Bourdieu’s Habitus and Field vs. Scott’s The Evidence of Experience

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Discussion
Conclusion
References

Introduction

The works of Bourdieu and Scott, despite their similar themes, have a number of differences, starting with the primary purpose of their creation. If one goes deeper and analyzes each of them, it becomes evident that they have different writing styles, they both use other techniques in the narration of their thought despite the same target audience.

Discussion

Bourdieu invokes the power of habit and its role in everyday life in writing. Scott, in his turn, takes a different view, gathering the influence of another principle, which is experience. In their writings, the authors consider how people are socialized and receive certain things, but the principles of obtaining them are radically different because of the methods of gaining privileges.

There are also differences between the two works beyond the main topic of writing, such as the styles. Bourdieu uses more accessible language and deals with the issue in question using conditional imagery. In his work, Habitus and Field, he considers that the lexicon used in his work may sound wrong, as opposed to those that are considered formal (Bourdieu et al., 2019). His aim, however, is to convey his material in simple and accessible language to his readers.

In contrast, Scott writes his text, called The Evidence of Experience more formally, avoiding the use of informal speech and using professional narrative language. In this way, he emphasizes the audience for which the reader is intended, namely, people who study the issue professionally (Scott, 1991).

Conclusion

Thus, one can conclude that both texts share standard features, such as the consideration of similar topics or writing in the same format. At the same time, the conclusions they reach are different, as is the method of writing and arguments given. This is advantageous for the reader, as he can choose the point of view to which he is more inclined and consider the question from both sides.

References

Bourdieu, P., Champagne, P., Julien Duval, Franck Poupeau, Marie-Christine Rivière, & Collier, P. (2019). Habitus and field : Lectures at the Collège de France (1982-1983). Polity Press.

Scott, J. W. (1991). The evidence of experience. Critical Inquiry, 17(4), 773–797. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!

Bourdieu’s Habitus and Field vs. Scott’s The Evidence of Experience

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)