Abstract
The aim of this paper is to examine the social theory of Althusser, comparing two concepts: “overdetermination” and “symptomatic reading.” These two concepts are central in his theory and we will see that the analysis of these concepts highlights an aporia of his theory. However, this is not only a problem of Althusser but also a problem of all sociological theory. It concerns the relationship between theory and its outside (reality). And an examination of these concepts helps to consider this issue.
Althusser proposed the concept of overdetermination to emphasize the irreducibility of social elements, such as economics, politics, or ideology. A society is constituted of different elements; they are not reduced to one element such as the economy.
To advance this idea, he tried to develop Marxist theory by using the concept of “symptomatic reading”. He focuses on an interpretation which Marx used for the analysis of classical economics. After careful reading, Marx discovered what classical economics excluded. We can say that by this reading Marx made visible what had been invisible to classical economics. Althusser called this “symptomatic reading.” Both concepts concern the outside of theory.
However, there is a gap between the two. The gap derives from the difference in the way in which a theory is related to its outside. Indeed, overdetermination is a concept of social reality that resists reductionism, while symptomatic reading is the process by which a theory makes visible what was outside. This gap reflects the difficulty of formulating a relationship between theory and reality. This is not peculiar to Althusser, but to the whole theory of sociology. In considering the problem of Althusser, we can locate our problem too.
