Sociology

In his book entitled Outline of a Theory of Practice, Pierre Bourdieu defined doxa as entities or situations taken for granted in the society. Doxa is the experience by which the physical and social world appears to be self-evident (Jones, 58). Doxa is found in the rubric of possibilities  the limits of human experience. Implied, doxa places limits on social mobility within what is called social space  limits imposed on the qualities of each individual. Now, there are certain social artifacts which are recognized as being inappropriate to social position. The function of doxa is to help reinforce social limits  the sense of personal place and belonging. Here, the idea of this is ours developed instinctively.

Another equally important concept is symbolic capital. Bourdieu defined symbolic capital as a critical source or origin of power. Symbolic capital is perceived capital (any form of capital which has social or cultural value  does not necessarily mean material wealth or political power) (Jones, 61). The holder of symbolic capital uses the power it confers against other individuals who hold less, and seeks to influence or change their action. An example is this Suppose a man proposed marriage to a girl he only met two weeks ago. The girl looks to the boy with suspicious eyes. The girl apparently does not want to get married yet. Her disapproval means that the man should not pursue his goal. In a sense, the girl exercises symbolic capital over the man.

This system of power relationship is related to doxa perhaps because symbolic capital is often the driving force behind doxa. This is a situation where personal space is directly correlated with symbolic capital. Symbolic capital may be used to reinforce personal space.

Symbolic systems are intricately connected to mode of domination. Mode of domination can be roughly defined as the means by which the ruling order of the society imposes values to the lower classes. Political power, wealth, and social status are sources of domination. Indeed, society teaches that class fractions are naturally occurring  that differences are only skinned-deep, based on wealth, power, and to some extent race. Class fractions may be considered as the prima facie origin of symbolic systems.

Raymond Williams developed the concept of cultural materialism. Unlike Bourdieus microscopic approach in the study of symbols and cultural systems, Williams approach is broad and macroscopic. According to him, cultural production is itself material  a part of human activity. Hence, culture must be understood both in its own terms (Jones, 138).

According to him, cultural materialism must be interpreted in relation to its underlying system of production. Because culture is a way of life, composed of symbols, language, organization, it is influenced by a substructure. This substructure determines the outcome of the superstructure. But the mode in which society operates is always dependent on culture, for culture determines the needs and aspirations of individuals  hence the term, cultural materialism. While Bourdieus concept of domination was naturally explicit, Williams similar concept was materialistic and superficially implied.