The Elements of the Concept of Ideology
TL;DR: The authors identified 27 definitional components or "elements" which are discussed in turn to ascertain their utility and coherence as definitional criteria, and built them into a definition which allows consideration of the expressive and justificatory dimension of beliefs often ignored in other definitions.
Abstract: This article, based upon an extensive examination of the literature on the concept of ideology, identifies some 27 definitional components or ‘elements' which are discussed in turn to ascertain their utility and coherence as definitional criteria. On the basis of this examination a number of these elements are found to be essential to the concept, and are built into a definition which allows consideration of, among other things, the expressive and justificatory dimension of beliefs often ignored in other definitions.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: The concept of ideology has been studied extensively in the social sciences as mentioned in this paper, with many definitions of ideology circulating within the field of social sciences in the postwar decades, including those of Campbell et al. (1960), Converse (1964), and McClosky (1964).
Abstract: What does "ideology" mean? As a preliminary step to answering this muchasked question, I collected what seemed to be the most thoughtful and/or influential definitions circulating within the social sciences in the postwar decades. 1 A quick perusal of these definitions reveals the extent to which ideology remains a highly flexible conceptual tool (see Table 1). One is struck not only by the cumulative number of different attributes that writers find essential, but by their more than occasional contradictions. To some, ideology is dogmatic, while to others it carries connotations of political sophistication; to some it refers to dominant modes of thought, and to others it refers primarily to those most alienated by the status quo (e.g., revolutionary movements and parties). To some it is based in the concrete interests of a social class, while to others it is characterized by an absence of economic self-interest. One could continue, but the point is already apparent: not only is ideology farflung, it also encompasses a good many definitional traits which are directly at odds with one another. Indeed, it has become customary to begin any discussion of ideology with some observation concerning its semantic promiscuity.2 Few concepts in the social science lexicon have occasioned so much discussion, so much disagreement, and so much selfconscious discussion of the disagreement, as "ideology." Condemned time and again for its semantic excesses, for its bulbous unclarity, the concept of ideology remains, against all odds, a central term of social science discourse. How, then, are we to understand this semantic confusion, and how are we to deal with it? Five common approaches can be identified among writers in the social sciences: operationalization, terminological reshuffling, intellectual history, etiology and multivocality. In the following section, I outline each of these endeavors and demonstrate their limitations. I then proceed to a new approach which comprehensively maps the meanings of ideology onto a single, reasonably concise, semantic grid. I conclude with a brief discussion of "core" meanings for ideology, and a plea for context-dependent methods of definition. COMMON APPROACHES 1. Operationalization Among those who study "behavior" in American politics, discussion of ideology has centered on a single empirical question: how ideological is the mass public (compared, that is, with political elites)? There have been a good many twists and turns in this debate since it was introduced by Campbell et al. (1960), McClosky et al. (1960), Converse (1964), and McClosky (1964). But the debate over the ideological proclivities of the mass public does not seem much closer to resolution today than it did in the 1960s.3 The reason for this lack of resolution has something to do with problems of data incommensurability through time and differing methods of operationalizing variables, as generally recognized. Less often recognized are the various problems of definition inherent in the concept of ideology. Is an "ideological" mode of thought characterized by abstraction, internal consistency, external contrast, endurance through time, rationality, sophistication, a hierarchical ordering of idea-elements, parsimony-or some combination of these characteristics? Is it separate from group affiliation and/or party affiliation? Such questions, which merely scratch the surface of scholarly debate among behavioralists, are "definitional" in the sense that no answer can claim a priori precedence over another. Each definitional attribute may, of course, be operationalized in different ways, raising a second tier of disputes. Indeed, some writers take the position that definitional tasks are contained within-and rightfully subservient to-tasks of operationalization. "It matters primarily not what you call it, but how you measure it," is the implicit approach of many behavioralists. Although there is surely much to be said for a pragmatic/ empirical approach to concept definition, this has not proven an entirely successful strategy in the instant case. …
391 citations
Cites background from "The Elements of the Concept of Ideo..."
...Rather, I shall set forth two general arguments that should 11 See, e.g., Converse (1964), Hamilton (1987), Huaco (1971), Mannheim (1960), Sartori (1969), Seliger (1976). at East China Normal University on October 13, 2012prq.sagepub.comDownloaded from 966 serve to delimit the process of concept…...
[...]
...2 See, e.g., Bennett (1977), Burks (1949), Converse (1964), Eagleton (1991), Goldie (1989), Hamilton (1987), Huaco (1971), Knight (1990), Lane (1962), Larrain (1979), Lichtheim (1967), McLellan (1986), Mullins (1972), Naess et al. (1956), Plamenatz (1970), Putnam (1971), Roucek (1944), Sartori…...
[...]
...The selection of other elements on the basis of reasoned argument will then fix the limits or boundaries of the concept" (Hamilton 1987: 19; emphasis added)....
[...]
