Full text
| |
| Author(s): |
Juliana Closel Miraldi
Total Authors: 1
|
| Document type: | Master's Dissertation |
| Press: | Campinas, SP. |
| Institution: | Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP). Instituto de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas |
| Defense date: | 2015-04-14 |
| Examining board members: |
Renato Ortiz;
Sílvio César Camargo;
Gabriel Moura Peters
|
| Advisor: | Renato Ortiz |
| Abstract | |
In Bourdieu's praxeology, the theoretical definition of social fields implies considering them relatively autonomous nominal entities carrying an illusio effect, which presents itself to agents as specific rules that both determine and are determined by historically constituted practices set into each field. Fields, in turn, impose a savoir-faire to their members, enabling the differentiation and homogenizing of practices in social space. However, if social fields are indeed relatively autonomous, the question raised is: relative to what? In spite of its centrality, the answer to this question is not to be found clearly in Bourdieu¿s writings, as the author did not face it directly. Nevertheless, given the conceptual consequences and epistemological principles of his theory, it is possible to draw three conditions through which social fields could relate to one another. First and second conditions are presented as causalities, meaning they are prerequisites for the theory itself. The third condition is a determination which, given its power of interference, coerces the internal logic of the fields. The first condition is hereby called transitional causality and it corresponds to the movement of inter-relation between the fields, originated in both the agents¿ movement from one field into the other and the fields¿ own process of restructuring that may as well affect other fields. The second causal relation is immanent to the formation of fields and it refers to the class struggle politics that presents a homology between dominant positions in specific fields and the dominant position of accumulating capitals in social space. Finally, the third determinant element in the differential dynamics of fields is the State, an actor who, according to Bourdieu, promotes hits of tyranny in fields given the position and power it has accumulated in the course of history. These three simultaneously effective conditions allow us to observe the idea of relative autonomy among fields and ensures the persistence of univocity and the specific differentiation in social space (AU) | |
| FAPESP's process: | 13/11282-7 - Pierre Bourdieu and the materialist theory of symbolic |
| Grantee: | Juliana Closel Miraldi |
| Support Opportunities: | Scholarships in Brazil - Master |