This is continued from previous post:
Bourdieu for American Political Development
The external habits of republicanism, liberalism and authoritarianism are available for human interaction eternally within and between regimes, states, society, identity, etc. I discount the assumption that ignorance means an object is unavailable. Meaning, the habitus of republicanism should hold complete and perfect information with respect to republicanism; however, people or politicians hold incomplete and imperfect information with respect to the possible republican solutions for APD (again, 25 centuries of limited data and long research studies).
Whereas Bourdieu studies, sociologically, scientists as external objects, which are a culmination of socialization, education and bias—interacting in the field and indeed contributing new knowledge to the field; I see political languages as external objects, which are a culmination of socialization, education, and bias—interacting in the field and indeed creating new paragraphs in legislation; which is an educated experiment for political action to solve collective action problems.
Political languages compose an ethical structure which does hold/occupy political space, and the language takes positions against other political languages, just as scientists, external to one another, take positions against each other too.
The political language of authoritarianism, for example, finds legislative solutions to quell anarchy, and it violates tenets of liberalism and republicanism. The structure and structuring of liberalism as a political language creates legislation that quells authoritarianism, even though it violates tenets of republicanism and authoritarianism. Likewise, republicanism admonishes liberal neutrality and fights authoritarianism with particular vehemence. Evidence regarding the former is beyond the scope of this paper.
Throughout the rest of this essay, I will inquire as to how the habitus approach will lead to improving scientific methodology by which the scientific community empirically denotes the truth of the external forces as objects that impact human [political] behavior.
Bourdieu argues that culture is a weapon of scientific struggles (2004, 46), and I argue that culture consists of political language and language position-takings.