Ideology is Fantasy

[The Reverend Bob]

Whether the ideology is political, cultural or religious/spiritual it is not something based on reality or on the here and now but on what people believe things should be or how things should be or are. Often ideology is used as a protective filter that saves us from seeing the vagaries of reality and give us the false comfort of an ordered universe. Even when ideologies accept the reality of the chaotic and unpredictable it is often looked at as something to be remedied or as something evil and sometimes as something to surrender to. Rather than putting on the glasses and seeing the world just as it is, we would rather eat the trash can because why not? We eat the trash everyday but in our ideological frame of mind we see the trash as filet mignon because the ubiquitous "they" "the authorities" and "the experts" tell us that it is filet mignon and "they know better than us" because after all "it is written...".

Let us take the ideology "democracy", a vague term that no one seems to be able to define precisely, people mention concepts like "freedom" (freedom from what?) or rights (often limited because too much "freedom" is a bad thing apparently) and "liberty". The ideology "democracy" like all other ideologies is nothing more than a baby's pacifier, given to you to suck on in order to keep you quiet when you want mother's milk but lacking in the nourishments you need. It is a promise to make you feel alright or give you meaning but that is all on the surface. You dine at the Cafe Ideology and you will find yourself munching on a Nothing Burger with a side of Word Salad while you await your turn to try the new and improved Bull**** Buffet.

 

[David T]

Although if the broad spectrum insists it is reality you just have to choose which one I would say that's a very very serious issue.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

Although if the broad spectrum insists it is reality you just have to choose which one I would say that's a very very serious issue.

Ideology is forced upon us. We are said to be given a "choice" and this "choice" is supposed to be proof that we are "free to choose" and is a perfect example of "democracy" at work. Then we are shown an red apple and then green apple and told these are our "choices". How is this "choice" or "freedom". It is just ritual and pure spectacle. Wizard of Oz crap. The political ideologies of the US are like this, we are given two or at most three "choices" as to what we are supposed to believe "left", "right" or "middle" and this is supposed to be "freedom"

 

[Quintessence]

I think you're setting up a false dichotomy here.

All ideologies, without exception, are based on reality in the sense that they cannot and do not emerge out of a vacuum. They are responses to something humans experience, which means they are responses to something in our environment. While philosophical debates can be had as to the nature of the sources of human experience, for the most part we tend to agree that the environment exists. But as human experiences are subjective, so too are how we respond to the sources of those experiences. Consequently, we create maps of the territory to help us navigate and understand the environment we live in and the experiences we have. These maps can and do have different purposes, which may or may not include what you call "false comfort" and whatnot. There is no "seeing the world just as it is" for humans.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

I think you're setting up a false dichotomy here.

All ideologies, without exception, are based on reality in the sense that they cannot and do not emerge out of a vacuum. They are responses to something humans experience, which means they are responses to something in our environment. While philosophical debates can be had as to the nature of the sources of human experience, for the most part we tend to agree that the environment exists. But as human experiences are subjective, so too are how we respond to the sources of those experiences. Consequently, we create maps of the territory to help us navigate and understand the environment we live in and the experiences we have. These maps can and do have different purposes, which may or may not include what you call "false comfort" and whatnot. There is no "seeing the world just as it is" for humans.

I admit that ideology arises out human need and desire. Like the need for comfort and/or security, the need to belong to something grander or bigger than oneself but that doesn't take away from the fact that all ideologies are subjective, that there is no inherent truth or falsehood in them. They are essentially religious in nature because people believe in them without requiring proof whether they can be true or false.

 

[Sanzbir]

A sliver of truth, buried in heaping mounds of edgy tryhardism.

 

[Augustus]

Rather than putting on the glasses and seeing the world just as it is, we would rather eat the trash can because why not?

No one can see the world 'just as it is', and even if we could it would be in no way conducive to living a meaningful and/or enjoyable life.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

No one can see the world 'just as it is', and even if we could it would be in no way conducive to living a meaningful and/or enjoyable life.

Who told you this and why do you believe this is so? maybe we don't need "meaningful or enjoyable", seeing the bare bones of reality might be conducive to survival of the species, there is little enjoyment in the struggle to survive. O am not sure the mighty lion ask himself whether his activity is meaningful or enjoyable.

 

[sun rise]

I admit that ideology arises out human need and desire. Like the need for comfort and/or security, the need to belong to something grander or bigger than oneself but that doesn't take away from the fact that all ideologies are subjective, that there is no inherent truth or falsehood in them. They are essentially religious in nature because people believe in them without requiring proof whether they can be true or false.

I agree there's a fantasy element to some ideologies such as tax cuts pay for themselves. But there is also sometimes evidence that they work in some situations.

So I think the OP has an element of truth but is overstated. Given our state of knowledge, what alternative is there to having an ideological stance knowing that it's imperfect and being willing to accept evidence to the contrary if and when it becomes available?

