• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Is ideology the bane of intellectual sophistication in the US?

coberst

New member
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
336
Is ideology the bane of intellectual sophistication in the US?

Marx is perhaps the first intellectual of great stature to coin the word “ideology” and to study its epistemological foundations. Marx makes it clear that ideology is an important aspect of all societies and especially for a society so dedicated to the cultivation of production and consumption as is capitalism.

A brief examination of culture in the United States and one will find that ideology, as framed by Marx, is a fundamental aspect of many of its social institutions; especially evident in religion, politics, and economics.

Ideology “is a systematically and socially biased body of thought”. It spans a broad spectrum of groups with their varying degree of bias and sophistication.

Despite the broad spectrum encompassed by this category of thought and practice “all ideologies share an identifiable logical structure objectively dictated by their ideological character”. Each ideology has a moral, i.e. prescriptive, dimension. Each ideology attempts to shape society to fit its particular world view. “Ideology turns what is a fact for one group into an “ought” or “ideal” for others…Marx argues that since an ideology generalizes a narrow point of view beyond the limits of its validity, it is compelled by its very logic to ‘moralize’ and ‘preach’.”

Ideology often becomes a hypocritical moral doctrine. Because it generalizes and remodels abstract ideas into an object, i.e. it objectifies, it reifies narrow abstract ideas beyond their true limits of validity it is compelled to propagandize and to “sell” its ideas. Ideology is constantly telling others how they should live.

Ideology has a complex character. It is normative; what are its ideas and experiences it attempts to present them as inherent in human nature and from this it “deduces appropriate moral recommendations”. It is biased toward a specific group; it is against other social groups, it treats these other groups as mere means. It universalizes a narrow and limited view and “sells”, perhaps evangelizes (militant and crusading zeal) might be an appropriate expression, this view to others.

An ideology can never adequately defend it self rationally because its assumptions have never been critically evaluated nor explicitly formulated. It is often rabidly critical of rival views. “Consequently it never states its first principles, or makes a perfunctory case for them, keeps reiterating and reformulating them, elaborates on them in the name of critically examining them, and so on.”

I think that ideology is the bane of American culture; it is solidly entrenched because ideology fits well within our religious, democratic, and economic heritage. The only antidote for this virus is a population well educated in the sophisticated thinking discipline and moral character traits of CT (Critical Thinking).

Do you think that CT might be my ideology? Can a teeny-tiny small group of individuals in a nation of 350 million form an ideology?


Quotes from Marx’s Theory of Ideology by Bhikhu Parekh
 

Eruca

78% me
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
939
MBTI Type
INxx
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Let's say the opposite of ideology is for each indivudal to deal with every situation and opinion on a case-by-case basis. If it was part of a culture to do so this anti-ideology would itself become an ideology of CT since anyone who did not use CT would be singled out.

It seems to me some people will always need ideology, or at least feel drawn towards it. Maybe they need it for guidance or just a sense of identity.
 

ajblaise

Minister of Propagandhi
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
7,914
MBTI Type
INTP
coberst, you've made 6 anti-ideology threads in the last two months. I'm detecting a common theme and a certain set of ideas coming from you... an ideology of sorts.
 

coberst

New member
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
336
coberst, you've made 6 anti-ideology threads in the last two months. I'm detecting a common theme and a certain set of ideas coming from you... an ideology of sorts.


Stick around I have several other hobby horses to ride.
 

Athenian200

Protocol Droid
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
8,828
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
Yes, it is. It's an ingrained thinking pattern that goes much deeper than any one individual ideology. This thinking pattern makes you receptive to ideological perception in general, even if you reject one. This has even happened to me. :blush:
 

Nocapszy

no clinkz 'til brooklyn
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
4,517
MBTI Type
ENTP
similarly, intellectual sophistication is the [a] bane of ideal society.

stop hating the NFs, and don't pretend that's not what this is about.

Ideology is constantly telling others how they should live.
and that's bad right? we ought to stop that shit!

also this has nothing to do with intellectual sophistication.

An ideology can never adequately defend it self rationally because its assumptions have never been critically evaluated nor explicitly formulated.
er... isn't that the role of the intellectuals anyway -- to critically examine things?

additionally, it's impossible to evaluate or analyze anything which hasn't been formulated, so that doesn't really make sense. try again?



i didn't read the rest, but i'm curious; why you even bring up the US?
seems like if these are universal concepts, it shouldn't really matter which country you're in.

and when i say i'm curious, what i mean is that i'm asking a rhetorical question, which doesn't have much relevance to the [supposed] topic, but am still responding to it because of the fact that you, the OP brought it into the mix even despite the low prevalence, which is something i hope to point out by virtue of my addressing it to dispel the illusion of cohesive and critical thought you might have created by writing about one of the 'tough questions.'

ace ventura out!
 

PuddleRiver

It's always something...
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
2,923
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
5w6
It's just so much easier NOT to think at all isn't it? Thinking's hard work, takes time out of the day and so on. It's much easier to simply react like those around you. Fit in better thatta way too. Get on a rant and never let go. I'm surrounded by these people.

