Main Article Content



As a part of a larger research within the Horizon 2020 project Closing the Gap Between Formal and Informal Institutions in the Balkans, 38 semi-structured interviews with citizens of Serbia have been conducted in the period  July – October 2017. These comprise the database used for analysis of “narratives of informality” – stories of how the research participants legitimize (or rationalize) informal practices (using connections and acquaintances to “get things done”, giving/receiving bribe, exchange of favors, etc.), supplemented by the analysis of participants’ attitudes towards informal practices, particularly when using them themselves. An insight into the respondents’ ideas of informality was gained through describing and understanding doxa – beliefs of an individual as “a quasi-perfect correspondence between the objective order and the subjective principles of organization (with which) the natural and social world appear as self-evident” (Bourdieu) or senso comune (Gramsci) – “naturalized”, unreflected, practical knowledge taking the form of self-explanatory content of common sense, that which is taken for granted, what “everybody knows“, the knowledge of the world that is undisputed – “just the way it is”, the domain of indefinite beliefs and incoherent views of the world, the knowledge which “legitimizes with the absence of legitimizing”. The assumption is that the “quality” of doxa, in the sense of its positive or negative orientation, has a large impact on the possibility of changes in formal practices and procedures – in some cases serving as a stimulus for change, and as an obstacle to changes in others – situations in which the new/imported rules remain “empty shells” with little influence in social life.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Author Biography

MILOŠ JOVANOVIĆ, University of Niš

MILOŠ JOVANOVIĆ is assistant profesor the Department of Socilogy of Faculty of Philosophy at the University of Niš, Serbia.


  1. Atkinson, Will. 2010. “Phenomenological Additions to the Bourdieusian Toolbox: Two Problems for Bourdieu, Two Solutions from Schutz.” Sociological Theory 28(1):1-19. doi:
  2. Atkinson, Will. 2016. Beyond Bourdieu: From Genetic Structuralism to Relational Phenomenology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  3. Atkinson, Will. 2018. “Bourdieu and Schutz: Bringing Together Two Sons of Husserl.” Pp. 398-421 in The Oxford Handbook of Pierre Bourdieu, edited by T. Medvetz and J. J. Sallaz. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:
  4. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1990. The Logic of Practice. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  5. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1991. “On Symbolic Power.” Pp. 163-170 in Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  6. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1996. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  7. Bourdieu, Pierre. 2000. Pascalian Meditations. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
  8. Bourdieu, Pierre. 2013. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambride: Cambridge University Press.
  9. Caminada, Emanuele. 2015. “‘Relativ natürliche Weltanschauung’ als common sense. Die wissenschaftstheoretischen Voraussetzungen für Schelers Funktionalisierungstheorie.” Thaumàzein - Rivista di Filosofia 3:397-414.doi:
  10. Collins, Harry M. 2001.“What is Tacit Knowledge?” Pp. 115-128 in The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory, edited by T. R.Schatzki, K. Knorr Cetina and E. von Savigny. London; New York: Routledge.
  11. Crehan, Kate. 2016. Gramsci's Common Sense: Inequality and its Narratives. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
  12. Dimitrova, Antoaneta L. 2010. “The New Member States of the EU in the Aftermath of Enlargement: Do New European Rules Remain Empty Shells?” Journal of European Public Policy 17(1):137-148. doi:
  13. Douglas, Mary. 2001. Implicit Meanings: Selected Essays in Anthropology (2nd ed). London; New York: Routledge.
  14. Eagleton, Terry and Pierre Bourdieu. 1992. “In Conversation: Doxa and Common Life.” New Left Review 191:111-121.
  15. Geertz, Clifford. 1983. “Common Sense as a Cultural System.” Pp. 73-93 in Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Antropology. New York: Basic Books.
  16. Herzfeld, Michael. 2015. “Common Sense, Anthropology of.” Pp.258-262 in International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences 2nd ed, Volume 4, edited by J. D. Wright. Elsevier. doi:
  17. Holton, Robert. 1997. “Bourdieu and Common Sense.” SubStance #84 26(3):38-52. doi:
  18. Liguori, Guido. 2009. “Common sense in Gramsci.” Pp. 122-133 in Perspectives on Gramsci: Politics, culture and social theory, edited by J. Francese. London & New York: Routledge.
  19. Lindenberg, Sigwart. 1987. “Common Sense and Social Structure: A Sociological View.” Pp. 199-215 in Common Sense: The Foundations for Social Science, edited by F. van Holthoon & D. R. Olson. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
  20. Luckmann, Thomas. 1983. “Common Sense, Science and the Specialization of Knowledge.” Phenomenology and Pedagogy 1(1): 59-73.
  21. Lynd, Robert S. and Helen Merrell Lynd. 1937. Middletown in Transition: A Study in Cultural Conflicts. London: Constable and Company Ltd.
  22. Mannheim, Karl. 1997. Structures of Thinking. London, Boston and Henley: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  23. Marx, Karl. 1984. Capital: A Critique of Political Economy; Volume III. London: Lawrence & Wishart.
  24. Misgeld, Dieter. 1983. “Common Sense and Common Convictions: Sociology as a Science, Phenomenological Sociology and the Hermeneutical Point of View.” Human Studies 6(2): 109-139.
  25. Myles, John F. 2004. “From Doxa to Experience: Issues in Bourdieu’s Adoption of Husserlian Phenomenology.” Theory, Culture & Society 21(2):91-107. doi:
  26. Nathanson, Maurice. 1962. “Introduction” Pp. xxv-xlvii in Alfred Schutz Collected Papers I: The Problem of Social Reality, edited by M. Nathanson. The Hague; Boston; London: Martinus Nijhoff.
  27. Prodanović, Srđan. 2017. Šta zdrav razum može da učini za društvenu teoriju? Ka pragmatičkom shvatanju prakse (What Can Common Sense Do for Social Theory? Towards a Pragmatic Understanding of Practice). Beograd: Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju.
  28. Rosenfeld, Sofia. 2011. Common Sense: A Political History. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  29. Schaeffer, John D. 1990. Sensus Communis: Vico, Rhetoric, and the Limits of Relativism. Durham & London: Duke University Press.
  30. Schütz, Alfred. 1962. “On Multiple Realities.” Pp. 207-259 in Collected Papers I: The Problem of Social Reality, edited by M. Nathanson. The Hague; Boston; London: Martinus Nijhoff.
  31. Smith, Barry. 1995. “Common Sense.” Pp. 394-437 in The Cambridge Companion to Husserl, edited by B. Smith & D. W. Smith. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:
  32. Susen, Simon. 2016. “Towards a Critical Sociology of Dominant Ideologies: An Unexpected Reunion between Pierre Bourdieu and Luc Boltanski.” Cultural Sociology 10(2):195-246. doi:
  33. Throop, C. Jason and Keith M. Murphy. 2002. “Bourdieu and Phenomenology: A critical assessment.” Anthropological Theory 2(2):185-207. doi: