• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do ideologies do more harm than good?

JC Callender

JC Callender

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
6,477
Reaction score
3,270
Location
Metro Detroit
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Most people don't fit perfectly into an ideology, but it can be a convenient way of organizing groups of ideas. Of course, once one identifies with an ideology, they're often considered an embodiment of anything and everything in that ideology even though almost no one agrees with every aspect of most ideologies, for example, Liberalism or Conservatism. And ideologies often change over time causing confusion. So, what do you think...do they do more harm than good?
 
The short answer is yes. Ideologies all illogically assume that everything fits their view.
 
JC Callender said:
Most people don't fit perfectly into an ideology, but it can be a convenient way of organizing groups of ideas. Of course, once one identifies with an ideology, they're often considered an embodiment of anything and everything in that ideology even though almost no one agrees with every aspect of most ideologies, for example, Liberalism or Conservatism. And ideologies often change over time causing confusion. So, what do you think...do they do more harm than good?
Click to expand...

As a socialist i use the ideology of socialism a nothing more than a rule of thumb, a base to start from rather than rules to be obeyed. The irony is that the right wing conservatives of america who oppose socialism in any form absolutely insist that we must follow the ideology blindly, obediently and without thinking about it.

So, my answer is yes. In the hands of those who oppose an ideology it is a harmful thing.
 
As a coherent system of ideas, an ideology is a necessary outgrowth of rationality, and as long as the capacity for critical thinking is not overridden a qualified good.
When critical thinking is barred by ideology, it becomes an unqualified evil.
 
JC Callender said:
Most people don't fit perfectly into an ideology, but it can be a convenient way of organizing groups of ideas. Of course, once one identifies with an ideology, they're often considered an embodiment of anything and everything in that ideology even though almost no one agrees with every aspect of most ideologies, for example, Liberalism or Conservatism. And ideologies often change over time causing confusion. So, what do you think...do they do more harm than good?
Click to expand...

Ideologies are platforms, and good or harm depends upon the mission of the platform. This country was founded and exists upon an ideology of liberty, one (man) one vote and the freedom to engage any path or the government. Was it good or bad do you think? Marxism likewise was an ideology based on social ownership of goods and services and the sharing benefits and responsibilities; was that a good ideology or a bad one? Or was it a good ideology led by people with bad intentions? Nazism is self explanatory.
 
soylentgreen said:
As a socialist i use the ideology of socialism a nothing more than a rule of thumb, a base to start from rather than rules to be obeyed. The irony is that the right wing conservatives of america who oppose socialism in any form absolutely insist that we must follow the ideology blindly, obediently and without thinking about it.

So, my answer is yes. In the hands of those who oppose an ideology it is a harmful thing.
Click to expand...

That is very much where I come from as well; I am primarily socialist but, if I apply socialist principles to a problem or issue and it doesn't make sense then I think again. It is the antithesis of what is being argued in other places on here regarding 'objective morality' for example; which is simply cheer leading for an ideological purity rather than a rational basis to actually organise ourselves politically and socially. As has already been said, the problem is not necessarily with ideology as an intellectual tool for grouping a set of principles so much as the tribalism that accompanies it both for and against. Try saying that Anarchism has some good ideas that we might learn from around here and you will soon find the limitations of free thought and how people are unable to detach ideas from tribes.
 
William Rea said:
That is very much where I come from as well; I am primarily socialist but, if I apply socialist principles to a problem or issue and it doesn't make sense then I think again. It is the antithesis of what is being argued in other places on here regarding 'objective morality' for example; which is simply cheer leading for an ideological purity rather than a rational basis to actually organise ourselves politically and socially. As has already been said, the problem is not necessarily with ideology as an intellectual tool for grouping a set of principles so much as the tribalism that accompanies it both for and against. Try saying that Anarchism has some good ideas that we might learn from around here and you will soon find the limitations of free thought and how people are unable to detach ideas from tribes.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I have argued in favour of anarchism, socialism and communism. Each time i meet the same obstacle of an opponent insisting that their belief of the ideology is the only ideology that counts.
 