Of course I'm quite capable of doing the same about them. I think I just did. :cheese:

Aw hell, it's 3 in the morning, I'm barely conscious.
 
Last edited:

coberst

New member
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
336
Bertrand Russell on Critical Thinking


ABSTRACT: The ideal of critical thinking is a central one in Russell's philosophy, though this is not yet generally recognized in the literature on critical thinking. For Russell, the ideal is embedded in the fabric of philosophy, science, liberalism and rationality, and this paper reconstructs Russell's account, which is scattered throughout numerous papers and books. It appears that he has developed a rich conception, involving a complex set of skills, dispositions and attitudes, which together delineate a virtue which has both intellectual and moral aspects. It is a view which is rooted in Russell's epistemological conviction that knowledge is difficult but not impossible to attain, and in his ethical conviction that freedom and independence in inquiry are vital. Russell's account anticipates many of the insights to be found in the recent critical thinking literature, and his views on critical thinking are of enormous importance in understanding the nature of educational aims. Moreover, it is argued that Russell manages to avoid many of the objections which have been raised against recent accounts. With respect to impartiality, thinking for oneself, the importance of feelings and relational skills, the connection with action, and the problem of generalizability, Russell shows a deep understanding of problems and issues which have been at the forefront of recent debate. 20th WCP: Bertrand Russell on Critical Thinking
 
S

Sniffles

Guest
Marx is perhaps the first intellectual of great stature to coin the word “ideology” and to study its epistemological foundations.

No actually it was Destutt de Tracy who coined the term.

It would also be worth noting the difference between "ideology" and "philosophy", or also for that matter religion.
 

coberst

New member
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
336
No actually it was Destutt de Tracy who coined the term.

It would also be worth noting the difference between "ideology" and "philosophy", or also for that matter religion.

I would say that philosophy is radically critical self-consciousness. I would say that ideology is the distortion of social theory do to self centered or social centered bias that is done either because the individual knows no better or because it serves his or her self interest.

I think that CT (Critical Thinking) can usefully be thought of as 'philosophy lite'. And I think that CT is an antidote for ideology.
 

coberst

New member
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
336
All thought is saturated with egocentric and sociocentric presuppositions. That is, all thought contains highly motivating bias centered in the self or in ideologies such as political, religious, and economic theories. Some individuals are conscious of these internal forces but most people are not.

Those individuals who are conscious of these biases within their thinking can try to rid their judgments of that influence. Those who are not conscious, or little conscious of such bias, are bound to display a significant degree of irrational tendencies in their judgments.

“Can the intellectual, who is supposed to have a special and perhaps professional concern with truth, escape from or rise above the partiality and distortions of ideology?”

Our culture has tended to channel intellectuals, or perhaps more properly those who function as intellectuals, into academic professions. Gramsci makes the accurate distinction that all men and women “are intellectuals…but all do not have the function of intellectuals in society”.

An intellectual might be properly defined as those who are primarily or professionally concerned with matters of the mind and the imagination but who are socially non-attached. “The intellectual is thought of not as someone who displays great mental or imaginative ability but as someone who applies those abilities in more general areas such as religion, philosophy and social and political issues. It is the involvement in general and controversy outside of a specialization that is considered as the hallmark of an intellectual; it is a matter of choice of self definition, choice is supreme here.”

Even anti-ideological is ideological. If partisanship can be defended servility cannot; many have allowed themselves to become the tools of others.

We have moved into an age when the university is no longer an ivory tower and knowledge is king but knowledge has become a commodity and educators have become instruments of power; the university has become a privately owned think-tank.

“A profound change in the intellectual community itself is inherent in this development. The largely humanist-oriented, occasionally ideological minded intellectual dissenter , who saw his role largely in terms of proffering social critiques, is rapidly being displaced either by experts and specialist, who become involved in special government undertakings, or by generalist-integrators, who become house-ideologues for those in power, providing overall intellectual integration for disparate actions.”

The subordination to power is not just at the individual level but also at the institutional level. Government funds are made available to universities and colleges not for use as they deem fit but for specific government needs. Private industry plays even a larger role in providing funds for educational institutions to perform management and business study. Private industry is not inclined ‘to waste’ money on activities that do not contribute to the bottom line. ‘He who pays the piper calls the tune.’

Each intellectual is spouting a different ideology, how does the individual choose what ideology? Trotsky once said “only a participant can be a profound spectator”. Is detachment then a virtue? To suggest that intellectuals rise above ideology is impractical. Explicit commitment is preferable to bogus neutrality. But truth is an indispensable touchstone.

I think that the proper role for the intellectual is commitment plus detachment. Do you think many of our present day intellectuals qualify as committed and detached?

Quotes and ideas from “Knowledge and Belief in Politics” Bhikhu Parekh
 
S

Sniffles

Guest
Long story short: Philosophy is largely about understanding the world; Ideology is about domination of the world.
 
Top