This chapter deals with the decline of ‘contextual continuity’ asnascent morphogenesis engages and with how the reflexive imperativecorrespondingly makes ‘communicative reflexivity’ more difficultto sustain. Why does this matter? It matters because in the past thecommunicatives were the only group whose responses to their social circumstanceswere socially reproductive in their effects and integrative in theirconsequences. Thus, this chapter emphasizes the shrinkage of ‘Bourdieu'speople’ as the world Bourdieu knew changes. At the same time, it helps toaccount for modernity's growing deficit in social solidarity, or what somepoliticians have called the ‘broken society’.

The undergraduate subjects whose interviews will be examined, neither desire norregularly obtain a rough parity of social position with their parents. Rather,what they seek is an intergenerational replication of theirfamilial relationships, which nascent morphogenesis makes increasingly difficultto accomplish. In turn, their communicative reflexivity is of little assistancewith the necessity of selection or with shaping their lives.

Why the reflexive imperative cannot be avoided

As these subjects encounter ‘contextual incongruity’ in everydayways, the last thing they can rely upon in order to duplicate the source of therelational goods they received whilst growing up is ‘habitualaction’. Instead, to achieve some approximation to replication – as themost that can be accomplished – involves strenuous work on the part of thoseconcerned. This has to be deliberative in kind because of the novel paradox thatreproduction now entails innovative action. What requiresreflexive deliberation is the design of a modus vivendi whosesatisfactions and sustainability are subjectively sufficient for thecommunicative reflexives and thus encourage them to continue to practise this astheir dominant mode of reflexivity. As on a moving floor, you do not stay put bystanding still and the simple solution of walking backwards is not anoption.