Philosophy and Ideology: Guest Post from Joe Jordan

By -
My friend Joe Jordan, after reading my post on "Religion and Ideology," sent me the following, which I post with his permission:

I bring this up in my political theory courses to differentiate between philosophy and ideology. I hate it when people talk about having a "philosophy" as if it were a method of fixing a flat tire while pulled over on the side of the road. To keep "philosophy" pure from ideology, I present the following dichotomies:

Philosophy:
Involves humble personalities
Begins in wonder
Open-minded
Involves dialogue / hence republican
Ever-differentiating Asks questions
Seeks truth

Ideology:
Involves vainglorious personalities
Begins in assumed certainty
Close-minded
Involves dictation / literally dictatorship
Attempts a one-size-fits-all explanation of reality / reductionistic
Avoids questions / Asserts ready-made "answers"
Seeks power

A very rough sketch, of course. The battle between Socrates and Thrasymachus embodies these distinctions, I'd say.

Comments

  1. Samson Corwell2:56 PM

    I'd add that ideology can also cause people to think nonsensical things actually make sense (i.e., government can't exist without taxation, shouldn't legislate morality, etc.). To give an example, it can cause people to believe things like a square circle or dry water are possible.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more