Bruce, you are too modest! As for the term "ideology," you will not be the first person to use it in a sense it was not originally intended to have.
Let me run through the most common meanings it has acquired, just in case this "ideology" issue should come up again.
1) As originally employed by Marx, "ideology" meant a "worldview" that was determined by economic class. In other words, if you were a bourgeois, say, you had a certain view of the world that was shaped by your class interests, and that rationalized and justified your class interests. This did not mean that you consciously developed that "ideology," or that you deliberately lied in order to advance your interests (although you may have done that, too). It meant only that you were a "creature" of your own class, and that you automatically absorbed its outlook by being born into it, as it were.
Later, this concept of "ideology" was broadened, to make it less deterministic, to make it dependent on a multitude of factors in addition to class, and to include more categories -- e.g., institutions and other social groups. (That is why we speak of "corporate culture" as having an "ideology," for example.)
The important thing to remember, however, is that the notion of "ideology" continues to include unconscious presuppositions and "attitudes," as well as consciously developed "positions" and/or "principles."
2) Consciously elaborated ideology, as in "Soviet ideology" or "Nazi ideology," etc. Here we are usually talking about an elaborate state-developed system of thought designed to explain and rationalize the power and functions of the state (and of the ruling class in that state). Theorists of revolution can also develop "ideologies" as a guide to action. Such ideologies are usually dogmaticand absolute, often abstract, but rarely realistic. (And an "ideologue" is somebody who bores us all to death by advocating some such ideology, or by presenting his/her favorite views in a sweeping, dogmatic, and tendentious manner.)
3) Ideology used as a synonym for political philosophy. Here the word designates a consciously chosen set of political principles. It is usually assumed that the "principles" alone will determine the individual's actions, that they are freely chosen, not determined in any way by his/her social origins, social and class status, profession, sex, race, religion, etc. I personally think that using "ideology" in this sense is misleading, and that it would be better to use some other term (such as political philosophy).
Finally, it is quite possible for an individual to derive his/her "ideology" from various sources. It does not have to be consistent; in fact, it can be internally contradictory, and often is.
Take the case of your businessman. He has one "ideology" in his private life. But when he goes to work, he operates on the assumptions of another ideology, which may or may not be compatible with his private ideology. If he does not notice -- or mind -- the conflict, no problem; if he does, he will be unhappy, and will probably end up resigning (if he can afford it).
Anyway, most of us, IMO, are a jumble of ideas and unconscious attitudes, taken from many sources, and I distrust attempts to jam it all into just two neat, mutually exclusive boxes.
For an idea of what is meant when we speak of business, or corporate, ideology, take a look at this book review (not the best example, just one I had handy):
info.greenwood.com
Joan
|
