Is ideology the bane of intellectual sophistication in the US?

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

your a facist first of all, believing theres a choosen class of CThinkers. Second of all what ideology are you fucking talking about to begin with? Through studying Philosophy one learns to live there life be it classical conventenal or modern even the ill concieved philosophies of religion. So why shouldn't we try to create a world were the quality of life is more important then ultimate consumption but what specific ideology are you even talking about.......remember your already clearly a fascist

And you're clearly a troll.

In all your time here you have not contributed anything positive to this site. Merely disguise your intellectual shortcomings with lowbrow insults and smart ass remarks.

Rethink your actions and your way of interacting with members of the site. Or I might take it upon myself not to like you. And then id be forced to show you those shortcomings.

I believe CW is referring to BethewateR as a troll. Based on BW's post here, I would agree. All of Coberst's threads here have been pretty thoughtful and thought-provoking stuff. Unless BW's a lot more perceptive than I am, I don't pick up at all that Coberst is any kind of facist. At most, Coberst appears to be as cynical, and as genuinely concerned, about the dubious state of the collective IQ as I am.

CT is in pretty short supply, as Coberst suggests, and BW's post appears to be an example of that relative lack of abundance.

From BW's perspective, that would make me a facist, too.

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).

Ok now look up the term fascist in a dictionary wow try to keep some dignaty on this site

being a fascist is an ideology by the way you poor special educational childrean

Fascism is a corporatist economic ideology. When Coberst was talking about ideology he was describing it as being like a 'Meme'. Critical thinking I wouldn't believe to be an ideology, but would come from our emotions about how you might feel towards a concept.

I do believe a small group can change the minds of the many. Like on a dance floor, few dare to be the first dancing but a small group of dancers will give others the confidence to join in.

quote:

---

Ok now look up the term fascist in a dictionary wow try to keep some dignaty [sic] on this site

---

Okay.

From: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/fascism

quote:

---

fas·cist
n.
1. often Fascist An advocate or adherent of fascism.
2. A reactionary or dictatorial person.
adj.
1. often Fascist Of, advocating, or practicing fascism.
2. Fascist Of or relating to the regime of the Fascisti.

---

quote:

---

fas·cism
n.
1. often Fascism
a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.

---

I don't see anything in Coberst's post that is so closely aligned with the definition of "fascism" that it justifies the charge.

It would seem to me that "dignaty" [sic] on this site would also include the use of CT in analyzing threads and comments, wouldn't it?

CT is an acronym for Critical Thinking. Everybody considers themselves to be a critical thinker. That is why we need to differentiate among different levels of critical thinking.

Most people fall in the category that I call Reagan thinkers-trust but verify. Then there are those who have taken the basic college course taught by the philosophy dept that I call Logic 101. This is a credit course that teaches the basic principles of reasoning. Of course, a person need not take the college course and can learn the matter on their own effort, but I suspect few do that.

The third level I call CT (Critical Thinking). CT includes the knowledge of Logic 101 and also the knowledge that focuses upon the intellectual character and attitude of critical thinking. It includes knowledge regarding the ego and social centric forces that impede rational thinking.

Most decisions we have to make are judgment calls. A judgment call is made when we must make a decision when there is no 'true' or 'false' answers. When we make a judgment call our decision is bad, good, or better.

Many factors are involved: there are the available facts, assumptions, skills, knowledge, and especially personal experience and attitude. I think that the two most important elements in the mix are personal experience and attitude.

When we study math we learn how to use various algorithms to facilitate our skill in dealing with quantities. If we never studied math we could deal with quantity on a primary level but our quantifying ability would be minimal. Likewise with making judgments; if we study the art and science of good judgment we can make better decisions and if we never study the art and science of judgment our decision ability will remain minimal.

I am convinced that a fundamental problem we have in this country (USA) is that our citizens have never learned the art and science of good judgment. Before the recent introduction of CT into our schools and colleges our young people have been taught primarily what to think and not how to think. All of us graduated with insufficient comprehension of the knowledge, skills, and attitude necessary for the formulation of good judgment. The result of this inability to make good judgment is evident and is dangerous.

I am primarily interested in the judgment that adults exercise in regard to public issues. Of course, any improvement in judgment generally will affect both personal and community matters.

To put the matter into a nut shell:
1. Normal men and women can significantly improve their ability to make judgments.
2. CT is the domain of knowledge that delineates the knowledge, skills, and intellectual character demanded for good judgment.
3. CT has been introduced into our schools and colleges slowly in the last two or three decades.
4. Few of today's adults were ever taught CT.
5. I suspect that at least another two generations will pass before our society reaps significant rewards resulting from teaching CT to our children.
6. Can our democracy survive that long?
7. I think that every effort must be made to convince today's adults that they need to study and learn CT on their own. I am not suggesting that adults find a teacher but I am suggesting that adults become self-actualizing learners.
8. I am convinced that learning the art and science of Critical Thinking is an important step toward becoming a better citizen in today's democratic society.

he is basically suggesting that all should be ruled by a higher class of critical thinkers, the definitions you found where mostly redundant statements of the word fascim, do you know what that even means? it means that you think one group of people is superior to another group of people. think hitler, we all have our own ideas on how the world should be run but he seems to be attacking all ideologies in general, how does one think without any goals or expectations for onself, who does a society exist?

quote:

---

he is basically suggesting that all should be ruled by a higher class of critical thinkers

---

No, he's examining the notion of ideology in the context of critical thinking. You're reading things into what he's saying -- which doesn't show much critical thinking.

quote:

---

the definitions you found where mostly redundant statements of the word fascim, do you know what that even means?

---

Your complaint is with Webster, not me.

quote:

---

it means that you think one group of people is superior to another group of people.

---

"a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
2. Oppressive, dictatorial control."

quote:

---

think hitler, we all have our own ideas on how the world should be run but he seems to be attacking all ideologies in general, how does one think without any goals or expectations for onself, who does a society exist?

---

Now I've think you've got it. Coberst is examining the notion of ideologies in general -- ALL ideologies, including one that might be called "CT" -- and how these ideologies affect how humans govern themselves.

ok how is Critical thinking an ideology or anything other than a skill? SurePSYCHOLOGY PHILOSOPHY have alot to do with our decision making process but really this is the most unfruitful post I've ever joined in on

quote:

---

ok how is Critical thinking an ideology or anything other than a skill? SurePSYCHOLOGY PHILOSOPHY have alot to do with our decision making process

---

If you'll read the OP (opening post) carefully, Coberst didn't insist that CT was an ideology -- but he asked whether it might well be an ideology in itself, or at least could become one, by the way it is applied.

quote:

---

but really this is the most unfruitful post I've ever joined in on

---

When you jump in with unjustified charges of "fascism", that makes things pretty unfruitful right out of the box. Think how YOU would feel if someone did that to you. Beyond that, your participation here is entirely voluntary, isn't it?