The essay "The Forms of Capital" written by Pierre Bourdieu addresses all the different colors of capitalism, including shades not typically seen by many. The spectrum includes such that capitalism, generally seen as having economic value, can also have cultural and meaningful purpose.
In this essay, Bourdieu talks about the common misconception that capitalism is a monetary value established through academic success, though he argues that it is so much more than that.Throughout the essay, Bourdieu explains that just because someone may not have the money or the gift of being academically inclined, that does not mean they don't have anything to give to the world. Value should be found in the uniqueness or individuality a person has to offer. It should be found in the talents or the cultural beliefs that we have. Bourdieu also makes a point about the competiveness or the working world: having the knowledge alone is not enough to persuade an employer to choose you, but it is our individuality - our quarks, experiences, unique qualities - that separate us from the competition.The term capital is defined as an advantage or quality that is used in production of goods and services.
Bourdieu describes this idea of capitalism by saying "any given cultural competence... derives a scarcity value from its position in the distribution of cultural capital and yields profits of distinction for its owner" (p. 245).
The idea is that if you bring something unique to the market, it will become more valuable because it has not been seen before - it is unique and cannot be replicated or replaced. This becomes appealing because society in the present is so competitive and everyone wants to have something no one else can obtain.Bourdieu has a common theme that society has a strong belief that academic standing is the only road to success; those who do not receive the proper education are not qualified. The problem with that, Bourdieu expresses, is that not everyone has the opportunity to gain those needed skills. Bourdieu states that "..
. measurement of the yield from scholastic investment takes account only of monetary investments and profits, or those directly convertible into money, such as the costs of schooling and the cash equivilant of time devoted to study" (p. 243).Having unique qualities is not enough for anyone in modern times, but no most employers look at the ability to pay money to get an education to receive a piece of paper saying that we have these qualifications. Unless you have that degree, knowledge is not generally recognized.
The lessons we learn in school, nowadays, are considered the only viable information. I think that Bourdieu was directing this essay at the persons at the top of the hierarchy, such as employers, head masters; anyone who has any choice in who makes the cut.He tends to use complicated sentence structure and a greater vocabulary, as if directing it towards those people who did have that chance to receive a higher education and get that degree to become successful. By him comparing the two worlds, he made me personally see things from a different perspective.
Not everyone has the privilege to have an education. Most people either have a higher level of understanding from extra schooling or people have unique traits and talents they were born and raised to have; but it is those people who have the advantage of having both that succeed today.
