Political Field in Islamic Republic of Iran:Application of Bourdieu’s Field Theory میدان سیاسی در جمهوری اسلامی:کاربست نظریه میدانی بوردیو

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار پژوهشکده امام خمینی و انقلاب اسلامی


عنوان مقاله [English]

Political Field in Islamic Republic of Iran:Application of Bourdieu’s Field Theory

نویسنده [English]

  • Dr.Mansour Ansari
Assistant Professor,Research Institute of Imam Khomeini and Islamic Revolution
چکیده [English]

The present paper is an attempt to apply Bourdieu’s field theory to the political field of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The concept of field, as explained by Bourdieu, provides a suitable theoretical framework to identify and explain the complexities and intricacies of different behaviors of this system and analyze its absolutely different practices in domestic and international arenas.  The main question of this paper is: What is the relationship between political field and other fields in Iranian political landscape? The hypothesis formulate to answer this question is: the political field in the Islamic Republic of Iran has turned into the most preponderant field and this very field in order to survive has dominated other fields, taking away the possibility of their independence. The findings of this paper shows that the growth of political field not only has created limitations for other fields, but also has politicized other fields including the field of religion.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Iran
  • political field
  • Bourdieu
  • cultural field
  • field theory
  • Bashiriyeh, Hossein (2002), An Introduction to Political Sociology in Iran During the Islamic Republic of Iran, Tehran, Negah Moaser,
  • Bourdieu Pierre (1975), “The Specificity of the Scientific Field and the Social Conditions of the Progress of Reason,” Social Science Information, 14(6): 19-47.
  • Bourdieu Pierre and Wacquant J.D. (1992), An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
  • Bourdieu Pierre, “Intellectual Field and Creative Project,” in Michael Young (1971), Knowledge and Control: New Directions for the Sociology of Education, London, Colleir-Macmillan.
  • Chehabi Houchang, Linz Juan (1998), Sultanistic Regimes, Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press; Saeed Hajarian (1995), “Structure of Sultanist Authority: Damages and Alternatives,” Ittellaat Siasi-Eqtesadi, No. 2, 91, 1995, 8-41.
  • Deer Cecile (2003), "Bourdieu on Higher Education: The Meaning of the Growing Integration of Educational Systems and Self-Reflective Practice", British Journal of Sociology of Education, Vol. 24, No. 2 (Apr., 2003), 195-207.
  • Dunn Allen (1998), "Who Needs a Sociology of the Aesthetic? Freedom and Value in Pierre Bourdieu’s Rules of Art", Boundary 2, Vol. 25, No. 1, Thinking through Art; Aesthetic Agency and Global Modernity, (Spring, 1998), 87-110.
  • Fligstein Neil (2001), “Social skills and the theory of field,” Sociological Theory 19/2 (2001):105-125.
  • Gamson William, The strategy of social protest, Homewood, Dorsey Press, 1975. 
  • Jenkinz Richard (1992), Bourdieu Pierre, Routledge, translated by Jouafshan, Leila and Chavoshian, Hassan (2006), Tehran, Nashr Nei. 
  • Keshavarz Abbas (2003), “Explanation of the Islamic Revolution from the Viewpoint of Teda Sckocpol,” Matin (Tehran), No. 19, Spring 2003.
  • Kordzadeh Kermani, Mohammad (2001), Political Economy of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Tehran, International and Political Institute.
  • Lash Scot, Sociology of Postmodernism (1990), Routledge, translated by Chavoshian Hassan (2004), Tehran, Nashr Markaz.
  • National Conference of Cultural Engineering (2006), Proceedings, Tehran.
  • Swartz David (2002), “In memoriam: Pierre Bourdieu 1830-2002,” Theory and Society, 31 (2002): 547-553.
  • Taraqi, Hamidreza (2001), Interview with Political Activists, Tehran, Ministry of Guidance, 2001.