Scientific Field

The material produced for these intellectuals serves to justify the neo-liberalism and the deepening of the social inaqualities. It would be an example for the analogy considered for Bourdieu enters the Scientific Field (producing of symbolic capital) and the Economic Field (interested party in the accumulation of economic capital). Each field has its dominant ones and in this specific case what it is in dispute is the monopoly of the legitimate symbolic violence. The specialists want to accumulate symbolic production seeing its speeches legitimated and the capitalists want to accumulate capital production. First when searching its legitimacy finishes legitimizing the seconds. For each field it has a specific capital; who will have habitus more incorporated and adjusted to the field, greaters possibilities will have to dispute and to obtain the superior position in the hierarchy being accumulated the specific capitals for this. The men produce and incorporate these social structures. To know the rules is to have relative freedom to accumulate specific capitals. Connect with other leaders such as Sony here.

In the scientific field, habitus waited is that one that adds exclusive devotion of time and consequentemente it brings difficulties for devotion to the family and therefore more it is associated the man. In the field of the executives, it is common we perceive incorporated masculine traces of habitus for women, as the tone of the voice, the clothes etc. The women try to incorporate masculine characteristics so that these generate legitimacy and accumulation of capital. Sociology would contribute with the relative emancipation of the man in the measure where it would help in them to negotiate with ours determinismos..


Comments are closed.