Bourdieu developed habitus to bridge the sociological divide between structure and agency, treating it as a set of durable but not immutable dispositions a person draws on through intuition rather than conscious rule-following. Critics counter that the concept slides back into determinism: the secondary literature states plainly that habitus is criticised as a deterministic concept, comparing the social actor to an automaton in the sense of Leibniz's Monadology, where every apparent choice was in fact pre-established. Neither the determinism critique nor a name for the critic making it is given in the sources this wave read, so the dispute is recorded as live in the field rather than resolved either way.
What would resolve this A settled theoretical account, accepted across the discipline, of exactly how much a habitus can be modified by a single agent's own reflective action within one lifetime (Bourdieu's own notion of hysteresis, a habitus lagging behind changed conditions, is one candidate mechanism), as opposed to only shifting gradually across generations through changed conditions of upbringing.
OpenSociological theory, specifically the structure-and-agency debateWikipedia: Habitus (Sociology)