Ideology as deceptive justification: notes for a postmetaphysical conceptualization
Abstract
The concept of ideology has played an important role in explaining and criticizing the reproduction and justification of circumstances of oppression and domination. However, its formulation in terms of false consciousness has the burden of assuming an asymmetry between the one who attributes ideology and the supposed victim, which is an almost indefensible perspective. As a way to overcome this difficulty, I propose a formulation of the concept in postmetaphysical terms, which, in being anchored in intersubjectivity and proceduralism, cancels the possibility of assuming a privileged access in the ideology attribution process. Such formulation consists of a deceptive justification that generates the blockage to justification, that is, the closure of the subject to the reasons of the others and hence to a reinforcement of one’s already adopted beliefs. This formulation also opens the way for situating the critique of ideology in the processes of justification, especially in the spaces where public discussion takes place.Downloads
References
Adorno, Theodor (1969), “La Ideología”, en Theodor Adorno y Max Horkheimer, La sociedad. Lecciones de sociología, Buenos Aires, Proteo, pp. 183-205.
Althusser, Louis (1967), La revolución teórica de Marx, México, Siglo XXI.
Boltanski, Luc (2011), On Critique. A Sociology of Emancipation, Cambridge, Polity Press.
Burchardt, Tania (2004), ‘Agency, Goals, Adaptation and Capability Sets’, Journal of Human Development, vol. 10, núm. 1, pp. 3–19.
Celikates, Robin (2006), “From critical social theory to a social theory of critique: on the critique of ideology after the pragmatic turn”, Constellations, vol. 13, núm. 1, pp. 21-40.
Clark, David A. (ed.) (2012), Adaptation, Poverty and Development Contents Houndmills, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.
Cohen, Gerald (1981), “Freedom, Justice and Capitalism”, New Left Review, nº 126, pp. 3-16.
____ (2008), Rescuing Justice and Equality, Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press.
Cortina, Adela (2017), Aporofobia, el rechazo al pobre, Barcelona, Paidós.
Elster, Jon (1985), Making Sense of Marx, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
____ (1988), Uvas amargas. Sobre la subversión de la racionalidad, Barcelona, Península.
____ (2007), Explaining Social Behavior. More Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sci¬ences, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Evans, Peter (2002), “Collective Capabilities, Culture and Amartya Sen’s Development as Freedom”, Studies in Comparative International Development, vol. 37, núm. 2, pp. 54–60.
F. Stewart (2005), ‘Groups and Capabilities’, Journal of Human Development, 6 (2), 185–204, 187–188.
Fló, Juan (1967), “La alienación ideológica”, en Juan Flo y Mario Sambarino, Alcance y formas de la alienación, Montevideo, Biblioteca de Cultura Univesitaria, 1967, pp. 61-95, pp. 81-82.
Forst Rainer, Contexts of justice, Berkeley, Universidad de California Press, 2002.
____ (2011), The Right to Justification, New York, Columbia University Press, 2011.
____ (2015), “Noumenal Power”, The Journal of Political Philosophy, vol. 23, núm. 2, pp. 111-127.
Fricker, Miranda (2007), Epistemic injustice. Power and Ethics of Knowing, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Gore, Charles (1997), ‘Irreducibly Social Goods and the Informational Basis of Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach’, Journal of International Development, vol. 9, núm. 2, pp. 235–250.
Habermas, Jürgen (1989), “¿Qué significa pragmática universal?”, en Teoría de la acción comunicativa: complementos y estudios previos, Madrid, Cátedra.
____ (1990), Pensamiento postmetafísico, México, Taurus.
Han, Byung-Chul (2012), La sociedad del cansancio, Madrid, Herder.
Honneth, Axel (2006), El reconocimiento como ideología, Isegoría, núm. 35, junio-diciembre, pp. 129-150.
Jaeggi, Rahel (2009), “Rethinking Ideology”, en De Bruin Boudewjin and Zurn Christopher, New Waves in Political Philosophy, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Palgrave-Macmillan, pp. 63-86.
Kahneman, Daniel (2012), Pensar rápido, pensar despacio, Barcelona, Debate.
Kahneman, Daniel, Slovic, Paul y Tversky, Amos (eds.) (1982), Judgment Under Uncer¬tainty: Heuristic and Biases, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Marx, Karl y Engels, Federico (1985), La ideología alemana, trad. Wenceslao Roces, Buenos Aires, EPU-Cartago.
Pereira, Gustavo (2013), Elements of a Critical Theory of Justice, Houndills, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.
Pereira, Gustavo (2019), Imposed rationality and besieged imagination, Basel, Springer.
Pereira, Gustavo y Vigorito, Andrea (eds) (2010), Preferencias adaptativas: Entre deseos, frustración y logros, Montevideo, Fin de Siglo.
Sen, Amartya (1977), “Rational Fools: A Critique of the Behavioural Foundations of Economic Theory”, Philosophy and Public Affairs, vol. 6, nún. 4, pp. 317-344.
____ (1995), Nuevo examen de la desigualdad, Madrid, Alianza, 1995.
____ (2002), Rationality and Freedom, Cambridge, Massachussets, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Stanovich, Keith (2004), The Robot’s Rebellion: Finding Meaning in the Age of Darwin, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
____ (2011), Rationality and the Reflective Mind, Oxford, Oxford Univer¬sity Press.
Stanovich, Keith y Richard West (1999), “Discrepancies between normative and descriptive models of decision making and the understanding/acceptance principle”, Cognitive Psychology, vol. 38, núm. 3, pp. 349-385.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1988), Investigaciones filosóficas, México/Barcelona, Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas-Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México/ Crítica.
Zajonc, Robert B. (1968), “Attitudinal Effects of Mere Exposure”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 68, núm. 1, pp. 1–27.
____ (2001), “Mere Exposure: A Gateway to the Subliminal”, Currents Directions in Psychological Science, vol. 10, núm. 6, pp. 224–228.
