Social Inequality and Symbolic Domination In Pierre Bourdieu’s Theory of Social Practice
DOI:
10.51601/ijersc.v7i5.1137Published:
2026-11-10Downloads
Abstract
Social inequality remains a persistent sociological concern, encompassing not only the unequal distribution of material resources but also cultural distinctions, institutional practices, and symbolic relations of power. This study critically reassesses Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of social practice to explain how symbolic domination legitimizes and reproduces social hierarchies in contemporary society. Using a qualitative critical literature review, the study examines 12 contemporary scholarly works published between 2021 and 2025, along with Bourdieu’s foundational theoretical texts. The study analyzed the literature through critical thematic analysis and theoretical synthesis, focusing on the interrelationships among habitus, capital, field, symbolic power, and symbolic violence. The findings reveal five interconnected dimensions of social inequality: the reproduction of social dispositions through habitus, the unequal distribution and conversion of capital, the structuring of power relations within social fields, the legitimization of hierarchy through symbolic domination, and the reproduction of inequality across institutional and everyday contexts. The synthesis demonstrates that symbolic domination operates through the institutionalization of dominant cultural standards, the naturalization of social classifications, and the internalization of unequal relations as legitimate social arrangements. Evidence from educational, organizational, and digital contexts affirms that Bourdieusian theory remains relevant for explaining contemporary forms of social differentiation and power relations. Nevertheless, its application requires conceptual refinement to address emerging forms of capital, evolving social fields, and the potential for individual agency and structural transformation. This study advances sociological theory by integrating habitus, capital, and field into a relational analytical framework that positions symbolic domination as a central mechanism linking structural inequality with social reproduction. It concludes that understanding contemporary inequality necessitates examining both the material distribution of resources and the symbolic processes through which unequal social relations gain legitimacy.
Keywords:
Pierre Bourdieu; Social Inequality; Symbolic Domination; Symbolic Violence; Habitus and Social Reproduction.References
[1] L. Warwick-Booth, Social Inequality: Social Inequality 3e. 1 Oliver’s Yard, 55 City Road London EC1Y 1SP United States: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2022. doi: 10.4135/9781036231606.
[2] M. Khan, K. Behrendt, D. Papadas, L. Arnold, and A. Sultana, “From Inequalities to Inclusion: Sustainable Development for Smallholders,” Sustain. Dev., vol. 33, no. S1, pp. 1520–1536, Nov. 2025, doi: 10.1002/sd.70073.
[3] M. Zafirovski, “The Theory of the Collective Unconscious and Social Coercion: Theoretical Extension and Empirical Application,” Hum. Arenas, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 2486–2532, Sep. 2026, doi: 10.1007/s42087-025-00530-w.
[4] C. Samuell, “Shadow education, Bourdieu, & meritocracy: towards an understanding of Juku and inequality in Japan,” Curr. Issues Lang. Plan., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 45–66, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.1080/14664208.2023.2209467.
[5] Å. Wikberg Nilsson, “Bridging Boundaries: Unveiling Bourdieu’s ‘Thinking Tools’ in Design Interventions with Youth,” Des. Cult., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 163–184, May 2025, doi: 10.1080/17547075.2025.2461937.
[6] F. Ershadi, “A Study of Pierre Bourdieu ’ s Theory of Inequality Through The Inheritors , Reproduction in Education, Society, and Culture, and The Logic of Practice Farnaz Ershadi Thesis submitted to the University of Ottawa In partial fulfillment of the requiremen,” University of Ottawa, 2025. doi: https://doi.org/10.20381/ruor-30902.
[7] M. Karatas-Ozkan et al., “Challenging the assumptions of social entrepreneurship education and repositioning it for the future: wonders of cultural, social, symbolic and economic capitals,” Soc. Enterp. J., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 98–122, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.1108/SEJ-02-2022-0018.
[8] S. Uekusa, S. Matthewman, and D. F. Lorenz, “Conceptualising disaster social capital: what it is, why it matters, and how it can be enhanced,” Disasters, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 56–79, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1111/disa.12470.