JC Callender said:
Most people don't fit perfectly into an ideology, but it can be a convenient way of organizing groups of ideas. Of course, once one identifies with an ideology, they're often considered an embodiment of anything and everything in that ideology even though almost no one agrees with every aspect of most ideologies, for example, Liberalism or Conservatism. And ideologies often change over time causing confusion. So, what do you think...do they do more harm than good?
Click to expand...

No, they don't do more harm. Established ideologies are the representation of concerted human effort to carve a logical set of ideas out of the chaos of human thought.
 
soylentgreen said:
Agreed. I have argued in favour of anarchism, socialism and communism. Each time i meet the same obstacle of an opponent insisting that their belief of the ideology is the only ideology that counts.
Click to expand...

Which only means you have dscovered the fatal flaw of ideology. It is always based on belief, which is based on personal preference. All ideology is an illusion.
 
devildavid said:
Which only means you have dscovered the fatal flaw of ideology. It is always based on belief, which is based on personal preference. All ideology is an illusion.
Click to expand...

No, that is the fatal flaw of the person who has no idea of the ideology apart from what he has been told about it.
Ideology is not an illusion, it is a discussion point. Somewhere to begin thinking about certain ideas.

It is the person who becomes a fanatic about an ideology and will only treat it as if it is gospel, never to be changed or tampered with that the ideology then becomes something bad.
 
Ideologies are belief systems based on some observations or acts of faith which are designed to help organise the observed and chaotic world in which we live using a scaffolding-schema to filter and make sense of what is going on around us. In that sense ideologies are useful and legitimate tools for comprehending the complex world around us.

The danger comes when adherence to an ideology becomes so strong that it disables reason and empathy in the follower and then makes that follower intolerant or even potentially hostile to other ideologies or points of view. Worse still is when that adherence to one ideological position blinds a follower to even considering contradictory facts which call into question the basic tenets of the cherished ideology. That's when the trouble really starts and societal gulfs form between various ideological factions leading to inter-factional enmity, kulturkampf and potential violence. That is the illegitimate facet of the tool of ideology.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
soylentgreen said:
No, that is the fatal flaw of the person who has no idea of the ideology apart from what he has been told about it.
Ideology is not an illusion, it is a discussion point. Somewhere to begin thinking about certain ideas.

It is the person who becomes a fanatic about an ideology and will only treat it as if it is gospel, never to be changed or tampered with that the ideology then becomes something bad.
Click to expand...

You are making my case stronger. Ideology is all about rigid thinking, otherwise it is no longer an ideology.
 
Evilroddy said:
Ideologies are belief systems based on some observations or acts of faith which are designed to help organise the observed and chaotic world in which we live using a scaffolding-schema to filter and make sense of what is going on around us. In that sense ideologies are useful and legitimate tools for comprehending the complex world around us.

The danger comes when adherence to an ideology becomes so strong that it disables reason and empathy in the follower and then makes that follower intolerant or even potentially hostile to other ideologies or points of view. Worse still is when that adherence to one ideological position blinds a follower to even considering contradictory facts which call into question the basic tenets of the cherished ideology. That's when the trouble really starts and societal gulfs form between various ideological factions leading to inter-factional enmity, kulturkampf and potential violence. That is the illegitimate facet of the tool of ideology.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

Ideology is a tool best not used at all.
 
devildavid said:
You are making my case stronger. Ideology is all about rigid thinking, otherwise it is no longer an ideology.
Click to expand...

It can be. But that is the fault of the thinker, not the ideology. You might as well blame the hammer for the users sore thumb.
 
It depends on your relationship with that ideology. If you identify with an ideology because others of that ideology happen to share a lot of your views, that is fine. But if you identify with an ideology and then turn to others of that ideology to see how you should think and believe, then that is wrong.
 
soylentgreen said:
It can be. But that is the fault of the thinker, not the ideology. You might as well blame the hammer for the users sore thumb.
Click to expand...

A hammer is a limited purpose tool. An ideology is something entirely different. It requires belief in a set of ideas which may or may not match up with reality. It is entirely subjective and attempts to reduce complex reality to a particular point of view. The hammer makes no claims of being a screwdriver.
 
devildavid said:
A hammer is a limited purpose tool. An ideology is something entirely different. It requires belief in a set of ideas which may or may not match up with reality. It is entirely subjective and attempts to reduce complex reality to a particular point of view. The hammer makes no claims of being a screwdriver.
Click to expand...

