Truth as Politics?

In my article I intend to find an answer for the following question: How should one understand Bourdieu’s often related statement saying that the scientific activity that a sociologist is involved in, that is his duty to bring hidden social mechanisms maintaining the privileged position of the dominant class into light, must be at the same time considered as a political activity. To make this statement logically possible, two conditions must be fulfilled: first, Bourdieu has to be convinced that science is capable of producing more valid statements about the social world that any other mechanisms, and second, he has to admit that nonscientific assertions have a reason to exist. On one hand, if he had no trust in the power of science, talking about scientifically grounded statements simply wouldn’t make any sense, and on the other hand, as some positivists do, if he regarded scientific knowledge as the only acceptable form of knowledge, unveiling non-scientific statements would not be a political act, but a simple obligation of science.