The Word Ideology - Essay Example

Inserts His/her Inserts Inserts Grade Inserts Here (Day, Month, Year) Definition essay on Ideology The word Ideology can be generally defined as ‘a system of ideas that explains and lends legitimacy to actions and beliefs of a social, religious, political, or corporate entity.’ Different philosophers and ideologists have defined the term in different manner, like: 1. The French philosopher Destutts de Tracy used the term to designate an epistemological position with respect to the origins of ideas. 2. Napoleon Bonaparte then used "ideologist" to designate fuzzy-minded revolutionary intellectuals, especially those associated with Destutts de Tracy. 3. Karl Marx used ideology to designate philosophical positions that claimed to be statements of natural law (e.g. political economy), but which when unmasked could be seen to be "really" deceptive defenses of capitalism. 4. Terry Eagleton in his book ‘Ideology an /introduction’, described ideology in the following manner: the process of production of meaning, signs & value in social life; a body of ideas characteristic of a particular social group or class; ideas/ false ideas which help to legitimate a dominant political power; systematically distorted communication; that which offers a position of a subject; forms of thought motivated by social interests and identity thinking; socially necessary illusion; the conjuncture of discourse and power; the medium in which conscious social actors make scenes of the world; action-oriented sets of beliefs; the confusion of linguistic and phenomenal reality; semiotic closure; the indispensable medium in which individuals live out their relations to a social structure; The process whereby social life is converted to a natural reality. There are three aspects to the definition of ideology. First, ideology is a set of ideas; it isn’t a person, an act, or a type of society. A person can believe in an ideology, an act can be motivated by an ideology, and a society can be prearranged in reference to an ideology, yet they themselves are not ideologies. Second, ideology is a set of ideas that tries “justifying” by providing an incorrect reason for inequality. Third, ideology is a set of ideas that tries “justifying” an unequal social, economic, or political system. Not all types of inequities are justified by the ideas in an ideology, only those describing certain kinds of social arrangements, economic or political systems. Ideologies are also understood in three different kinds of languages: religious, philosophical and scientific. This makes them seem as if they are real and rational. It’s easier to picture an ideology from the past than one from the present. It is easy to see how the godly status of the pharaoh in ancient Egypt served an ideological objective. Yet which are the ideologies that exist today, and what kind of language would they use as reasoning for inequality and the control of society today? An example of a current dominant ideology is the beliefs that if you can afford to buy say, a luxurious yacht / personal helicopter, and then you should be free to spend that money any way you choose. But, of course, some people might rightly believe that there are many people in society who work very hard indeed and yet would never be able to afford such a luxury as a yacht / personal helicopter. They might say that the wealth generated within society should be more fairly shared between the so-called haves and the have nots. They might worry too that the power that can be wielded by someone who is wealthy enough to own a yacht is far in excess of the power that could be wielded by a poor person Any set of ideas dominating our culture or society represents ideology. For example different religions that are practiced in our world like Islam, Catholicism, Liberalism, and Marxism are different ideologies as each has a different way of thinking and living. Similarly, there are different family structures that we see around, like absolute nuclear family and joint family, both are different ideologies as both represent a different and unique set of ideas and thoughts. Further, political parties as well as different types of governments like dictatorship, democracy, monarchy etc also are examples of different mindsets and therefore different ideologies. Ideology is “A system of ideas and ideals, especially one that forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy.” Everyone has an ideology. The rise of progressivism in America is reflected more starkly in direct ratings of various ideological approaches. Today, more than two-thirds of Americans rate a “progressive” approach to politics favorably, and these now equal the conservatives. The continuing strength of the conservative brand—if not all of its constitutive ideas—reflects the long-term success of the conservative movement over decades. Despite electoral setbacks and larger proportions of Americans now adhering to progressive ideas about governance and society, the conservative worldview remains appealing to many Americans. Conservative principles about markets, spending, national defense, and traditional values enjoy residual strength and could rise in prominence depending on shifts in the economic and political environment. Conservatives may be down but they are not out of the ideology game. But unless and until conservatives recognize the depth of affinity between President Obama’s ideological approach and that of the American electorate, conservative ideas likely will remain in secondary status. According to this research, President Obama himself—and his ideas about governance outlined in his recent address to the joint session of Congress and his budget overview—best embodies in spirit, tone, and ideological and substantive content the emerging center spot in the American electorate today. The strong public support for President Obama reflects personal qualities and strengths that appeal broadly to Americans and