Talk:Ideology/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Introducing an ArchiveBot

Sorry, I just came on to have a look after seeing the various "further explanation" citations and say walls of text dating back to 2002. Would people object to the introduction of an ArchiveBot? I will wait 48 hours for any objections before making any changes, to avoid WP:SILENT assumption. Dr Crazy 102 (talk) 01:50, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Resolved

Further explanation needed tag

I'm not convinced the sentence tagged as requiring further explanation (in the first paragraph of the article) actually needs further explanation. The sentence makes sense to me. Unless someone expresses an objection in the next couple of days, I will remove the tag. Mmyotis ^{(^^o^^)} 16:23, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Why open the lede with what Althusser thinks?

It seems odd to introduce some opaque and tendentious definition of "ideology" in the lede. What counts as ideology or ideological is contested space by nearly everyone who's written about it. Why not find a more neutral, secondary or tertiary source that defines it?50.191.21.222 (talk) 14:04, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Slavoj Zizek

This article needs an extension to include briefly the contributions of Slavoj Zizek to the analysis of ideology, particularly his book The Sublime Object of Ideology, with the relevant links to the corresponding Wikipedia entries. Feminist positions would also be enriching to the article. --130.209.113.52 (talk) 15:38, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Ideology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110701015904/http://www.ideologieforschung.de/web/Christian_Duncker.html to http://www.ideologieforschung.de/web/Christian_Duncker.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091213073427/http://ideologieforschung.de/web/Welcome.html to http://ideologieforschung.de/web/Welcome.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060711193812/http://www.philosophieportal.net/Ideologiekritik.htm to http://www.philosophieportal.net/Ideologiekritik.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:47, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Ronald Inglehart

Links have not gone right. I'm not a computer geek and not sure why. Also, how do I post a picture to illustrate this man's ideas? Crawiki (talk) 14:34, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Sociological understandings of ideology

This article is part of the WikiProject Sociology, and is currently a C-class article. Sociologists, let's "be bold" and get to work to improve the sociological content of this article. One approach might be to use some examples of ideologies and define them sociologically, e.g. sexism, racism, classism, heterosexism, and ableism.AnaSoc (talk) 20:41, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

reading no objections nearly a month later, I'm going to start working on this.AnaSoc (talk) 23:25, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

ancient?

When studying the origins of the ancient roman culture is it reasonable to conclude that the different people which formed the cradle were united by an "ideology"? It became, as I formulate it, "The great Roman Idea". History shows that it was very attractive for non-Romans but has in the end deteriorated. Cato the Elder accused "those little Greeks" to be the cause but also formulated the bad character traits in the Roman people.

145.129.136.48 (talk) 10:12, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

move text in lead/lede

I propose a major edit like this in order to address readability/clarity.

"An ideology is a set of normative beliefs and values that a person or other entity [disambiguation needed] has for non-epistemic reasons. These rely on basic assumptions about reality that may or may not have any factual basis—in these there are tenuous causal links between policies and outcomes owing to the large numbers of variables available, so that many key assumptions have to be made.

The term is especially used to describe systems of ideas and ideals which form the basis of economic or political theories and resultant policies. In political science the term is used in a descriptive sense to refer to political belief systems.

The term was coined by Antoine Destutt de Tracy during The Terror in 1796. In contemporary philosophy it is narrower in scope than that original concept, or the ideas expressed in broad concepts such as worldview, The Imaginary and in ontology."

In the sense defined by French Marxist philosopher Louis Althusser, ideology is "the imagined existence (or idea) of things as it relates to the real conditions of existence"

Currently it reads as

"An ideology is a set of normative beliefs and values that a person or other entity[disambiguation needed] has for non-epistemic reasons.[1] These rely on basic assumptions about reality that may or may not have any factual basis. The term is especially used to describe systems of ideas and ideals which form the basis of economic or political theories and resultant policies. In these there are tenuous causal links between policies and outcomes owing to the large numbers of variables available, so that many key assumptions have to be made.[2] In political science the term is used in a descriptive sense to refer to political belief systems.[3]

The term was coined by Antoine Destutt de Tracy, a French Enlightenment aristocrat and philosopher, who conceived it in 1796 as the "science of ideas" during the French Reign of Terror by trying to develop a rational system of ideas to oppose the irrational impulses of the mob. However, in contemporary philosophy it is narrower in scope than that original concept, or the ideas expressed in broad concepts such as worldview, The Imaginary and in ontology.[4]

In the sense defined by French Marxist philosopher Louis Althusser, ideology is "the imagined existence (or idea) of things as it relates to the real conditions of existence"."

(Flagrant hysterical curious (talk) 14:02, 1 November 2019 (UTC))

Ideology is a term referring to comprehensive sets or expressions of the ideas of individuals, groups or societies.

