was the original version of this text as part of a philology exercise, otherwise the content was a bad joke, the misery of the academic establishment aptly illustrated. It is an approach to the concept of ideology and originally it was also about the question of the relationship of language is to be an ideologue. The latter section, I felt, however, as weak and therefore had waived him out here published. Although the text is fairly tight, I think it is a useful introduction to the topic of ideology. Footnotes I have not set because the original text was written for the oral presentation. The sources used are, however, at the end.
Introduction
The question of what ideology is not easy to answer, because there are many different ideological terms, which can not be combined. In addition, most of the scientific concept of ideology sometimes differ dramatically from the colloquial use of the word, which makes them particularly counter-intuitive. In addition, of course, that ideology often is used as a defamatory term political struggle. The question of what is to be regarded as an ideology, is itself part of political and ideological clashes also a sense in which it occurs often that a group accuses another to act out of ideological motives. This usually means either that the respective opponents of an error, a false doctrine rests, or operates a deliberate distortion of reality. Part is also assumed that it was not even something of a "will to truth" exists. The implication is, of course, that their own party, "not ideological" (In the case of the Pirate Party "post-ideological"), in their views and statements of "objective" However, what is undeniable, of course, as a rule. Sometimes, they also implied that his own party would be contrary to the ideologues of the "pragmatic", so to be based "realities" and the intention of the "real solution" of problems. That the orientation of what a first glance as a "real fact" appears is not necessarily non-ideological, I wish to describe in the course of the text.
Since there is no uniformly accepted concept of ideology, and the simple juxtaposition of different terms, as they stood to each other in any relationship is not very satisfactory, I try to close a historic development of the concept of ideology present. The development of the concept of ideology closely linked is Wissenschaftshteoretischen considerations, is also the scientific theory of the answer.
The concept of ideology
ideology as the idol, and prejudice
ideology as the idol, and prejudice
One of the central questions of philosophy, from which also developed the concept of ideology is the question of what, in the words of Kant, the conditions of possibility of knowledge are, or negative words, what it is, what prevents the knowledge of the truth. For the Greek philosophy of reason was the partiality of the people in the "sensible world" by a shift to "pure thought" and had overcome the "ideas". The Christian theology of the Middle Ages went a step further: Because of original sin men are cut off from the truth, it would ultimately only as divine revelation and grace.
Francis Bacon
Especially against this thinking came in the 16th and 17 Century of living Aufklärungsphilosph Bacon one, the so-called "idols", ie, idols, as constituted obstacles to understanding. were all meant different things: emotions, lack of education, misleading language, superstition, dogma, authority and all of the latter spread merely invented false explanations of the world. In a way, Bacon formulated the first theory of ideology, even if he does not coined the term. Did so only the "ideologues", a group of French scientists from the revolutionary period, however, understood him as a kind of value-free theory of the origin of ideas. Napoleon had this enlightenment philosophers, a thorn for an eye, as it makes its political ambitions, which were based on the reconciliation with ancient traditions, the way to proceed. He coined the concept of ideology defamatory see today, the connotation of naivety and stubbornness has.
The early materialist d'Holbach turn first to develop a concept of ideology (even if not used that term) that in the context of an ideology of domination that: The theory of the priest fraud. This was that the priest religion and the religious fear had only invented to subdue the rest of mankind. Only this manipulation prevented the people from their lives according to their real needs to set up. An end, a very convincing theory, especially in terms of how such a purely ideological power relations should be developed historically. Nevertheless, modifications to such a priest is a fraud theory resorted to this day, such as when the National Socialism as a rule of a few ideologues led by self-interest represented by an only become guilty by seduction mass, those of the National Great Power madness and anti-Semitism had to be instilled as a justification for the rule of the Hitlerites only propaganda.
the idols Bacon put the wisdom to through experience and inductive process. He was a pioneer of empiricism and forerunners of such thinkers as Locke. But could the problem of how to secure the experience and gain reliable knowledge, was not with the doctrine of the idols solved. On the contrary. The moment in which the study of phenomena is the primary source of knowledge, the question of what constitutes the empirically observable phenomena, but the observation itself is withdrawn. So after that is as it were behind the phenomena. For Locke, this is the "substance" in Kant and the "thing in itself". Empiricism led directly to the skepticism of a Hume: This questioned the certainty, stability and confidence of all that can be gained through experience and induction.
The early materialist d'Holbach turn first to develop a concept of ideology (even if not used that term) that in the context of an ideology of domination that: The theory of the priest fraud. This was that the priest religion and the religious fear had only invented to subdue the rest of mankind. Only this manipulation prevented the people from their lives according to their real needs to set up. An end, a very convincing theory, especially in terms of how such a purely ideological power relations should be developed historically. Nevertheless, modifications to such a priest is a fraud theory resorted to this day, such as when the National Socialism as a rule of a few ideologues led by self-interest represented by an only become guilty by seduction mass, those of the National Great Power madness and anti-Semitism had to be instilled as a justification for the rule of the Hitlerites only propaganda.
philosophy of science: ideology and presented as a mere illusion
the idols Bacon put the wisdom to through experience and inductive process. He was a pioneer of empiricism and forerunners of such thinkers as Locke. But could the problem of how to secure the experience and gain reliable knowledge, was not with the doctrine of the idols solved. On the contrary. The moment in which the study of phenomena is the primary source of knowledge, the question of what constitutes the empirically observable phenomena, but the observation itself is withdrawn. So after that is as it were behind the phenomena. For Locke, this is the "substance" in Kant and the "thing in itself". Empiricism led directly to the skepticism of a Hume: This questioned the certainty, stability and confidence of all that can be gained through experience and induction.
David Hume
do here is ultimately the following alternatives on either the symptoms a superficial appearance that conceals him producing reality unattainable, or the phenomena are indeed an expression of that reality, but so that they allow the uncontrollable autonomy of their unknown and respond as such, the experience has withdrawn origin - witness to the deceptive demon Descartes. Kant's theory of knowledge can ultimately be understood as an attempt to defeat that skepticism. Hegel broke from his predecessors by attempting, through investigation of the appearance of that very "thing-in-itself", which hides behind appearances, to become the object of the investigation. The essentials this step is that the bill is seen as a necessary product of something which produces it is assumed, that as a symptom of something deeper. Hegel understood the story, in so doing, as the contradictions are in developing process of the mind towards the reason. This process occurs on the bill as a mandatory appearance in each case at any stage of spiritual development until the process finally in the final reconciliation of spirit and nature, in the abolition of all contradictions will be the end. In Hegel's tradition is also the philosopher Feuerbach, religion as a sham created by people described that appears to them but as something external. This bill would correspond necessarily a specific stage of development of the human spirit and is ultimately justified by its explanation in anthropological causes.
Marxism - ideology as necessary false consciousness
Marx developed his concept of ideology from a review of the previously illustrated. He rejected the speculative philosophy of Hegel and Feuerbach's in two respects: first
In terms of Feuerbach's anthropology, which he conceived himself as a historically contingent form. An ahistorical, across time anthropology is questionable, because man is a being that is not done to the world but gives only appear socially, that is, both as a product of society he comes from, but also as a designer of that company. Therefore, one can only say what the man is in a given society and in a certain time. The man himself is but an empty abstraction.
second With regard to the concept of history that came from a speculative, detached from the empirical human "consciousness" but not of specific people and their practical life. The overestimation of the spiritual Marx described himself as "German ideology".
Marx put his swivel point on life and practice on the terms and conditions under which the People live and reproduce their lives. Instead of considering how Hegel, history as a spiritual development, he saw it as an evolution of society. These take place through the development of means of production on the one hand, and dependent on this type of social organization on the other side. The birth certificate of Marx led back to internal re Sayings of a society by re-competing interests and power relations that are in effect and subject unconsciously distort their perception of reality. Ideology in this sense is neither a conscious manipulation, nor simply a mistake.
"ideology is socially necessary false consciousness, if Looking at the subject site, and socially necessary illusion, when one speaks of the subject of ideological consciousness. The term "socially necessary" does not mean a natural legal requirement to false consciousness, but an objective necessity that comes from the organization of society itself. It occurs when the society seems to individuals other than it is in truth, if obscure certain surface phenomena their internal organization fetish
central component of ideology is "", which means that something is a result of human activity, mediates by society, as a property appears to the respective Thing or person belongs as a kind of natural property, such as their weight. Marx worked out this fetish with reference mainly to the value and commodity fetishism. Here is a social value, namely the need to manufacture a product, average working time by being based in the exchange on other work, seems a thing to a tacking property. However, it is a twist or turn each product as you like, its value can not recognize the thing itself. The fetish may even go so far that the actions of people they have chosen their own will, but as any foreign power that is unfolding behind her back. This could be for example in relation to the world market, diagnose the almost appears as an "automatic subject". Clearly, this is the basis of a visualization: When tables back people sitting around a table with his hands on the table. With time, make the movements of their muscles at the table for easy movements that cause noise, which in turn are interpreted as expressions of a spirit.
