In this paper, I will consider the action theory of Parsons and Bourdieu through their critique of the Utilitarianism. Both Parsons and Bourdieu criticize  the Utilitarianism, because they think it inadequate to theorize the social action from the utilitarian perspective. At the same time,  to analyze the social action adequately. Parsons and Bourdieu construct the action theory respectively. The former's is called the voluntaristic theory of action and the latter 's habitus theory.
 Parsons criticizes the utilitarian theory, in there spect that its norm is restricted to the economic utility. But, he evaluates the actor of the Utilitarianism which acts under the means-ends schema and in herits its action schema. Therefore, he postulates the conscious action,  when he constructs his voluntaristic theory of action. Bourdieu criticizes the utilitarian theory for its concept of the action and the interest. Though the utilitarian theory postulates the conscious calculation of the actor. Bourdieu thinks that the social action is not necessarily conscious from  the perspective of habit us theory. So, Bourdieu claims that the utilitarian theory cannot understand the human action or the interest enough.
 By comparing the action theory of Parsons with that of Bourdieu through their critique of the Utilitarianism. I think that it is possible to demonstrate the importance of Bourdieu's concept of habitus in the action theory, which is different from Parsonian action model, that is the means-ends schema of the  conscious actor. For, due to the influence of Parsons in sociological theory, it seems that habitual action has been neglected for along time.

論文