...…is defined by its &dquo;facticity&dquo; Unlike other types of communication, ideology makes statements with truthclaims- ideas which &dquo;purport to be factual, and also carry a more or less explicit evaluation of the &dquo;facts&dquo; (Ashford 1972: 26; see also Birnbaum 1960: 91; Hamilton 1987)....
[...]
...&dquo; This also replicates the sense of one of Mannheim’s (1960; quoted in Hamilton 1987: 21) basic definitions of ideology-as &dquo;the total structure of the mind of an epoch or class....
[...]
Book•
13 Feb 2012TL;DR: The second edition of Gerring's exceptional textbook has been thoroughly revised in this second edition as discussed by the authors, which offers a one-volume introduction to social science methodology relevant to the disciplines of anthropology, economics, history, political science, psychology and sociology.
Abstract: John Gerring's exceptional textbook has been thoroughly revised in this second edition. It offers a one-volume introduction to social science methodology relevant to the disciplines of anthropology, economics, history, political science, psychology and sociology. This new edition has been extensively developed with the introduction of new material and a thorough treatment of essential elements such as conceptualization, measurement, causality and research design. It is written for students, long-time practitioners and methodologists and covers both qualitative and quantitative methods. It synthesizes the vast and diverse field of methodology in a way that is clear, concise and comprehensive. While offering a handy overview of the subject, the book is also an argument about how we should conceptualize methodological problems. Thinking about methodology through this lens provides a new framework for understanding work in the social sciences.
288 citations
TL;DR: The authors identify philosophical debates about justice between globalists and statists and between universalists and contextualists as raw material that political entrepreneurs active in the public sphere can draw upon and identify four major bones of contention that could provide the core of such ideological underpinning: the permeability of borders; the allocation of authority between levels; the normative dignity of communities; and the patterns of justification.
Abstract: Economic, cultural and political systems formerly bounded by the borders of nation states are increasingly globalized. Politicians, civil society and other societal actors engage in publically debating issues related to globalization. Whether conflicts consolidate to form a stable cleavage depends among other factors on the extent to which they become ideologically underpinned. As the basis for such an underpinning, we identify philosophical debates about justice between globalists and statists and between universalists and contextualists as raw material that political entrepreneurs active in the public sphere can draw upon. On this basis, we identify four major bones of contention that could provide the core of such ideological underpinning: the permeability of borders; the allocation of authority between levels; the normative dignity of communities; and the patterns of justification. One ideal typical combination of those four components can be labelled cosmopolitanism—combining arguments from g...
111 citations
01 Jun 2019
TL;DR: The authors presents a comprehensive and up-to-date analysis of how economic, cultural and political globalization have transformed democratic politics, and offers a fresh perspective on the rise of populism based on analyses of public and elite opinion and party politics as well as mass media debates on climate change, human rights, migration, regional integration and trade in the USA, Germany, Poland, Turkey and Mexico.
Abstract: Citizens, parties and movements are increasingly contesting issues connected to globalization, such as whether to welcome immigrants, promote free trade and support international integration. The resulting political fault line, precipitated by a deepening rift between elites and mass publics, has created the space for the rise of populism. Responding to these issues and debates, this book presents a comprehensive and up-to-date analysis of how economic, cultural and political globalization have transformed democratic politics. This study offers a fresh perspective on the rise of populism based on analyses of public and elite opinion and party politics, as well as mass media debates on climate change, human rights, migration, regional integration and trade in the USA, Germany, Poland, Turkey and Mexico. Furthermore, it considers similar conflicts taking place within the European Union and the United Nations. Appealing to political scientists, sociologists and international relations scholars, this book is also an accessible introduction to these debates for undergraduate and masters students.
109 citations
TL;DR: The authors explored the ideological currents emerging within the contested idea of global citizenship in public discourse by focusing on how this term has been deployed within the educational arena, arguing that public discourse related to global citizenship does not yet validate a prospective ideology such as "globalism" but does illustrate how established ideologies, most notably liberalism in its plural forms, are adapting alongside increasing public recognition of global interdependence.
Abstract: This article explores the ideological currents emerging within the contested idea of global citizenship in public discourse by focusing on how this term has been deployed within the educational arena. In educational initiatives across the English-speaking world, ‘global citizenship’ is aligned with four ideological constellations: moral cosmopolitanism, liberal multiculturalism, neoliberalism and environmentalism. Identifying and examining some of the more prominent strains of thinking within educational programs for global citizenship contributes to ongoing debates about whether a new, distinct and globally-oriented ideology might be emerging. This article maintains that public discourse related to global citizenship in education does not yet validate a prospective ideology such as ‘globalism’ but does illustrate how established ideologies, most notably liberalism in its plural forms, are adapting alongside increasing public recognition of global interdependence.
100 citations
Cites background from "The Elements of the Concept of Ideo..."
...and/or aimed at justifying a particular pattern of conduct, which its proponents seek to promote, realize, pursue or maintain.(3)...
[...]