genuine consensus among the public about the ideas and prescriptions necessary to navigate the country through turbulent waters. Notably, the ideological areas of greatest consensus among Americans are all key priorities and investment targets of President Obama: renewable energy; education, science, and infrastructure; universal health care; financial support for the least well-off; public interest regulations; and reductions in inequality financed by increased taxes on the wealthy. American ideological attitudes tend to converge in the middle which implies that Americans are not fully convinced of many ideological positions on their own side are open to ideological positions that may be different than their own. "Ideology", like many other words, may be ambiguous, since uses are not static. More specifically, the term "ideology" was used many years ago to refer to a "definite school of thought". This was neutral in nature however. In recent years, especially on TV, the term "ideology" has been used in a negative manner. A user is implying that an opponent is "narrow" or "biased", if there is adherence to a particular "ideology". Originally, the concept of ideology was not very alarming. The National Dictionary of 1939 defines ideology as “the science of ideas.” Since that time, however, ideology has taken on other connotations—specifically of dogma and of a rigid, doctrinaire understanding of the world. After the Second World War, both communism and fascism were said to be ideologically driven, but the same could easily be said for a wide variety of political beliefs. Ideology, as I will use the term, constitutes a rigid set of political or social doctrines and ideas that frame a ‘black and white’ worldview. Karl Marx insisted that ideology is determined by who controls the means of production, and functions to blind the proletariat to their own exploitation. But isn’t Marxism the ideology par excellence, that has blinded untold millions? And how could class-based relations of production suffice to explain its proliferation throughout the 20th century? If some of Marx’s disciples have attempted to update his analyses to keep up with a world that has never borne out his predictions, we should be as suspicious of them as we are of all ideologues. Ideology is particularly harmful because it seeks to reduce the complexity of human life and society to ultimate. It substitutes conscious reflection and careful consideration with axioms meant to apply to all situations. To an ideologue, for instance, ‘X’ will always supply an answer or explanation for every problem. “One simply turns to the ideological vending machine,” Daniel Bell once wrote, “and out comes the prepared formulae.” For instance, an ideologue might argue (hypothetically) that Hilary Clinton will not (or did not) win the election because she is a woman, while ignoring any number of other reasons she may have not been appealing to the voters. Everything is reducible to one convenient excuse that confirms the ideologue’s previous belief about the nature of the country’s voting population. When their explanations fail, as they inevitably do, they fall back on conspiracies to explain why things haven’t gone their way. To conclude, an ideology is basically a set of ideas justifying inequality in society. Ideologies are understood by scientific, philosophical and religious languages. It’s amazing how much people will try to make you believe in certain things. The real problem with ideology, as I see it, is that it closes a person’s mind to other possibilities and solutions. In some instances, this can be dangerous, as in the case of people who refuse all medical care or who refuse to feed certain foods to their infants that are essential for their healthy development. A blind adherence to ideology could result in unnecessary death. To suggest that we should be flexible in our approach to the analysis of problems and in our solutions to those problems, and that we should view every situation with a multifaceted lens, is in it inherently unideological. It is the negation of ideology, and therefore cannot be the same. It is not that ideologies are never appealing, convenient, and therefore useful to some people. Given their prevalence, many individuals have clearly chosen ideology as the governing influence over their thoughts and beliefs. It is saying that we must choose otherwise. If we are ever going to find solutions to the problems that we face in the Midwest today, we must jettison black and white thinking and grasp onto what works. As Franklin D. Roosevelt tried one idea after another to alleviate the pains of the Great Depression, so too must we find solutions that work and apply them where they are needed. One solution need not apply to every area, nor does that solution have to be maintained if it ceases to be useful. We must not succumb to extremism or ideologies that seek to divide us into neatly opposing categories. We must chart a middle course. We must be open to a wide variety of ideas from a diverse pool of thought. We must not close ourselves off to anything that might help us simply because it seems distasteful. On the other hand, we must be careful not to slip too far over the edge and embrace a course that is wishy-washy and lacking in substance. That is how we got into this mess in the first place. We must be firm in our convictions. In the spirit of pragmatism, we must be ready to compromise at certain times and be steadfast at others. There is no contradiction or weakness in possessing a variety of tools from which to draw. References Kennedy, E. Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 40, 1979. Kennedy, E. Society Memoirs (Vol. 129): A Philosophe in the Age of Revolution: Destutt de Tracy and the origins of ‘Ideology’, 1978. “The Concept of Ideology”, History and theory, 1965. Jay, W. Stein, “The beginnings of ‘Ideology,’ “ South Atlantic Quarterly, 1956. Boudon, R. The Analysis of Ideology, 1989. Read More