Habermas and Bourdieu for World Peace

664 Words3 Pages
The idea of world peace implies there is a common understanding between diverse nations and cultures. Theories or perspectives concerning problems of peace and development, if understood dialectically, can shed light upon the conditions that regulate the use of language. Bourdieu’s conditions refer to the relations of power, whereas Habermas’ conditions refer to relations of reason. The implementation of a politically neutral language affords the opportunity for every sovereign individual to participate within the public realm for rational discourse to take place. Both Bourdieu and Habermas’ theories identify the hurdles of equitable discourse. World peace implies a “neutrality” of speech void of language games and communication anchored in widespread participation. In Bourdieu’s words, “The use of language…depends on the social position of the speaker;” and in effect, the authority of language “comes to language from outside.” The “outside” is created from social conditions fraught with language games. Bourdieu argues that speaking is inseparable from the distribution of power in a society, and the distribution power in society is unequal. Hence, there is difficulty for neutrality. The analysis of language games involves an awareness of social classes and the relative social position of speakers. The institutionalized social relations of speaking establish who is authorized to speak and recognized as such by others. Bourdieu goes on to identify an inverse relation

    More about Habermas and Bourdieu for World Peace

      Get Access