Weber’s Sociology of Religion. Trans. Chris Turner. In Max Weber, Rationality, and Modernity, ed. Scott Lash and Sam Whimster, 119–136. London: Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1990 [1980]. The Logic of Practice. Trans. Richard Nice. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1993 [1984]. The Racism of ‘Intelligence’. In Sociology in Question, 177–180. Trans. Richard Nice. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1998. Contre-feux. Propos pour servir à la résistance contre l’invasion néo-libérale. Paris: Raisons d’agir.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2001 [1990]. Masculine Domination. Trans. Richard Nice. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014 [2012]. On the State: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1982–1992. Ed. Patrick Champagne, Remi Lenoir, Franck Poupeau and Marie-Christine Rivière. Trans. David Fernbach. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2016. Sociologie générale, Volume 2: Cours au Collège de France (1983–1986). Ed. Patrick Champagne, Franck Poupeau, and Marie-Christine Rivère. Paris: Raisons d’agir.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2020 [2016]. Habitus and Field: General Sociology, Volume 2. Lectures at the Collège del France (1982–1983). Ed. Patrick Champagne, Julien Duval, Franck Poupeau, and Marie-Christine Rivière. Trans. Peter Collier. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denord, François. 2020. Sociodicée. In Dictionnaire International Bourdieu, ed. Gisèle Sapiro, 796. Paris: CNRS Editions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dianteill, Erwan. 2004. Pierre Bourdieu and the Sociology of Religion: A Central and Peripheral Concern. In After Bourdieu: Influence, Critique, Elaboration, ed. David L. Swartz and Vera L. Zolberg, 65–85. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagleton, Terry. 2016. Materialism. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, Bridget. 2011. Pierre Bourdieu: Unorthodox Marxist? In The Legacy of Pierre Bourdieu: Critical Essays, ed. Simon Susen and Bryan S. Turner, 33–59. London: Anthem Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2018. Meditazioni marxiste: riconsiderare il debito di Bourdieu nei confronti di Marx. In Bourdieu e Marx: Pratiche della critica, ed. Gabriella Paolucci, 361–390. Udine-Milan: Mimesis.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2020. Pierre Bourdieu on Social Transformation, with Particular Reference to Political and Symbolic Revolutions. Theory and Society 49: 439–463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-019-09375-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giner, Salvador. 2014. Sociodicea. Revista Internacional de Sociología 72: 287–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grottanelli, Cristiano, and Bruce Lincoln. 1998. A Brief Note on (Future) Research in the History of Religions. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion 10: 311–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauchecorne, Mathieu. 2020. Idéologie. In Dictionnaire International Bourdieu, ed. Gisèle Sapiro, 433–434. Paris: CNRS Editions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Honneth, Axel. 1984. Die zerrissene Welt der symbolischen Formen. Zum kultursoziologischen Werk Pierre Bourdieus. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 36: 127–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maduro, Otto. 2007. Preface. In Terry Rey, Bourdieu on Religion: Imposing Faith and Legitimacy, vii–viii. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx, Karl. 1972 [1927]. Critique of Hegel’s ‘Philosophy of Right’. Ed. and trans. Annette Jolin and Joseph O’Malley. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels. 1998 [1932]. The German Ideology: Including Theses on Feuerbach and Introduction to the Critique of Political Economy. Amherst: Prometheus Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paolucci, Gabriella. 2018a. L’enigma dell’affrancamento dal dominio. In Bourdieu e Marx: Pratiche della critica, ed. Gabriella Paolucci, 89–122. Udine-Milan: Mimesis.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2018b. Introduzione: Eredi, Bourdieu, Marx e noi. In Bourdieu e Marx: Pratiche della critica, ed. Gabriella Paolucci, 9–32. Udine-Milan: Mimesis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rey, Terry. 2007. Bourdieu on Religion: Imposing Faith and Legitimacy. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2018. Pierre Bourdieu and the Study of Religion: Recent Developments, Directions, and Departures. In The Oxford Handbook of Pierre Bourdieu, ed. Thomas Medvetz and Jeffrey J. Sallaz. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199357192.013.13.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Saalmann, Gernot. 2020. Rationalisierung und säkulare Gesellschaft: Beiträge zur Religionssoziologie. Baden-Baden: Ergon.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Suaud, Charles. 2020. Religion. In Dictionnaire International Bourdieu, ed. Gisèle Sapiro, 734–736. Paris: CNRS Editions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swartz, David. 1996. Bridging the Study of Culture and Religion: Pierre Bourdieu’s Political Economy of Symbolic Power. Sociology of Religion 57: 71–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max. 1989. Die Wirtschaftsethik der Weltreligionen. Konfuzianismus und Taoismus. Schriften 1915–1920. Max Weber Gesamtausgabe, Band 1/19, eds. Helwig Schmidt-Glintzer Together with Petra Kolonko. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck).

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2001. Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft: Religiöse Gemeinschaften. Max Weber Gesamtausgabe, Band 1/22-2, eds. Hans G. Kippenberg together with Petra Schilm and also Jutta Niemeier. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roberto Alciati .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Alciati, R. (2022). If Theodicy is Always Sociodicy: Bourdieu and the Marxian Critique of Religion. In: Paolucci, G. (eds) Bourdieu and Marx. Marx, Engels, and Marxisms. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06289-6_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06289-6_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-06288-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-06289-6

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics