Our studies about safety in society lead us to the most popular book by Karl Mannheim： Ideology and Utopia. This work envisages the discrepancies between social knowledge and the material world itself. The crucial co...Our studies about safety in society lead us to the most popular book by Karl Mannheim： Ideology and Utopia. This work envisages the discrepancies between social knowledge and the material world itself. The crucial conclusion reads as follows： Our image of reality is mostly based on our interests and desires and does not rely on thorough research. There are two types of such representations： utopia and ideology. The first of them, less interesting for us, is the type of ideas which can revolutionize a social being. The second one is a particular set of visions which can never be realized but on the other hand they act as common knowledge （general knowledge of the world）--stabilizing the social structure by presenting it with a holistic image of the world. Taking the above into consideration, how is it possible that representations, being so distant from reality （creating a completely separate ＂world＂）, basically enable efficient functioning in it？ Ideology, being the foundation of the society＇s functioning space, should always be tautological, in the sense that for the participants of the given world＇s image （creation as it is）, it should define the being in a comprehensive and adequate way （in Thomas Aquinas spirit）. What is more, it would always be true. We should also mention that the main tools of ideology, understood this way, are specific definitions and the extrapolation of sense. The purpose of this lecture is to prove that it is possible for ideology to come to life, only when the individuals who acknowledge it will consider their image of reality proper. The above ideological system should be understood as the obviousness of description of the surrounding world which in return makes unreflective functioning in reality possible. This obviousness of the presented world will be referred to as social safety.展开更多
Mainstream ideology is closely related with the innovation system of Chinese philosophy and social sciences. Innovation in mainstream ideology research is of theoretical and practical significance to contemporary Chin...Mainstream ideology is closely related with the innovation system of Chinese philosophy and social sciences. Innovation in mainstream ideology research is of theoretical and practical significance to contemporary China, and constitutes a precondition for the establishment of an innovation system of Chinese philosophy and social sciences. Innovation in mainstream ideology research involves three important aspects. First, we should innovate mainstream ideology research in terms of the pattem of civilizations, that is, to grasp the historical continuity and cultural identity of mainstream ideology and oppose historical nihilism and revivalism. Second, we should adopt an inclusive approach to mainstream ideology research to bring in different perspectives and enrich the content of research, and to optimize its guiding role and overcome both ideological arrogance and ideological aphasia. And third, we must be open-minded in carrying out a comparative analysis of mainstream ideologies of other countries. In exchanges with and learning from other countries, we should protect the safety of mainstream Chinese ideology and avoid both self-contained isolationism and a blind worship of foreign things. In this way, we can develop a new ideological culture that is worthy of our times.展开更多
文摘Our studies about safety in society lead us to the most popular book by Karl Mannheim： Ideology and Utopia. This work envisages the discrepancies between social knowledge and the material world itself. The crucial conclusion reads as follows： Our image of reality is mostly based on our interests and desires and does not rely on thorough research. There are two types of such representations： utopia and ideology. The first of them, less interesting for us, is the type of ideas which can revolutionize a social being. The second one is a particular set of visions which can never be realized but on the other hand they act as common knowledge （general knowledge of the world）--stabilizing the social structure by presenting it with a holistic image of the world. Taking the above into consideration, how is it possible that representations, being so distant from reality （creating a completely separate ＂world＂）, basically enable efficient functioning in it？ Ideology, being the foundation of the society＇s functioning space, should always be tautological, in the sense that for the participants of the given world＇s image （creation as it is）, it should define the being in a comprehensive and adequate way （in Thomas Aquinas spirit）. What is more, it would always be true. We should also mention that the main tools of ideology, understood this way, are specific definitions and the extrapolation of sense. The purpose of this lecture is to prove that it is possible for ideology to come to life, only when the individuals who acknowledge it will consider their image of reality proper. The above ideological system should be understood as the obviousness of description of the surrounding world which in return makes unreflective functioning in reality possible. This obviousness of the presented world will be referred to as social safety.
基金funded by the National Social Sciences Foundation Program entitled "Dynamics of China's Social Consciousness from the Perspective of Reform and Opening Up" (No. 10zd&048)
文摘Mainstream ideology is closely related with the innovation system of Chinese philosophy and social sciences. Innovation in mainstream ideology research is of theoretical and practical significance to contemporary China, and constitutes a precondition for the establishment of an innovation system of Chinese philosophy and social sciences. Innovation in mainstream ideology research involves three important aspects. First, we should innovate mainstream ideology research in terms of the pattem of civilizations, that is, to grasp the historical continuity and cultural identity of mainstream ideology and oppose historical nihilism and revivalism. Second, we should adopt an inclusive approach to mainstream ideology research to bring in different perspectives and enrich the content of research, and to optimize its guiding role and overcome both ideological arrogance and ideological aphasia. And third, we must be open-minded in carrying out a comparative analysis of mainstream ideologies of other countries. In exchanges with and learning from other countries, we should protect the safety of mainstream Chinese ideology and avoid both self-contained isolationism and a blind worship of foreign things. In this way, we can develop a new ideological culture that is worthy of our times.