The analogy represented using something badly rather than the extent to which it can be used.

One does not have ideologies of reality, one has theories of reality. Understanding of gravity becomes a theory of gravity, not an ideology of gravity.

Ideology is subjective and it is supposed to be flexible in order to accommodate the presence of reality. But when used badly it turns into a zealous belief system.

Ideology does not require a belief in any ideas, It requires a willingness to look at ideas in a positive way. But again to many use it to look at things in a bad way. The example of the right wing conservatives here who insist upon thinking up the most stupidest way of doing socialism and then insisting it has to be done that way.
 
soylentgreen said:
The analogy represented using something badly rather than the extent to which it can be used.

One does not have ideologies of reality, one has theories of reality. Understanding of gravity becomes a theory of gravity, not an ideology of gravity.

Ideology is subjective and it is supposed to be flexible in order to accommodate the presence of reality. But when used badly it turns into a zealous belief system.

Ideology does not require a belief in any ideas, It requires a willingness to look at ideas in a positive way. But again to many use it to look at things in a bad way. The example of the right wing conservatives here who insist upon thinking up the most stupidest way of doing socialism and then insisting it has to be done that way.
Click to expand...

Ideologies are subjective; gravity is not. Once an ideology becomes flexible, it is no longer an ideology, unless you call pragmatism an ideology.
 
devildavid said:
Ideology is a tool best not used at all.
Click to expand...

devildavid:

I value and respect the implied suspicion of ideologies which I detect in your cautionary advice and I support your implied reticence to dependence on others' ideologies without critical review and a willingness to set ideology aside at a certain point in life. However human use of ideologies may be unavoidable, based on our past performance as a species. Ideologies are tools, the use of which may be unavoidable, given the human organism's need to make its own sense out of a world which does not function on and defies any sensible principles usually. They probably can't be avoided and are if used properly a useful stepping-stone towards gaining enough personal understanding (albeit an ersatz and thoroughly bio--centric understanding) to begin to analyse the chaotic interpersonal and societal currents churning around us. As long as ideology is subservient to reason and empathy, it is fine.

The moment ideology becomes dominant and the ideological adherent submits uncritically to the tenets of the ideology without reasonable review and basic human empathy is when the ideology derails the human's quest for understanding and replaces it with slavish supplication to an external code of thought and implied behaviour. Human's have the gift of the capacity of reason bestowed upon them by chance or divine providence and they must use that reason as best they can to make their way through life. They also have the capacity for empathy which acts as a buffer to temper extremism, fundamentalism and misbehaviour in a social context. Ideology, as a useful stepping-stone, allows human's to develop their own mental schema by borrowing from others' until each rational and sane human can stand on their own and supplant others' ideologies with their own reason-based understanding tempered by empathy. Of course this does not apply to irrational or insane humans but does apply to the majority of us, most of the time.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
Last edited:
Evilroddy said:
devildavid:

I value and respect the implied suspicion of ideologies which I detect in your cautionary advice and I support your implied reticence to dependence on others' ideologies without critical review and a willingness to set ideology aside at a certain point in life. However human use of ideologies may be unavoidable, based on our past performance as a species. Ideologies are tools, the use of which may be unavoidable, given the human organism's need to make its own sense out of a world which does not function on and defies any sensible principles usually. They probably can't be avoided and are if used properly a useful stepping-stone towards gaining enough personal understanding (albeit an ersatz and thoroughly bio--centric understanding) to begin to analyse the chaotic interpersonal and societal currents churning around us. As long as ideology is subservient to reason and empathy, it is fine.

