Ideology or Pragmatism or both?

Wiseone said:

................. seems to be based purely off ideology rather than pragmatism. And that's really the sticker for me, ideology is probably one of the most dangerous things that people can follow as if there's some magical set of rules that if you follow everything will turn out well in the end. I'm a pragmatist, I'm about solving problems, getting things done, and doing things that make sense without worrying about whether they pass some ideological litmus test.

Click to expand...

I thought that this would make for an excellent discussion as this is a hugely complex issue. Here everyone is talking about this parties ideology, that parties ideology, right or wrong, this is better vs that etc etc. But I don't think that I've ever seen a thread here on DP actually talking about these two things themselves. What is your take on this and how do you feel on this?

IMO they are both essential but they have to be in the right amounts as there are varying degrees in both. Too much pragmatism in our laws and they become overbearing and tyrannical. Same goes for idealogy...only it has an additional problem of also being too lax. And of course pragmatism can be based on an ideology and visa versa. I like the middle ground myself which probably is why I am an independent.

There's not that much danger of overemphasis, being that they inform each other's boundaries. The only time you'd be likely to notice any imbalance is where there exists no precedent, so the ideology is ambiguous. It's not like we leave everything to chance, especially in a legal context.

Imo, both are necessary, as pure pragmatism tends to forge a cold hard edge, and a purely ideological nature lends itself to weakness.

I will take a moderate pragmatist over an ideologue of any stripe any day.

lizzie said:

Imo, both are necessary, as pure pragmatism tends to forge a cold hard edge, and a purely ideological nature lends itself to weakness.

Click to expand...

Exactly. Ideology gives you an idea of where you want to go. Pragmatism, however; is the vehicle that's going to get you there in the first place.

One without the other tends to be rather worthless.

False dichotomy. No purism is possible here. Even science and religion observe both features of endeavour. How is ideology relevant if not framed in a pragmatic context? How about pragmatism sans objectives defined to whatever extent ideologically?

I think both are necessary. Purely ideological ideas are often not attainable or ignore human behavior. However, purely pragmatic ideas do not lead anywhere - basically, it's the old adage of "if a dog caught a postman, then what?" This being said, I think both are necessary. I often lean more ideological paths than pragmatic, but still have pragmatism included.

To me, and I think most people share this view, an ideologue is someone that adheres to their ideology as though it were religious dogma. They believe the same thing on Wednesday that they did on Monday no matter what happened on Tuesday. For example, AM Talk Radio is full of ideologues. The tea party movement is fueled by ideology as was the Occupy Movement. There are a lot of ideologues on this forum.

A pragmatist is someone that most likely has an underlining ideology, but always endeavors to evaluate the world rationally making judgments based on the best available data, willing to let go of preconceptions, and more goal oriented than bound to specific solutions. While ideologues revere philosophy, pragmatists are data junkies.

Gathomas88 said:

Exactly. Ideology gives you an idea of where you want to go. Pragmatism, however; is the vehicle that's going to get you there in the first place.

One without the other tends to be rather worthless.

Click to expand...

Well, I was thinking more of the concept of pragmatism as a means of making decisions, rather than a course of action. A pragmatic nature tends to be pretty cold, as objectivity is the guiding principle.

Pragmatism. I am very liberal, but I believe the nation should have centrist policies, thereby representing the greatest number of the people (since everyone from both 'sides' would get at least a little of what they want).

lizzie said:

Well, I was thinking more of the concept of pragmatism as a means of making decisions, rather than a course of action. A pragmatic nature tends to be pretty cold, as objectivity is the guiding principle.

Click to expand...

Ultimately, I would say that this depends upon the circumstances in question. Times of peace and plenty give a person more time and breathing room to measure their actions against the "ideal" standard their society or individual worldview happens to uphold.

In times of crisis, conflict, or scarcity, however; this isn't always possible. That is when a "hard edge" becomes necessary.

A big part of the problem our current society has, IMO, is that it doesn't seem to be able to make the shift in mindset necessary to thrive under those latter circumstances.