Традиція І Традиціоналізм У Методологічному Контексті Теорії Практик
Tradition and Traditionalism in the Practice Theory Methodological Context

Summary/Abstract: This article is an attempt to use practice theory methodological apparatus for tradition and traditionalism analysis. It is an actual research approach, demanded by post-Soviet scholars that are interested in modern methodological “turns” and particularly in “pragmatic” one. Apparently, on the post-Soviet space “Practice theory”, written by V.Volkov and O.Harhordin, is the most complex work, devoted to this approach. The authors name M.Heidegger and L.Wittgenstein as its founders. N.Elias, P.Bourdieu, M.Focault, J.Scott, A.MacIntyre and all thinkers, who studied everyday and formalized activity of people as socialized members of certain soceity, are called as adherents of this approach. The author defines the practice as any activity that characterizes its performers as member of certain group or some social role carrier. Practice theory is concentrated usually on traditional actions that were formed by continued habit. Unitary practice in this case is understood as “routinized behaviour”, consisted of bodily movement, mental actions, things and their using, background knowledge, emotions and motivations. The main concept, given by the practice theory to ethnology, is the habitus, which can be defined as “collective unproblematic procreation of successful action strategy” (O.Harhordyn) or internalized, embodied schemes of perception, evaluation and action. Pierre Burdieu formulated the most famous conceptualization of the habitus. Actually the habitus is useful to match in which way an actor can carry traditional culture of certain society or ethnos. Practice theory agitates for actual practices studying, without abruption from their original conditions (not only social and economical, but conditions of body culture and “equipment totality” too). Also the author considers the habitus internalizing process, its structures recreation as the basis of tradition mechanism, “practice logic” in traditional culture and “pragmatical” critique of structuralism. Some attention is paid to the authentic tradition and traditionalists’ practices comparison. Difference between their habitus can pass for good explanation of the distance between their practices.

• Details
• Contents