So, where I left off in my last blog was at false dichotomies. I started these blogs by explaining social space to be the area in which players hold positions, act according to their positions, and follow the rules of the field. After explaining social space I continued by explaining habitus which is a combination of the internalization of the social structures, or more specifically ones own position in the social space, a situation, context, or interaction that requires from the individual a certain course of action, and the individuals own judgment with a little bit of their own freewill. That is what makes up habitus and lead me into my explanation of false dichotomies. A false dichotomy being something with two opposite ends which in reality are far from opposing each other, like structures and action. With habitus, we can see this false dichotomy. One would first think that structures and action are separate oppositions but in fact they rely on each other and work with each other.
So we have this space, which we all have a position and take actions in that helps to structure the structures that are structuring, but what is the point? Do we exist in this space to take position and action to continue change the structures which determine our actions for no reason?
No, the reason is for capital, or more specifically “Cultural Capital” “Social Capital” and “Economic Capital” (Bourdieu 1986). Everyone is divided by their positions in social space because of the practices that are required of their positions. Those practices are determined by the capital of their position. For instance if someone has a lot of money they will send their child to a good school, if they don’t have a lot of money then their child may have to work for the money to pay for school. The two actions are different because both exist in two different positions in social space which have been divided by their different forms of capital.
The picture above is one that I took to better depict the different forms of capital. Cultural capital is things that can be used by an individual to gain social class and more economic capital. Cultural capital is defined by Bourdieu as “ cultural capital, which is convertible, on certain conditions, into economic capital and may be institutionalized in the forms of educational qualifications” (Bourdieu 1986). In the picture I used text books for this representation. By going to school and getting an education one gains better social standing and can convert their education into economic capital by getting a good paying job. The more cultural capital one gains the more economic capital they can convert. Other forms of cultural capital would be their physical appearance, and other objects that would be desired, like cars, houses, art work and other things.
Social capital is a bit different. Social capital are things that are not necessarily physical but still have great value. Bourdieu defines social capital as “ the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition - or in other words, to membership in a group” (Bourdieu 1986). Things like your family name, or social groups like a yacht club, and even places you go to eat can contribute to your social capital. In the picture above I used the dinner place to represent social capital. While knowing how to eat in a fancy restraint would be cultural capital, being seen in a fancy restraint with the right people would be social capital.
The last form of capital is the most straight forward and that is economic capital. Economic capital is simply defined by Bourdieu as “immediately and directly convertible into money and may be institutionalized in the forms of property rights” (Bourdieu 1986). It is the things you own and amount of money you have. I did also say that certain things you own would count as cultural capital like a nice car or a big house and that is true. A nice car and big house do have cultural capital but the action of owning them means that they also have a material value which is economic capital. Economic capital allows us to reproduce our capital by buying nice things for our children and sending them to good schools so they gain the cultural and social capital so that they too can one day obtain economic capital.
But thats not the whole story. How things are valued varies depending on where you are. Something may have a large sum of capital in one place but less in another, and its always changing through habitus. Like the example I made earlier about the rich parents paying for their child's college while less fortunate parents can’t afford it and their child has to work to pay for school. When the child from the rich family will gain many types of capital because of the family they were born into, the other child who has to work to pay for college will also gain capital in another way. They might gain more respect for hard work, or be a better employee and move up in their profession one day. Everyone has some form of capital and it might not always be worth something everywhere but it still does have some worth somewhere or at some time, due to habitus, the changing social structures, and our freewill.
References
Bourdieu Pierre, 1986 “The Forms of Capital.” marxist.org. 11/28/12
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/bourdieu-forms-capital.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment