Similarly to Max Weber, Bourdieu explained class in its broader sense. As he understood that class cannot be explained from economical point of view alone, Bourdieu presented three forms of capitals, based on which social class stratification is elaborated: economic, cultural and social capital. Economic capital is described in a typical way in connection with financies and the ownership of the means of the production. Due to the fact that cultural capital includes various aspects of life such as taste of food, film preferences, use of spare time, usage of language, way of wearing clothes, etc., it can be, according to Bourdieu, further subdivided into three subtypes: embodied, objectified and institutionalized cultural capital (The Forms of Capital, 1986). Andy Blunden, in his article Bourdieu on Status, Class and Culture, explains what cultural capital means in connection with one's social class: the bourgeois child knows the price of an Impressionist painting at auction and where it should hang in the drawing room, like the working class boy knows who won the World Cup and how to eat a pie.
In his work Discourse on the Origin of Inequality Rousseau presents the argument that political inequality is rooted in the origins of human sociality. He suggests that in the state of nature, only physical inequality existed. Thusly meaning that political inequality only came into being as a result of human beings shifting from undifferentiated oneness to differentiated individuals. He illustrates three main stages that lead to this (civil society): the development of village life, the social division of labor and the formation of government. In forming society, we as human beings entered into social relationships and so were able to socially construct agreed upon measurements of human worth (i.e.
The most well-known work he created are Discourse on the Origins of Inequality, the Discourse on Political Economy, The Social Contract, and Considerations on the Government of Poland. One of his works “The Social Contract” explains how the state need to be guided by the member’s general will. That means everyone should decide how to run the state. His first major work is “Discourse on the Sciences and Arts”, it was the winning response to an essay contest conducted by the Academy of Dijon in 1750. In that particular book, Rousseau argues that sciences and arts progression has led to the corruption of virtue and morality.
Both emphasize that we do not act purely as robots but emphasize that we are in fact not really free. For Marx this is because our class confines our consciousness to certain limits set by our environment and for Bourdieu, his term of habitus entails that we are preconditioned to believe certain things subliminally which influences our conscious notions of our abilities and place in society. Both Marx and Bourdieu highlight the fact that through our actions we are guilty of continuing the class production and the struggles which come along with it. Bourdieu however does view the human as reflexive and able to think about actions and not merely follow blindly thus with this difference Marx perhaps missed that people may rise up against a particular conscious idea. For example, revolutions occur due to people rising up and reflexively realizing and influencing others that a situation is unfair; i.e.
Rousseau's perspective in the Second Discourse initiated the discussion of inequality by distinguishing between the two types: "moral" or "political” or what is just called social inequality. Rousseau emphasizes that the Second Discourse concerns itself with the origin and legitimacy of only moral inequalities. These differ from natural inequalities in two respects, each of which makes them social singularities. This specifically tackles the origin of moral inequalities which are not consequences of nature alone but depend instead on, convention. This essentially means that they are "established, or at least authorized, by consent".
In his Reflections on the French Revolution, he blames the philosophes for their abstract ideologies that were incapable of accommodating the complexity of human nature and their rejection of the divinity of the monarchy that was the foundation of the constitution. Although, its influence over the population is debatable prior to 1789, which saw a publication of the thoughts of philosophes. The periods between the 1748 to 1770 clearly laid the base for a forum to critique traditional institutions but it was not till the collapse of political order that these ideals became widespread. taking Lefebvre’s argument that the Enlightenment had been the ideology of the bourgeoisie, and the evidence that sales of the Encyclopédie were particularly high within the upper classes supports this notion that the bourgeoisie, along with the nobility collectively knows as the ‘notables’, felt with conviction that they had become enlightened and must create a liberal state to promote the individual. This argument is further supported as the readership of the philosophes did not extend to the peasants in pre-revolutionary France and the restrictions on publishing determined the influence of the Enlightenment.
Pierre Bourdieu is a very influential social theorist within the 20th century and his work spans many disciplines. Bourdieu was very concerned with social order and the dynamics within society, he was interested in the power held and the structures of society. Although the term habitus was a term used before by other sociologists it was Bourdieu’s work on the topic that truly delved rihght into contemporary society to look at the way it was structures. Bourdieu defines habitus as “A structuring structure, which organises practices and the perception of practices.”(Bourdieu, 1984: 170). The habitus emphasises the socially formed power of taken for granted practices.
Just like Bernstein, Bourdieu attempted to empirically test a theory of society, culture, and education. Both sociologists used their own theories and related it to “working-class” and “middle-class” students and attempted to discuss how factors such as language for example, can have an affect on social
I am deliberately situating my discussion on diversity and inclusion in the context of Nigeria. II. DIVERSITY IN NIGERIA DEFINED When we talk of diversity in the context of Nigeria, a number of criteria easily come to mind. Identified are six criteria which the typical Nigerian would consider relevant. • Ethno/Linguistic • Religious • Regional • Gender • Age • Physical and Mental Disability I will take each of the above six criteria in turn and
Through identifying, defining, and understanding the key concepts of Marxism, the preconditions and contradictions of a capitalist society become more prominent. The contradictions of a capitalist society will be introduced through identifying and defining; radical change by societal transformation exploitation, conflict between different social groups (the bourgeoisie and proletariat), and exploitation. The two contradictions “exploitation” and “conflict between social groups” can be explained complimentary to one another as a result of being closely related. Key concepts such as; historical materialism, means of production, class consciousness, superstructure, and alienation will be referred to in order to aid the further understanding of