Bourdieu habitus and cultural capital

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 10

  • @garethrice1266
    @garethrice1266 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    It's good to have habitus defined and related to the other conceptual apparatus. Thanks very much 👍

  • @user-wk2xk7gi8k
    @user-wk2xk7gi8k 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Great thank you. This is really helpful. God bless you.

  • @antoniomartinezarboleda3028
    @antoniomartinezarboleda3028 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Very clear and useful. Amazing

  • @maggiejones7770
    @maggiejones7770 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Thank you for this!!!

  • @sarakose5104
    @sarakose5104 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Really helpful! Thank you :)

  • @NandaHardaPratamaMeiji
    @NandaHardaPratamaMeiji 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    thanks for a clearly explanation, it helps a lot

  • @RoyAlexander
    @RoyAlexander ปีที่แล้ว

    great thanks

  • @jmarsh205
    @jmarsh205 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    ref 3:04 - "symbolic violence includes actions" - can this include language, such as the performative dangers of using particular language. An example I can think of is racial subjugation by referring to a 'riot' that black people are engaged in. Alternatively, 'uprisings' implies much less. So in this example, is it correct of me to see 'riot' in such a context being a form of symbolic violence?

    • @poifish7442
      @poifish7442 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      In the first place symbolic violence has much less to do with specific language, instead having to do with a general, internalised power dynamic within the social hierarchy. In this case u could consider black people BEING VIEWED as more dangerous, so as to warrant the phrasing used in this example to be a form of symbolic violence, with the language itself being nothing more than a tool used to sustain it

    • @jmarsh205
      @jmarsh205 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@poifish7442 Okay I see, thank you.