 

[The Reverend Bob]

So I think the OP has an element of truth but is overstated. Given our state of knowledge, what alternative is there to having an ideological stance knowing that it's imperfect and being willing to accept evidence to the contrary if and when it becomes available?

That is a problem that needs to be address when it comes to ideology, just as with religion when you present a person whether they be leftists or on the right with evidence that their ideological beliefs might be based on a falsehood sometimes they become in entrenched in their beliefs. In their minds "Bernie is always right!" or "Trump can do no wrong"

 

[tayla]

Whether the ideology is political, cultural or religious/spiritual it is not something based on reality or on the here and now but on what people believe things should be or how things should be or are.

Humans have the capacity to experience ideas and to create them. The problem is: when they claim certain ideas are true without matching them up to physical reality via the scientific method.

But even non-physical ideas have their potential benefits. Using sound philosophy, certain ideas can be considered useful and helpful even though they don't correspond to physical matter.

yes, social ideas that dream of a utopia in the future can be unhelpful. But there is nothing wrong with wanting to improve the world.

 

[Augustus]

Who told you this and why do you believe this is so?

It's pretty much the same point you were making. Do you actually think you see the world just as it is?

We are bundles of molecules that became sentient by chance, and not for the purpose of seeing the world 'just as it is'.

maybe we don't need "meaningful or enjoyable", seeing the bare bones of reality might be conducive to survival of the species, there is little enjoyment in the struggle to survive. O am not sure the mighty lion ask himself whether his activity is meaningful or enjoyable.

Considering we evolved specifically to not see the world just as it is, why on earth would it be conducive to the survival of the species to see the world just as it is?

 

[The Reverend Bob]

But even non-physical ideas have their potential benefits. Using sound philosophy, certain ideas can be considered useful and helpful even though they don't correspond to physical matter.

Can you give an example? I can give one, let's take the idea of altruism.

 

[tayla]

Let us take the ideology "democracy", a vague term that no one seems to be able to define precisely, people mention concepts like "freedom" (freedom from what?) or rights (often limited because too much "freedom" is a bad thing apparently) and "liberty".

These are examples of where philosophy can be helpful. There is an online course on YouTube (in the YaleCourses channel) called "The Moral Foundations of Politics" by Ian Shapiro in which he analyzes such ideas of political philosophy.

I agree that when people have different opposing views on a topic, this indicates that the truth of this topic can't be known. But in some cases, it's not so sinister and is merely that we must choose which course of action to take. And this requires considering whether democracy is a better system of government than totalitarianism (for example).

As humans, we can affect the events of the world using our ideas. So we should study philosophy so we can make good choices and avoid getting fooled by bad ideas.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

why on earth would it be conducive to the survival of the species to see the world just as it is?

Because our ideological and religious conflicts are causing great suffering and may cause our extinction because some of us because of our ideological and/or religious beliefs do not want to see the reality of impending global disaster. That's why.

 

[Augustus]

Because our ideological and religious conflicts are causing great suffering and may cause our extinction because some of us because of our ideological and/or religious beliefs do not want to see the reality of impending global disaster. That's why.

You seem to assume your own views are in no way ideological (a common conceit).

What you are really proposing is that people follow a different ideology, not that people 'see the world just as it is'.

Can you actually explain how 'seeing the world just as it is' would produce global harmony or whatever result you find desirable?

 

[tayla]

Can you give an example? I can give one, let's take the idea of altruism.

Are you wondering whether altruism has any good benefits, or whether it is possible to eradicate the idea of altruism from human collective consciousness?

Usually, it's impossible to discuss ideas without defining the terminology. I have not studied altruism in this regard so I'm not sure how helpful I could be.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

You seem to assume your own views are in no way ideological (a common conceit).

What you are really proposing is that people follow a different ideology, not that people 'see the world just as it is'.

Can you actually explain how 'seeing the world just as it is' would produce global harmony or whatever result you find desirable?

I am not saying it will magically bring "global harmony" (I think that is impossible), I am saying that if we don't put on the sunglasses, we might find ourselves eating that trash can. I don't want to eat the trash can.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

Are you wondering whether altruism has any good benefits, or whether it is possible to eradicate the idea of altruism from human collective consciousness?

Usually, it's impossible to discuss ideas without defining the terminology. I have not studied altruism in this regard so I'm not sure how helpful I could be.

Whether it can be considered a non-physical idea without a scientific bearing that benefits us. But since you have not studied altruism I think it is bet for you to supply the example.

 

[Augustus]

I am not saying it will magically bring "global harmony" (I think that is impossible), I am saying that if we don't put on the sunglasses, we might find ourselves eating that trash can. I don't want to eat the trash can.

What you are saying is you wish more people held ideologies you find preferable. You wish our illusions drove us in more positive directions

You were right in saying 'ideology is fantasy', just wrong to absolve yourself.