4/2/26
There are not many technological advances that carry the potential to revolutionize the way we think, act, and relate more than artificial intelligence (AI). Even in its infancy, the technology has profoundly influenced facets of daily life; of how we think, relate, and perceive the environment and interact with the institutions so fundamental to our existence then outwardly expressed through institutional life. It carries with it a host of concerns regarding these dynamics, but so too has it gained widespread usage for its convenient applicability and efficiency reasons. Where this technology takes us as a species undoubtedly will look drastically different. And there are reasons for this. Let’s dive in.
Structured Levels of Reality
Have you ever experienced a moment where you were doing something and suddenly become aware that you weren’t consciously behaving, went on autopilot, and now wonder what it was you just did? Don’t worry, we’ve all been there. It’s a sign that your cognition has become socialized and you are fulfilling the obligations provided through your social role. It’s institutionalization working at its finest. Just think, performance of the role is performed through a gestault of cognition. This is social theory in action.
Biology
And so, there exists four emergent levels of reality to take into consideration, each building upon the last. At the base, forming the foundation, exists the biological level. It provides the physical embodiment of existence to occur, the capacity to perceive. It’s where our instinctual responses lie, and our most basic constraints within which we operate. Think of this as the substrate from which the dependent levels emerge.
Social
The biological level is what the emergent level of the social takes as given. Building upon the functions of the biological, the social level is achieved. This is really the area where meaning, norms, and interaction arise. Forming an identity and fulfilling roles works to orient consciousness toward the magnitude of developing the “self,” or subjective experience. Philosophically debated by the likes of Bruno Latour, Charles Taylor, Margaret Archer, and Pierre Bourdieu, but by no means limited to, this topic has a long history of debate. I, however, have been deeply influenced by Bourdieu’s work, which we will get to below. Here, though, it’s important to consider that the social level of reality contains norms, shared expectations, and rules. In essence, where humans become social actors.
Institutional/Structural
Out of the social arises the institutional/structural layer. This is where the complexity of social relations comes from. Think policy, law, economics, administration. And what happens here we need to take note. It is the layer where rule becomes codified and behavior is shaped by formal structures. This social fabric is what develops through the socialization process, which, interestingly enough, contributes to one of the primary reasons that humans possess the longest duration of development, leading them to require so much care to reach adulthood. Institutional awareness, no less, is a reflective ability of the self to confront the web of relations experienced, some conscious and others relegated to institutional memory. These patterns of cognition are areas that can be identified, and provide opportunity for change to occur as they are where issues pertaining to the social construction of reality are first felt. It is the platform in which social movements develop and activism develops.
Habitus and Field
Finally, we’ve come to the highest layer, habitus and field. Keep in mind that here we specify that we are analyzing the ontology of the concept and not the epistemology that Bourdie wrote about. This level embodies a pre-reflective, internalized social reality, fully embodied and partially unconscious. It integrates individual experience with objective social structures. The best ontological classification is a dispositional entity, a realized potentiality. Yes, absolutely, habitus is a subjective experience where agency is experienced, only it is constrained by our social behavior and social ties or responsibilities. This is where idiosyncrasy is displayed, or the particular dispositions, a unique interaction where the subject confronts structure. And furthermore, field is the social arena where individuals compete for social position. There are a multitude of fields each with its own rules, stakes and forms of social capital. Examples include the policy field, academic field, economic field, etc. Thus field is structured space in which habitus operates. Think of “field” as the structure of the house and “habitus” as the family that inhabits it to make it a home. Not only is this the highest level of emergent reality, but so too is it the reflexive space comprised of system reinforced behavior. Practice and reproduction are associations often made.
Implications
As artificial intelligence continues to weave itself into the fabric of daily life, it will inevitably interact with each of these layers in distinct ways. At the biological level, it reshapes our habits of attention; at the social level, it reframes norms and expectations; at the institutional level, it reorganizes the very structures through which we coordinate collective life. And at the highest layer—habitus and field—it begins to influence the dispositions we carry and the arenas in which we act, subtly altering the “feel for the game” that guides practice. AI does not float above these layers; it enters into them, amplifying some dynamics while unsettling others. Understanding this stratified reality is not an abstract exercise but a necessary step toward grasping how this technology will continue to transform who we are, how we behave, and the systems we inhabit.
From within the structures we inhabit,
Jake
Leave a Reply