Karl Marx
What Marx getting at, and what is his criticism of empiricists and positivists ultimately, who think they can ensure knowledge through direct perception of empirical reality is that the objects of our perception of virtually no concrete objects, but that she taught the contrary, such as goods, real and abstract, by the company of objects. Whenever we therefore what appears to us as immediately accept as true, whenever we view the world as it presents us understand as something rationally organized and completed, then we run the risk of succumbing to Marx ideology. The immediacy is deceptive and to express it with Adorno, "The whole is the untrue." And why were the Idelogues fact producers of ideology. According to Marx, ideology is not in principle impossible to figure social theory makes it possible to recognize them. What ideology , it can therefore only through a substantive examination, ie, a critique of ideology to be identified, but will not be made on purely formal criteria.
In Marx, the concept of ideology revealing character. He is not a scientific end in itself but is in enlightened intention against the existing society were positioned, which need to expose. This does not apply to subsequent terms ideology, which are often referred to as value-free. This ideology terms fall short of Bacon part by ideology and explain only with psychological dispositions or understood as an inadequate mixing of opinion and facts. In Mannheim's sociology of knowledge or Toppiz the concept of ideology, finally enlarged and serves ultimately only to the relationship between social being and my highlight. Even in Marxism-Leninism, the Soviet Union prevailed, such a value-neutral concept of ideology, the ideology sees as simply spout Social enforcement agents of a class. Schnädelbach criticized the fact that: regressed
ideology as a value-neutral category of social sciences
In Marx, the concept of ideology revealing character. He is not a scientific end in itself but is in enlightened intention against the existing society were positioned, which need to expose. This does not apply to subsequent terms ideology, which are often referred to as value-free. This ideology terms fall short of Bacon part by ideology and explain only with psychological dispositions or understood as an inadequate mixing of opinion and facts. In Mannheim's sociology of knowledge or Toppiz the concept of ideology, finally enlarged and serves ultimately only to the relationship between social being and my highlight. Even in Marxism-Leninism, the Soviet Union prevailed, such a value-neutral concept of ideology, the ideology sees as simply spout Social enforcement agents of a class. Schnädelbach criticized the fact that: regressed
"The sociology of knowledge and vulgar Marxist concept of ideology, the expansion of the pre-Marxist theory to the level of interest in psychology and a static Anthropology.. The thesis that all thinking "existentially bound" or expression of class interests is generally regarded, and leads to a general relativism, which excludes the emancipation of thought from the respective interest-related prospects in principle, this relativism is valid only under two conditions one is it requires the tacit insistence on an absolute concept of truth, because only when one conceives of truth independently as timeless, unchanging and of the knower, the movement has a meaning that all truth is relative to a particular being capable of detection. Secondly, such relativism meaningful only on a very high level of abstraction. Whether a company to Enter the appropriate individuals of their own reality permitted or not is an empirically decidable question. Only if other than the running social theory in the sociology of knowledge, the consciousness and being as specified sizes will accepts and applies retroactively to each other, can be brought to the knowledge of relativity with its truth in such a direct relationship. Detached from the social theory, ideology is also about merely intellectual history research. The relationship between being and consciousness can then only be presented as a simple causal relationship: the proposition that social being determines consciousness, then even for all knowledge of this relationship on hold while it depended on to analyze how the social reality determines consciousness. "
ideology in the plural
is often spoken as opposed to ideology in the singular of ideologies in Plual, which different particulate ideologies such as nationalism, liberalism, socialism, etc., are meant to be different models related to each other. Another division took Kurt Lenk, between "complementary ideologies," the disadvantaged members of society are put off, "justifying ideologies," the status quo legitimacy, "obscured ideologies" and verbal ideologies, "the alleged external enemies construct" attitudes and promote.
sources including:
Enderwitz, Ulrich: What is ideology? The economics of bourgeois thought. Münster 2005th
Schnadelbach, Herbert: What is ideology? Attempt at disambiguation, in: The Lutheran educator 20th Frankfurt 1968th
Strassner, Erich: Ideology - Language - politics. Basic questions of context. Tübingen 1987.
0 comments:
Post a Comment