I am very rarely inclined to get involved in the many regular disputes on Wikipedia, and usually do so only when I have little or no choice in the matter, but a bit of activity on Wikiquote revising the long-standing intro there, which had been derived from previous ones here, brought me here, to at least make a few comments.

There are many other alternatives which could be devised, but at this point I strongly recommend a return to something closer to the introductory definitions or descriptions existing on Wikipedia in the summer of 2017, which grammatically deficient as some of them were, I adapted at that time to a simple one line intro to the page on Wikiquote to read:

Ideology is a term which refers to comprehensive sets of normative beliefs and expressions of the conscious and unconscious ideas of individuals, groups or societies.

Such an intro could be revised slightly, perhaps to an even simpler:

Ideology is a term referring to comprehensive sets of beliefs or expressions of the conscious and unconscious ideas of individuals, groups or societies.

OR:

Ideology is a term referring to comprehensive sets of beliefs or expressions of the ideas of individuals, groups or societies.

OR, perhaps most simply and accurately:

Ideology is a term referring to comprehensive sets or expressions of the ideas of individuals, groups or societies.

or:

Ideology is a term referring to comprehensive expressions or sets of the ideas of individuals, groups or societies.

I believe the last two forms are probably most generally preferable as a concise first line to the article, but believe any of the above are quite acceptable. Further definition and descriptions could of course be expanded or refined in various ways, as they regularly are here, but I am strongly inclined to believe that only when people are caught up in rather narrow, shallow perceptions, beliefs or values "held for reasons that are not purely epistemic" could they entirely or long approve such an introductory quasi-description as "An ideology is a set of beliefs and values attributed to a person or group of persons, especially as held for reasons that are not purely epistemic." I would also note that they would NOT actually have to embrace any particular ideologies to do that — simply all-too-common forms of obtuse obscurant pedantic pretensions or their often pernicious influences on human endeavors — or merely a few other forms of ignorance or confusion.

The current statement, as an introduction to a Wikipedia article simply does not serve to either adequately describe, limit or specify the term very clearly, or in some important ways do so at all: it could be reasonably argued that very few, if any, beliefs or values are held by human beings for reasons that are "purely epistemic", and people can certainly hold a multitude of these without having any "ideology" at all being "attributed" to them. Such is an indication of some of my not "purely epistemic" beliefs and observations, which I also believe neither merit or deserve to be identified as indicating a definite or distinct "ideology", or anything beyond a genuine affinity and concern to strive towards fairly honest precision and accuracy in descriptions and definitions, when possible.

Thus I think the title of this section would be an acceptable first line to the article. ~ ♞☤☮♌︎Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 00:49, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Isms and Schisms

"isms and schisms." See the Rastafari page for more info. Anyone else think this is appropriate? And if so, any ideas on where it might fit into the "ideology" page?

I think it's a very useful topic. (Masculinity (talk) 15:21, 24 June 2020 (UTC))

Christian Democracy

Anyone taking Christian democracy? [1] --Kaihsu 17:53, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Ideology requires beliefs

"Ideology is a term which refers to comprehensive sets of normative beliefs and expressions of the conscious and unconscious ideas of individuals, groups or societies."

Understanding requires words and phrases which support the foundation of our experiences.

Unfortunately, in contemporary discourse, ideology points towards a vast realm of information, most of which becomes immediately interpreted as having some political reference or inference.

We hinder or even cripple our discourse when we preempt the potential of our language to inform our understanding. The human experience is based upon our personal knowledge, and then our beliefs about the external world and ideas--many of which proved--or may prove--to be adaptive.

Many nations are struggling with seemingly unresolvable political conflicts which argue around ideologies as if ideologies are real phenomena rather than beliefs. We cannot succeed in our discourse if we allow our language to elude the power which beliefs have in our lives, and which can too often become conflated with knowledge and some seeming external reality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IfItsX (talk • contribs) 21:08, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Can memetics be called what ideology was meant to be in Tracy's original meaning?

Simple question, ideology was meant to be the science of ideas. While memetics is the study of memes (essentially just ideas in a social context). Would it be fair to add such a mention in See also, or somewhere else? Kanclerz K-Tech (talk) 17:13, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Social Science

social ideologies 49.146.116.28 (talk) 07:38, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Tracy's Institutional (continued)

[Napoleon] often hurled against his liberal foes in Tracy's Institutional[clarification needed].

This obscure sentence probably refers to the newly created Institut National (now Institut de France), of which Tracy was a founding associate, specifically in the in the class of the moral and political sciences.

Hopefully a native writer will sometime wikify this paragraph. Noliscient (talk) 13:45, 13 November 2023 (UTC)