Can we separate science from ideology?
Science and ideology use different interpretations of similar thought processes, yet attempting to achieve the same goal in the end. I think the old saying is many “different” roads lead to Rome, yet they all get there eventually. Whether or not we separate science from ideology depends on several things, as both have the ability to change over time with its individual answers. Neither are black and white in their content–ideology is a collection of ideas, while science is a collection of data based on ideas, forming new ideas for new collections of data—and so on.
Prior to the Middle Ages and the 1700s, the terms science and ideology were entirely different, but as both fields evolved into the scientific methods, the early English definition of acquiring science through knowledge was based on the Aristotelian concepts, yet in contrast philosophy was divided up into two divisions—natural and moral philosophy. By the late 1700s, the term “ideology” was termed for the first time by Destutt de Tracy, referring to his science of ideas while Hippolyte Taine describes ideology as a method of teaching philosophy by the methods of Socratic. In the 1800s, the scientific field became totally separate from the fields of ideology and philosophy, with science and technology even more separate.
Intermingling in their own way for hundreds of years as different as they both are, the fields of science and ideology have been used in our search for the endless quest of knowledge. When Mary Midgley said, “Before human beings can change their behavior, they have to change their way of thinking,” it took the scientific view that other beings and animals on Earth were unthinking and unfeeling, with humanistic ideology changing this brutal sort of thinking into that where animals are gathering more support for their care and way of living compared to case after case of severe child abuse and childhood sexual traumas slipping through endless bureaucratic cracks of society. Requiring a balance of both thought processes, ideology seems to be a system of abstract thought where a change in society is sought, developing a pendulum which swings back and forth from one extreme to another. This extreme is similar to the Bell Curve, where it takes one end of almost wanton neglect to achieve the desire of change to occur.
Ideology brings about change through thoughts and the philosophy of the human mind and behavior, as in the above scenario. But without science, it would be nothing as change needs to be studied—looked at—deciphered—absorbed—and then gather the scientific data that is accurate with as few errors as possible. In fact, the less errors that occurs in science the better the process of ideology has a chance of making accurate change. Was the change needed? Was it interpreted correctly? Were the studies and research run correctly? If so, then success can shake hands with both field, doing their job with one end result.
This entry was posted on Sunday, June 29th, 2008 at 2:45 am and is filed under Public Relations. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