[9] S. Yu, L. Hong, and G. Ma, “The Mediation of Exam-oriented Cultural Capital: Economic Capital and Educational Inequality of Chinese High School Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic and School Closures,” Appl. Res. Qual. Life, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 1189–1204, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11482-022-10127-y.
[10] G. Christensen, “Three concepts of power: Foucault, Bourdieu, and Habermas,” Power Educ., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 182–195, Jul. 2024, doi: 10.1177/17577438231187129.
[11] A. Prieur, M. Savage, and M. P. Flemmen, “Distinctions in the making: A theoretical discussion of youth and cultural capital,” Br. J. Sociol., vol. 74, no. 3, pp. 360–375, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.1111/1468-4446.13002.
[12] G. Stahl and G. M. Mu, “Pierre Bourdieu: Revisiting Reproduction, Cultural Capital, and Symbolic Violence in Education,” in The Palgrave Handbook of Educational Thinkers, Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2024, pp. 1199–1214. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-25134-4_128.
[13] F. A. Fudiyartanto and G. Stahl, “Theorizing the professional habitus: operationalizing Bourdieu to explore the role of pedigree in Indonesian higher education,” Br. J. Sociol. Educ., vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 157–172, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.1080/01425692.2023.2291324.
[14] F. de Moll, A. L. Grecu, and A. Hadjar, “Students’ Academic Habitus and Its Relation to Family Capital: A Latent Class Approach to Inequalities among Secondary School Students 1,” Sociol. Inq., vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 190–220, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.1111/soin.12578.
[15] J. D. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications., 2017.
[16] Y. Lu, R. Scandurra, and X. Bonal, “An integral model of cultural reproduction: The case of China,” Curr. Sociol., vol. 70, no. 6, pp. 897–920, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.1177/00113921211028626.
[17] J. Quaye and D. Pomeroy, “Social class inequalities in attitudes towards mathematics and achievement in mathematics cross generations: a quantitative Bourdieusian analysis,” Educ. Stud. Math., vol. 109, no. 1, pp. 155–175, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10649-021-10078-5.
[18] J. Lindell, “Symbolic Violence and the Social Space: Self-imposing the Mark of Disgrace?,” Cult. Sociol., vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 379–401, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.1177/17499755221082375.
[19] C. Umeh, N. Cornelius, and J. Wallace, “A Bourdieusian Exploration of Ethnic Inequalities at Work: The Case of the Nigerian Banking Sector,” Work. Employ. Soc., vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 885–910, Aug. 2024, doi: 10.1177/09500170231173604.
[20] J. Croizet and M. Millet, “How preschool education perpetuates social inequality: An ethnographic study of the practical conditions of symbolic violence,” J. Soc. Issues, vol. 80, no. 4, pp. 1345–1378, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.1111/josi.12654.
[21] H. Mitre, “Symbolic violence: What added value to the sociology of domination?,” J. Soc. Sci., vol. 7, no. 29, pp. 295–317, 2023, doi: https://journalsocialsciences.de/index.php/jss/article/view/110.
[22] R. Verwiebe and S. Hagemann, “Bourdieu revisited: new forms of digital capital – emergence, reproduction, inequality of distribution,” Information, Commun. Soc., vol. 28, no. 11, pp. 1861–1883, Aug. 2025, doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2024.2358170.
[23] Akhiruddin, S. A. Kamaruddin, and A. Adam, “Cultural Capital and Educational Inequality: A Critical Analysis of Bourdieu’s Thought in the Context of Indonesian Education,” IJOLEH Int. J. Educ. Humanit., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 256–270, Nov. 2025, doi: 10.56314/ijoleh.v4i2.430.
[24] R. Aditia and K. Széll, “Belonging matters: How context and inequalities shape student achievement in Indonesia,” Int. J. Educ. Res. Open, vol. 9, p. 100512, Dec. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.ijedro.2025.100512.
License
Copyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Educational Research & Social Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
