FIELD THEORYThe French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu is one of the key thinkers of the 20th Century in relation to ways of working with the understanding of our actions and our positions in cultures and in society. In relation to philosophy of science, Bourdieu takes a position between structuralism (which has an objective view on people as agents in society) and a subjective approach to his objects of study. That means, that people are free agents, but they are also affected by the structures of their social environments. Bourdieu's theory aims at research of people in their environment by mapping their actions, their preferences and how they look at other people. This mapping can then be interpreted by using theoretical concepts like capital and doxa. In this small article, you will be introduced to the keypoints of Bourdieu's field theory.

The Field TheorySociety is defined by what Bourdieu calls the social room. This social room is divided into several fields, that operates with each of their own set of rules of access. For example, in the field of education, the rules of access are exams; in the field of religion, the rules of access are faith and dogmas; in the field of business, the rule of access is success and proactivity etc. The concept of field theory is an analytical concept, that can be used to map people's preferences, their actions, and their social practises. Every field is often a limited area of society, which has a certain practise. This practise involves the social actions we use when we are together in these fields and when we communicate to- and from a field. We don't always know why we are performing our actions, but it often just feels right in a given field. There are certain, almost objectively assumed, qualities of our thinking in a given field. For example, the way

KEYWORDSField TheorySociologyStructuralismAgent TheoryInterpretive MethodsSocial roomsCapitalHabitusDoxa

Pierre Bourdieu

we act and make use of the rules in a given field is what Bourdieu calls to strengthen our position in a given field. In every field we fight for good positions by making use of the rules of the game. These rules are called doxa in Bourdieu's theoretical approach. We tend not to question doxa in a field. We respect the rules of the game, be it official rules or more subtle directions in a given field. But these rules can of course be changed by the agent's actions in these spaces of possibilities. It is very typical, says Bourdieu, that the given field has an effect on us. The field can regulate our behaviour. So battles for better positions within a field is regulated by the doxa of the field. However, there are elements of the agent's own autonomous actions: only the agents of the given field can define the value of the the field's position. For example, an adult may not care about the playground in the park. But the children who get together to play here are trying to establish positions in terms of who it is to decide what to play, who may be invited to play etc. Sometimes you don't even have to belong to the field to be willing to ascribe a high value to the field: In the field of politics we often don't get a lot to say after the elections, but we respect the political-debate field and we accept its doxa. The positions in the field of political power also marks the distinction between us and them: those with a high ranking position in the field has this certain value because of the difference between the positions in the field and the difference between those who are inside and those who are outside. The ruling class often has agents with invested prestige. Now, how can we define the different types of strengths in these fields? Let's move on to the concepts of capital.

Capital and habitusThe specific position, which is occupied by an agent in a certain field, is dependent of the agent's capital: Bourdieu is working with a theoretical framework of different types of capital:

Social capital are the social network ressources of an agent. It Can be family, business associates, formal and informal networks. You might score all the A's at your education, but

without a good network to support you, you might get problems in your search for a job after your graduation.

Economic capital are all the accumulated ressources such as money, property etc. This is also related to the certain life styles of a social room/field.

Cultural capital are the cultural knowledge and the competencies that are build up and used by the agent. This also includes preferences or taste. In other words: what is for example fine art and what is not, as defined by a field's doxa. Again, this marks the distinction between members of different fields. The cultural capital is a set of rules that define how to define other fields and other capital. Some might not be interested in a high salery, but experience a lot of symbolic capital by working in an acedemic field:

This symbolic capital is the general framework for all the above mentioned types of capital. Symbolic capital is connected to a field's doxa and has to do with prestige and reputation. The symbolic capital and the use of economic-, cultural-, and social capital constitutes a specific field and its doxa. This might lead to supressive actions of power, however, this might not be regarded as such by the implied agents. Often the agents of a given field do not have the full overview of all aspects of the field, but they have a practical

sense of operating in the field and to create a position. This sense is each agent's habitus, and this habitus is connected to the doxa of the field. The habits, values and preferences of the agents are mixed with the doxa of the field, thus making the field an internal part of the agent's habitus. The agents are adjusting to the field, and then, on the other hand, the field is affected by their habitus. This dual power of the agent and the system creates a world, a common knowledge and a system of truth. This is the reality we can investigate, says Bourdieu.

The logic conclusion of this theoretical approach is to look at culture and power as being defined and reproduced in fields of preferences and doxa. And, more important, we can take a look at the concepts as they are defined by a field.