Commentaar en discussie: Miskenning van cultuur. Antwoord aan De Graaf en Kraaykamp

Samenvatting

Responds to Nan Dirk de Graaf & Gerbert Kraaykamp's comments (1998 [see abstract 9812526]) on Houtman's "Cultureel kapital, sociale stratificatie, en onderwijsorientatie" ([Cultural Capital, Social Stratification, and Orientation toward Education] 1996 [see abstract 9701679]). Their accusation that the sample Houtman used implied corroboration of the main hypothesis (ie, students with more cultural baggage will be more successful in education) is rejected; it is argued that the fact that different educational categories were sampled made corroboration as well as rejection of the key hypothesis possible. It is further noted that De Graaf & Kraaykmap refuse to acknowledge the problem of causal order that was indicated by the results, thus confirming the suggestion that too many sociologists view cultural capital as a resource to be converted into economic capital. This suggestion is misinterpreted by De Graaf & Kraaykamp as a rejection of other research on cultural & economic capital. Attention to the Weberian notions of intended vs unintendned consequences is deemed necessary. 15 References. Adapted from the source document.