committing to a specific ideology is a trap
many smart ppl make the mistake of committing to one ideology and thereafter their intelligence is solely directed toward finding the best arguments to support/rationalize their chosen ideology
Conversation
Replying to
Depends on what you mean by commitment. Tacit support and identitarian clinging are not the same thing.
1
1
There's a difference between adhering to an ideology for Reasons and letting the ideology provide your Reasons for you. Latter is v. dangerous.
1
4
Replying to
the former also seems like it would almost always be toxic tho. can you elaborate on an example in which it wouldn't be? running for political office and have no chance of winning if you don't affiliate with a well-known ideology?
2
Replying to
Similarly, I don't identify as leftist, but people generally label me as such because most of my political opinions and actions converge that way.
1
Replying to
if your independently-thought-out conclusions happen to overlap a lot with a particular ideology i see no problem with that
it's when people become devotees of specific ideologies that they lose the ability to arrive at conclusions outside their ideology's accepted opinions
2
1
Replying to
Also, IMO this hard and fast relationship with ideology is itself a tool of black/white-type political radicals, and I don't approve of its use.
1
2
Replying to
interesting. you're saying you've seen (destructive?) radicals who were vocally critical of ideological possession? care to elaborate? i haven't seen this. most anyone i've ever seen speaking meta-ideologically seems clear-headed, sane, helpful
8
1
Replying to
The people who are the most critical of ideological highjacking in others, IME, are themselves tightly wound in that web - and completely unaware.
Replying to
ah, i see what you mean and have observed this behavior --- interesting. one thing that's key for me is that ideologues are quick to straw-man others as being in an opposing ideological camp, but it always goes only one way and they don't speak in meta-ideological terms
3
i.e. they don't discuss the phenomenon of ideological possession in more abstract terms or acknowledge that many ppl in all ideological camps (including their own) are caught in a dogmatic snare...
(note: using term "meta-ideological" spontaneously -- hopefully meaning is clear)