March 15, 2003
Ideology is a Dirty Word
In the previous introductory column, I said that The Agnostic Engineer was, first, about "striving to understand how the world works, uncolored as much as possible by ideological preconceptions of how it should work". Let's look a little closer at that business about "ideological preconceptions".
It's impossible to avoid altogether being influenced by ideological preconceptions. For all of us, there are beliefs we've simply picked up, by "osmosis", from the culture around us. That's fine, because if we tried to question everything, we'd never get anywhere. A key role of culture is to distill the experience of our forebearers into wisdom that is passed on to future generations. There's a difference, though, between accepting what your culture hands you in the spirit of a "working hypothesis", vs. treating it as a kind of "revealed wisdom". The latter is an easy trap to fall into, because another role of culture is to serve as a kind of glue for knitting societies together. To question the common social wisdom is to threaten the cohesion that societies depend upon for surviving conflict with other societies. Questioning may be tolerated at times when the society is feeling reasonably secure, but at other times it can end up getting one burned at the stake.
The same dynamic of defining and cementing a group operates with political ideologies--which are, after all, a form of culture. Political ideologies, however, tend to start out as deliberate constructions by a charismatic founder. They enshrine the founder's theories about how society operates, or should operate. The theories may be more or less insightful, but once put forth, they become accepted more on the basis of reverence for the founder as a leader and source of group identity rather than on the basis of logical examination and testing. The role of political culture as social glue trumps its role as a vehicle for passing acquired wisdom.
It's easy to see the effect of ideological bias and its damaging effect on knowledge in the history of communism. Marx developed theories of economics and social evolution that were intended to be "scientific". They contained sufficient insight that they still exert a strong influence on those who study his writings. But they were premised on a very flawed understanding of human behavior and the dynamics of institutions. Marx and those who followed him never realized how unworkable the doctrine of "from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs" really was.
---
To the extent that they proceed from belief, and allow (or demand!) that belief to color what their adherents are able or willing to perceive of the world, ideologies are bad news. The universe is what it is, and cares nothing about anybody's ideology. If you have any interest in understanding the world, you must start from a position that values truth above hallowed belief. Theorize to you heart's content, but be prepared to test your theories and discard or revise, when they disagree with evidence. An uncomfortable truth is preferable to a comfortable falsehood, because it is a foundation on which it is possible to build. You can't build anything durable on a foundation of falsehood.