21–30 of 43 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
religion is a facet, or component of ideology.
I would not describe the defining parts of buddhism as ideological so much as philosophical and sensuous. I’m not sure a good definition of religion exists. You’re being hugey reductive.
If you remove all the cosmology and mysticism from Buddhism, you are left with something other than the original practice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
zizek says that the book of job is the first critique of ideology, and he calls himself a christian atheist because he thinks becoming an atheist is only possible by going through christianity. so you have it exactly backwards. or maybe not, who the hell knows with hegelians.
Do you know where he writes about that? I'd be interested to read more.
Understanding how modern philosophy understands ideology is important. I bemoan hearing american-liberals discuss how people don't, " share common truth " anymore. In reality this is a decoupling of the DNC, and RNC's ideology. They are no longer one and the same, so what is considered " true " by either has changed, irreparably. The problem is most Americans politics had a unified ideological understanding of the wo…
> I bemoan hearing american-liberals discuss how people don't... I think the point is that "bemoaning" that is an ideology in itself. So your own reality is "augmented" with a belief set that is, likely, not terribly representative of reality. You've simply filled in the gaps in everyday experiences with something that you can, at once, understand, and is comfortable to you.
My theory here is really sloppy, but in this topic I think there are two concepts worth examining: * Baudrillard's ideas on the hyperreality , which is basically a simulation that doesn't actually relate to any underlying reality. He argued that a lot of the signs and symbols in our postmodern society have become hyperreal, purely manufactured artifacts. * Deleuze's concept of virtuality which he defines as something…
I think as we go along, a lot of Baudrilliard's ideas that seemed radical in the 1980s are becoming inert, as they are so ingrained in our everyday experience (eg, hyper-reality, the simulacra, etc). At least in this iteration of the technology. Moving into mass-scale mixed reality environments will be an entirely different proposition.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I bemoan hearing american-liberals discuss how people don't... I think the point is that "bemoaning" that is an ideology in itself. So your own reality is "augmented" with a belief set that is, likely, not terribly representative of reality. You've simply filled in the gaps in everyday experiences with something that you can, at once, understand, and is comfortable to you.
I bemoan the ideology of others, and you bemoan mine. Perchance we’ve more in common then you would think.
This would be true of ALL ideologues. That's my point. In my opinion, nearly every human on Earth, is likely an ideologue. And this model, or analogy, of AR as ideology, is a pretty good representation of that state of affairs.
Understanding how modern philosophy understands ideology is important. I bemoan hearing american-liberals discuss how people don't, " share common truth " anymore. In reality this is a decoupling of the DNC, and RNC's ideology. They are no longer one and the same, so what is considered " true " by either has changed, irreparably. The problem is most Americans politics had a unified ideological understanding of the wo…
My theory here is really sloppy, but in this topic I think there are two concepts worth examining: * Baudrillard's ideas on the hyperreality , which is basically a simulation that doesn't actually relate to any underlying reality. He argued that a lot of the signs and symbols in our postmodern society have become hyperreal, purely manufactured artifacts. * Deleuze's concept of virtuality which he defines as something…