The moment ideology becomes dominant and the ideological adherent submits uncritically to the tenets of the ideology without reasonable review and basic human empathy is when the ideology derails the human's quest for understanding and replaces it with slavish supplication to an external code of thought and implied behaviour. Human's have the gift of the capacity of reason bestowed upon them by chance or divine providence and they must use that reason as best they can to make their way through life. They also have the capacity for empathy which acts as a buffer to temper extremism, fundamentalism and misbehaviour in a social context. Ideology, as a useful stepping-stone, allows human's to develop their own mental schema by borrowing from others' until each rational and sane human can stand on their own and supplant others' ideologies with their own reason-based understanding tempered by empathy. Of course this does not apply to irrational or insane humans but does apply to the majority of us, most of the time.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

I think the dangers far outweigh any perceived benefits. But most people don't really understand or embrace specific ideologies. Ideology is normally the tool of those in power, used as a tool to keep order. it is normally implemented crudely and in broad strokes, so as not to confuse people. Mostly it is used to appeal to emotions, and not to be examined too deeply.
 
devildavid said:
Ideologies are subjective; gravity is not. Once an ideology becomes flexible, it is no longer an ideology, unless you call pragmatism an ideology.
Click to expand...

True which is why we theories about reality and not ideologies.

Ideologies should always be flexible. they need to be able to change if the circumstances change. It is only when you rigidly adhere to an ideology and ignore the changes happening that you start to have a problem with an ideology.

You are expresing the problem with ideologies. The belief that they are fixed.

Christianity is a good example. There are theists who look at the world around them and change the chiristian ideology to fit. So we do get christians who accept gays and gay marriage. Then there are the other christians who have a fixed ideology and ignore everything that might contradict it such as good arguments and evidence that homosexuality causes no more harm than heterosexuality.
 
soylentgreen said:
True which is why we theories about reality and not ideologies.

Ideologies should always be flexible. they need to be able to change if the circumstances change. It is only when you rigidly adhere to an ideology and ignore the changes happening that you start to have a problem with an ideology.

You are expresing the problem with ideologies. The belief that they are fixed.

Christianity is a good example. There are theists who look at the world around them and change the chiristian ideology to fit. So we do get christians who accept gays and gay marriage. Then there are the other christians who have a fixed ideology and ignore everything that might contradict it such as good arguments and evidence that homosexuality causes no more harm than heterosexuality.
Click to expand...

Ideologies are fixed. That is what makes them ideologies. Flexible realism is not an ideology.

Christians can pick and choose what is sinful behavior, but then claiming to be a Christian loses all meaning. Can a Christian decide murder is ok and still be a christian? Can a communist use capitalistic means to be a communist?
 
devildavid said:
Ideologies are fixed. That is what makes them ideologies. Flexible realism is not an ideology.

Christians can pick and choose what is sinful behavior, but then claiming to be a Christian loses all meaning. Can a Christian decide murder is ok and still be a christian? Can a communist use capitalistic means to be a communist?
Click to expand...

The core ideology is fixed. What marx said about communism, he said. That is in the past and no one can change that. But it is nothing more than zealous fanaticism to adhere to the words without question. If anyone does adhere to the word without question then it is no longer an ideology but instead a dogma.

And yes, christians can and do murder in the name of their god. Christians in today's world are giving up on fixed religions and choosing to decide for themselves how to interpret christianity. Only the die hard extremists insist that they are fake christians. And yes communists do use capitalists means any coop where the workers own and profit from their own labour is an example of that.
 
soylentgreen said:
The core ideology is fixed. What marx said about communism, he said. That is in the past and no one can change that. But it is nothing more than zealous fanaticism to adhere to the words without question. If anyone does adhere to the word without question then it is no longer an ideology but instead a dogma.

And yes, christians can and do murder in the name of their god. Christians in today's world are giving up on fixed religions and choosing to decide for themselves how to interpret christianity. Only the die hard extremists insist that they are fake christians. And yes communists do use capitalists means any coop where the workers own and profit from their own labour is an example of that.
Click to expand...

Your examples are not ideologies at all, but pragmatism. Let's be Christian except when we don't want to be. Let's be communists except when we don't want to be. The more you do that, the less there is an identifiable ideology at work.
 
devildavid said:
Your examples are not ideologies at all, but pragmatism. Let's be Christian except when we don't want to be. Let's be communists except when we don't want to be. The more you do that, the less there is an identifiable ideology at work.
Click to expand...

No, that is you being dogmatic. Christian or communist ideology says one thing and unless someone sticks to that then for you they are not doing that ideology. But for them they have taken that ideology and asked themselves how they can fit it into their reality. What do they need from that ideology and what can be discarded. And that is the way ideologies should be treated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom