Praxis intervention

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims.
Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (December 2007)
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.
Please improve this article if you can. (December 2007)

Praxis Intervention is a kind of Participatory Action Research, with a difference. Participatory Action Research and its kinds emphasize on the collective modification of the external world. The Praxis Intervention, on the other hand emphasizes working on the Praxis potential of its participants. Here by the term "Praxis Potential" it is meant,the 'members' potential to reflexively work on their respective 'mentalities'; by 'participant' it is not just meant the clientele beneficiaries of the praxis intervention project alone, but also the organizers and experts participating in such a project. The praxis intervention aims at leading its members through a "participant objectivation"[1]. The praxis intervention method prioritizes unsettling the settled mentalities, especially where the settled mindsets prevalent in the social world or individuals is suspected to have contributed to their suffering or marginality [2].

Contents

[edit] Reflexive and Routine Praxis

Praxis is conceptualized in its reflexive as well as non-reflexive variety in Marx (Gouldner 1980:32, 33). The reflexive praxis is understood as the moment in the dialectic change, and the non-reflexive one as the routinising mechanism operating within the ideologies as a reproductive or status quo maintaining. It is, for Marx, the non-reflexive habituating praxis, which leads to False consciousness and alienation.

To Markoviç, moments of praxis include creativity instead of sameness, autonomy instead of subordination, sociality instead of massification, rationality instead of blind reaction and intentionality rather than compliance (1974:64).

[edit] Praxis intervention and Habitus-Praxis

If the internal dispositions be called habitus following Pierre Bourdieu and if the species character of human beings with which they make sense, think and weave their social world can be called praxis following Ludwig Andreas Feuerbach then praxis intervention can be explained in terms of habitus-praxis :unsettlement of habitus and its routine praxis (Madhu 2005)

For Bourdieu, Habitus is a biographical, positional, historical construct internalized as a second nature and so forgotten as history, (Bourdieu 1990:56) functions as a generative apparatus predisposed to function structuring structures of internal logic of structures and agents (Ibid: 53). Bourdieu conceptualizes the actor or agency is the habitus well intertwined in the practices and not a human being capable of rising above the constrain of the habitus (Archer 2000: 150-1, 166-7;Sayer 1999: 59-62).

Praxis Interventionists though accept the importance of habitus, conceptually they deviate from Bourdieu as they assume the praxis potential is trans-historical, trans-subjective, trans-rational species character of human beings, capable of unsettling the settled logic. They view humans as praxis-beings capable of unsettling their respective habitus - the habituated mindsets. In other words it is held that humans can actively work on their respective mindsets using their 'praxis potential'.

It is presumed that the human species potential of sensuousness, the non-fixity of meanings and the diversity of Indexicality available (Wittgenstein 1976: section 154; Harold Garfinkel 1984)together make humans into praxis beings rather than just leaving them to be sedimented habitués. The idea of praxis intervention opens up a new possibilities for politically sensitive social action projects sensitive to the human conditions of plurality (Arendt 1958: 7).

[edit] Why Praxis Intervention?

Praxis intervention method aims at helping members to unsettle their settled mindsets and to have a fresh look at the world around and intervene. For instance, members may take a fresh critical look on the gender relations existing, if praxis intervention method is applied to study gender relations. They would be unsettling their biographically and structurally ingrained percepts of gender relations and freshly look at it to correct the marginalities inbuilt in the mindsets of themselves and that of the relevant others. A gradual process by which members are helped to reflexively recognize the arbitrary and discriminating mindsets within themselves and the world around and working towards correcting it is praxis intervention. Praxis intervention method helps members to struggle against structurally ingrained discriminations.

Invoking praxis potential becomes reasonable where the passive obedience to ‘revealed’ truths or succumbing to ‘revered’ knowledge claims to ‘nominal’ truths is ‘immorality’ (Kant 1991: 247- 8), the naturalized neutrality is violence (Barthes1975: 131; Cook 2001: 154) the socially existing collective conscience – the ‘ties of ideas’ -- is a product of individual human activities (Durkheim 2001: 292), value systems of the actors in social action constitute the social reality (Max Weber1975: 75), the meaning of social text is decided by the ‘art of [its] interpretation,’5 and “because the wreckage of the narcissist home (Adamczewski 1995: 56, 58) has let us homeless, yet creative” (Adamczewski 1995:62).

The re-creative praxis is understood to be anthropologically valuable, essentially human, involving ‘fabrication of meaning’ that is ‘more important than the meanings themselves’ (Bannet 1989:66). A preparation for a re-creative praxis is primarily self-reflexivity, understanding [Bourdieu 1998] and a ‘penetrative perception’ of the structure (as a ‘topological and geological survey of the battlefield’)to ‘topple the present order of things’ (Foucault 1980:62).A reflexive praxis is the counter to the mental process that is ‘an imaginative rehearsal,’ crystallizing into more or less stabilized ‘self conception’–a Homo Clausus [[3]] It is an activity of suspending the perceived normality of the socially structured routine.

The Praxis Intervention theory and practice assumes that the action to bring about the material changes should flow from the reflexive self-monitoring, unsettled internality and the reverberation the unsettled internalities could produce in the figurational (Norbert Elias 1994: 288, 343;Elias 1984: 251; Giddens 1986; Bourdieu 1993).

[edit] Praxis Intervention is a systematic Participant Objectivation

Praxis intervention is not just a method in which one interferes with the habitus of the persons with whom the Action research is carried out but also it is intervention on the praxis intervention practitioner's habitus too. In this respect the practice of praxis intervention is also a systematic participant objectivation The premise of praxis intervention is largely taken from Bourdieu’s position on understanding of the on the spot sociological action and the participant objectivation. The object of praxis intervention social work is not just its client community and their physical or material conditions alone, but also the mindscape of the social worker, as well as that of her ‘clients’ or ‘client communities’ (Bourdieu and Wacquant 1992:38). Though the practice of reflexive participant objectivation, the practitioner re-looks the taken for granted assumptions in order to wake up from her epistemic sleep and helps her clients too to help them to wake up from theirs.

In Bourdieu it is not just subjectivity/ objectivity, theory/ practice, but also methodology/ theory, researcher/ research dichotomies are disfavoured with his conceptualization of the participant objectivation. Participatory objectivation is ‘objectifying the act of objectification.’ By ‘objectifying the objectification’ it is meant the researcher, while observing and objectifying, taking a similar critical distance towards the objectification itself. It is being sensitive to the immensely possible biases from the researcher’s social coordinates, field and intellectual orientation and self-critically problematising them to reduce the impact of the biases (Bourdieu 2003). According to Bourdieu, within the sociological analysis, the participant objectivation is the essential but difficult exercise of all because it requires the break with the deepest and most conscious adherence and adhesions, those quite often give the object its very interest for those who study it- i.e., everything about their relation to the object they try to know that they least want to know (Bourdieu and Wacquant 1992:253). It is through the participant objectivation the practical relation to practice is substituted with the observer’s relation to practice (Bourdieu 1990:34). Through the practice of participant objectivation, Bourdieu aims to make the critical and political activity of social research the ‘solvent of doxa.

[edit] The Praxis Intervention in Practice

"Praxis Intervention" as a practice involves working on the bias of the professionals and their clientele. It is a practical method of “objectifying objectification” on a collective basis [4]. The Praxis Intervention method problematises the bias of the researcher and her clientile emerging from their social origins, class, gender coordinates; the their position in the intellectual field and in their respective social space; and also their “intellectualist bias,” the results of viewing the world as a spectacle.

In practice it involves the clientèle and the researchers collectively probing into a problem that affects the clentele and helping the clientele to find solutions to their problem through reflexive probing with the experts belonging to relevant fields. The project aims at the clientele and the researchers work together and collectively learn from each other.

The practice of praxis intervention can be used in many fields such as post positivist research, social work research, participatory action research, Local history research, Social action and social work projects, Community Health Project and many other projects where people's participation is crucial. The method can be used in the field of education effectively.

Praxis intervention method focuses on what happens to mindsets. In the community work situation it can be helping the community participants to undertake a systematic research on themselves in the areas such as history of their social relationships, land ownership patterns, critically exploring gender relations, studying the ecological changes happening in their habitat, learning historically and comparatively on their health status, nutrition status etc. The research undertook by the local residents can be converted into social actions or welfare projects.

Similarly praxis intervention can be used in helping patients to undergo a participatory diagnostic and experience sharing research with the medical professionals and other experts on their health conditions and take necessary action. In this process both the facilitating professionals and the patients can over come their respective personal and professional bias. The Praxis Intervention method could be extended to the professional social work practice in facilitating the social workers themselves and their clients overcoming personal or social mindsets that induce suffering or marginality. The praxis mode of social work depends on the sensibility that could be provoked in a given context: sensible towards one’s own biography, historical locatedness, spatial positioning and the interaction setting. It could be a model for providing companionship to people in need of self-exploration. Praxis intervention as a practice can be carried on to the extent it is possible for people to take care of themselves and to the extent people require professional companionship of the social work practice. Praxis intervention practice requires the professionals and the client participants to be self-reflexive and self-critical. The model provides opportunity for the social worker to undertake a reflexive inward journey to get rid of biases that affect her practice. The context that is not suitable for self-reflexivity or self-criticism is not suitable for praxis intervention practice either.

