Ideology at work in society

Which is precisely why the good old closet Nietzschean Slavoj Zizek does NOT speak of philosophy (he would agree that philosophy never really dictated anything) but instead speaks of IDEOLOGY. And as any good Nietzschean he describes and exposes ideology, not proposes it. For example by looking for how Ideology glued Salinist Soviet Union together and then glued contemporary Europe or America together. This is how it works, this is why we do the things we do instead of doing what we say we should do. Et cetera. I frankly don't see the opposition between Zizek and Rorty on this matter, but then I also believe that the supposed opposition between Hegel and Nietzsche is nonsensical too. Our latest favorite Eva Illouz is also a social critic describing Ideology at work, especially how Psychologism has taken center stage in contemporary culture and thereby has become an incredibly strong ideological factor.
Mehr Afzoon
Alexander

2010/8/17 Special Kain

Frankly, I don't subscribe to the heavy use of post-this and post-that anyway. ;-)
So how does language "actually function", then? There's a variety of explanations and attempts at grasping the essence of language. Just pick the one that suits you best. It's like wearing a dress (and that's why Peirce was right about the similarity between philosophy and the world of fashion).
I'm not totally against Zizek's suspicions, but I don't share his paranoia. The fact that we don't live in a post-ideological society does not necessarily mean that philosophy was the one single and supreme adhesive gluing absolutely everything together. I don't see philosophy on top of it all. Modern societies are far more complex than that.


Ushta,
Dino

--- Alexander Bard schrieb am Mo, 16.8.2010:

Von: Alexander Bard
Betreff: [Ushta] Mazdayasna vs Zoroastrianism (Comparisons of The Mazdaist, Jafareyite and Parsi views)
An: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
Datum: Montag, 16. August, 2010 11:22 Uhr


In that case, I'm a pragmatist who agrees with Zizek on this issue. Just as Nietzsche would. Or call me post-pragmatist if you like.

Or rather: This is where it would be wise for pragmatists to not ignore the wisdom of Hegel.
Otherwise they risk getting too naive about how language actually functions. Too autistic.
Ushta
Alexander

2010/8/16 Special Kain

Dear Alexander
"Livsåskådning" is "Lebenseinstellung" in German: one's attitude towards life that shapes our feelings, thoughts, words and actions.
It is exactly Richard Rorty who rejected the idea that philosophy was at the innermost core of our lives (please also see Martin Heidegger). And it is Slavoj Zizek who strongly rejected Rorty's stance for ignoring the ideology at work in an allegedly post-ideological society. So the two thinkers take a radically different stance.

Ushta,
Dino

--- Alexander Bard schrieb am Mo, 16.8.2010:

Von: Alexander Bard
Betreff: [Ushta] Mazdayasna vs Zoroastrianism (Comparisons of The Mazdaist, Jafareyite and Parsi views)
An: Ushta@yahoogroups.com
Datum: Montag, 16. August, 2010 10:15 Uhr


Dear Friends

Swedish has a beautiful word "livsåskådning" (I believe there is a similar word in German, perhaps Dino can help us with that?) which perfectly illustrates what Zoroastrianism or Mazdayasna is to me. Unfortunately the word can not be translated to English (freely translated the word would mean somehting akin to "having and oracticing a view on the conditions of existence". The problem here is not our concept of what Mazdayasna is or should be but rather the Ebnlish language's lack of vocabulary to describe our ambition.

And I must disagree there can be a society without philosophy: As Slavoj Zizek has explained and proven: There is always an IDEOLOGY at work in any given society, a matrix of ideas that dominate (precisely through vocabulary), and what is an ideology if not a philosophy, but merely STRONGER by operating as subconscious rather than conscious. So we can live in a society without a conscious philosophy but then only even more controlled by subconscious philosophy or rather ideology. Supersitition is the most perfect example of such subconscious philosophy. What we are doing by giving a vocabulary to philosophy (which is what Rorty would mean is the art of philosophy) is actually to DISTANCE ourselves from ideas that control us uncritically.

Ushta
Alexander

2010/8/13 Parviz Varjavand

Dear Jehan and Dino,

Spirituality connotes the existence of a spirit often perceived as separate from the body, something i do not believe in. Religion on the other hand was a bonding between men, but Agustin turned it into a bonding of men and God. I believe in Religion (Relegare) in its original implication, I share a religion between you, Dino, Alex, Arthur, and many others because we have come to like one another and some kind of a "bond" has been created between us. That "bond" I call Religion.

We are very lucky because our Zoroastrian religion does not have a chain of authority that must be obeyed, so I feel very at ease sailing my ship under that flag.

Parviz