References
More filters
Book•
01 Jan 1980
TL;DR: The Dominant Ideology Thesis has generated controversy since first publication and has also been widely accepted as a major critical appraisal of one central theoretical concern within modern Marxism and an important contribution to the current debate about the functions of ideology in social life as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: As a radical critique of theoretical sociological orthodoxy, The Dominant Ideology Thesis has generated controversy since first publication. It has also been widely accepted, however, as a major critical appraisal of one central theoretical concern within modern Marxism and an important contribution to the current debate about the functions of ideology in social life.
576 citations
TL;DR: The question of whether conservative political thought has a place in America today depends upon the general nature of conservatism as an ideology: its distinguishing characteristics, its substance, and the conditions under which it arises as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: Does conservative political thought have a place in America today? The answer to this question depends upon the general nature of conservatism as an ideology: its distinguishing characteristics, its substance, and the conditions under which it arises. By ideology I mean a system of ideas concerned with the distribution of political and social values and acquiesced in by a significant social group. Interpretations of the role and relevance of conservative thought on the contemporary scene vary greatly. Underlying the debate, however, are three broad and conflicting conceptions of the nature of conservatism as an ideology. This essay deals with the relative merits of these concepts.
226 citations
TL;DR: This paper examined the meaning of the term "ideology" and the shifting status of the phenomenon itself, granted that a propensity so widespread as the duplication and distortion of reality in thought lends itself to the historical approach.
Abstract: Few concepts play a larger part in present-day discussions of historical and political topics than does that of ideology, and yet it is not always clear what meaning is applied to the term by those who employ it. Even if one confines one's attention to the utterances of sociologists and historians, leaving out of account the terminological misuse seemingly inseparable from ordinary political discourse, it is apparent that different and conflicting meanings are intended by writers who casually refer to the "ideology" of this or that political movement. From the vulgar misunderstanding inherent in the familiar phrase "we need a better ideology to fight the enemy", to the refinements of academic dispute over "the ideology of science", one encounters a terminological vagueness which appears to reflect some deeper uncertainty about the status of ideas in the genesis of historical movements. It is here intended to clarify the theme by examining the different significations attached to the term "ideology", and the shifting status of the phenomenon itself, granted that a propensity so widespread as the duplication and distortion of reality in thought lends itself to the historical approach. If this initial assumption is allowed to pass as a working hypothesis, it is hoped that the term "ideology" will be shown to possess both a definite meaning and a particular historical status: the history of the concept serving as a guide to the actual interplay of "real" and "ideal" factors whose dialectic is obscurely intended in the formulation of the concept itself. The subject has recently been dealt with by, among others, Mr. Ben Halpern ("'Myth' and 'Ideology' in Modern Usage", History and Theory, I, 2, 1961, 129-149). In what follows it is not proposed to take issue with his analysis, but to pursue a line of thought suggested by the present author's concern with the manner in which the ideology concept relates to what is usually known as the "philosophy of history", notably in its Hegelian form.
200 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that the concept of ideology does not provide criteria for distinguishing ideological thought from non-ideological thought, and thus it fails to achieve empirical relevance.
Abstract: Although the term “ideology” is ubiquitous in modern political discourse, it is used in diverse and usually ambiguous ways which limit its value as an analytical concept. The main ambiguity arises from the fact that, as most writers use it, the concept of ideology does not provide criteria for distinguishing ideological thought from nonideological thought. Lacking this power to make concrete discriminations, the concept fails to achieve empirical relevance. This paper attempts to remedy that deficiency and save the concept of ideology for the explanation of politics. The problem of conceptualization is approached by viewing ideology primarily as a cultural phenomenon. As such, it is argued, ideology has characteristics that distinguish it from other symbol systems. Of special importance in this regard is the identification of basic differentia between ideology on the one hand, and myth and Utopia (with which ideology is often confused) on the other. The features of ideology identified in this comparative analysis are then discussed in fuller detail with a view to understanding (1) the significance of ideology in politics, and (2) the way in which the concept of ideology can help us to understand politics, insofar as politics involves ideology.
164 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors proposed a method to improve the quality of the information provided by the user by using the information gathered from the user's own data, such as: Став о господствующего класса в дддержании ста-�ильност
Abstract: Книга содержит критику распространенного в неомарксизме “тезиса о господствующей идеологии” (ТГИ), в котором преувеличивается роль идеологии господствующего класса в поддержании стабильности социального порядка. Как показывают авторы, ТГИ в различных его вариациях характерен не только для взглядов большинства неомарксистов (от Грамши до Альтюссера и Хабермаса), но и для академической социологии, особенно в структурно-функционалистском ее варианте (концепция “общей культуры”). Привлекая эмпирический материал, относящийся к обществам феодализма, раннего капитализма и позднего капитализма, авторы демонстрируют несостоятельность ТГИ. Аберкоромби, Тернер и Хилл призывают вернуться к аутентичным взглядам Маркса, Дюркгейма и Вебера на проблему социального порядка. Стабильность социального порядка, по их мнению, лучше объясняется не принятием большинством членов общества ценностей и верований господствующей идеологии, а такими факторами, как политическое и экономическое принуждение.
127 citations