The method could be fruitful in working with the marginalized people as marginalisation is usually a historical phenomenon. This would avoid people losing self-respect and dignity under the conditions of marginalisation. The method could be applied in other conditions of marginalisation such as working with people discriminated on the basis of gender. It can also serve as a model for opportunity scanning. The praxis intervention can be used as a method to initiate and implement participatory project provided the project has sufficient flexibility inbuilt for effecting a change from its pre-designs. A project management from praxis perspective should not have full-fledged blue print before hand, rather the projects should be flexible enough to wait till the participants themselves research and come out with a project plan. In the new practice, the experts could be facilitated to work with the participants. While a project is designed and carried out with this method, there should be options to change the course of project or even to suspend some projects according to the collective findings and evaluations of the collaborative research. Similarly the praxis method could be used in the planning process provided sufficient flexibility is allowed and reflexivity is tolerated. It has to be further tested whether the model works with socially, economically, and culturally heterogeneous set of people.


The praxis intervention practice has its implications for social work education. A social work education based on praxis model could shape the students and teachers self-reflexive, sensible. Through this method, it may be possible for students gaining theoretical and practical skills. The method can be used in other branches of education and training like the management education, medical education, agriculture extension and other fields where the clientele really matter. However, the praxis model would be yielding better results if sufficient flexibility is maintained.

The praxis practice could also be extended to social work practice in the medical setting, AIDS care, psychiatric social work, management of juvenile delinquency, school social work, correctional administration practices in prison social work, gender related social work practice, geriatric social work, nursing, etc.

The praxis intervention model of social intervention may not be applicable in all contexts. There are sections of people who cannot take care of themselves and hence require absolute external care. For example, persons suffering from progressive, irreversible diseases characterised by degeneration of the brain cells such as Alzheimer’s disease would require complete external care. The praxis practice would be inappropriate for the people who do not need care. The approach could be helpful in accompanying people who can be helped to care for themselves. Praxis intervention practice is appropriate for working with the people who can be helped to care themselves with in a scale of caring.

[edit] References

  1. Archer, Margaret. Being Human: The Problem of Human Agency.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
  2. Arednt, Henna. The Human Condition. London: The University of Chicago Press, 1958.
  3. Barthes, Roland. The Pleasure of Text. Ed. Miller, R. New York: Hill and Wang, 1975.
  4. Bannet, Eve Tavor. Structuralism and the Logic of Dissent. London:Macmillan Press, 1989.
  5. Bernstein, Richard J. Praxis And Action. Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania, 1971.
  6. Bourdieu, Pierre. Utopia of Endless Exploitation: The Essence of Neoliberalism. Le Monde Diplomatique.1998.
  7. Bourdieu, Pierre. "The Field of Cultural Production Or the Economic World Reversed." The field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature Ed. Randal Johnson. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1993.
  8. Bourdieu, Pierre. The Logic of Practice. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1990.
  9. Bourdieu, Pierre and Loic Wacquant. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1992.
  10. Durkheim, Emile. "Rules for the Observation of Social Facts." Mainstream and Critical Social theory; Cannons and critical discourses Ed.J.C.Alexanders. New Delhi: Sage, 2001.
  11. Easton, Bt Loyd D and Guddat, eds. Writings of the Young Marx on Philosophy and Society. New York: Doubleday & Co, 1967.
  12. Elias, Norbert. The Civilizing Process. Oxford: Blackwell, 1994.
  13. Elias, Norbert. "Knowledge and Power : An Interview By Peter Ludes." Society and Knowledge Eds. Volker Meja and Nico Stehr. London:Transaction,1984.
  14. Feuerbach, Ludwig “Principles of the New Philosophy”. Principles of the Philosophy of the Future. Trans. Zawar Hanfi, (1972)
  15. Foucault, Michel. Power/knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings. New York: Pantheon, 1980.
  16. Garfinkel, Herald. "Studies of the Routine Grounds of Everyday Activities." Studies in Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1984.
  17. Gouldner, Alwin W. Marxism and Critique in the Two Marxisms. NewYork: Oxford University Press, 1980.
  18. Kant, Immanuel. Kant: Political Writings. Political Writings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
  19. Madhu.P, Towards a Praxis Model of Social Work: A Reflexive Account of ‘Praxis Intervention’ with the Adivasis of Attappady. PhD Dissertation, School of Social Sciences, Kottayam 2005
  20. Markoviç, Mahilo. From Affluence to Praxis. Boston: Beacon Press,1974.
  21. Weber, Max. The Logical Problems of Historical Economics. 1903.New York: Free Press, 1975.
  22. Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Philosophical Investigation. Trans. Anscombe,G. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1976.

[edit] See also:

[edit] External sources

[edit] Categories