Religionistická typologie a taxonomie IDEOLOGY the resulting political/public Cary Lease relations campaigns, the word lost its original philosophical and quite "Ideology" marks the twentieth a-political meaning, to be century as no other term. Since the transformed into a polemical slogan social and political upheavals in the during the first half of the United States and France at the end nineteenth century. As a result, the of the eighteenth century, notion assumed its status as a battle revolution, of course, has laid claim cry, a function it has not lost to to first rank among modern-era this day. It is also in this guise concepts. And since Freud, the notion that Marx and Engels appropriated the of "the unconscious" has gained term and provided it with the strong currency as the chief marker specific meaning that still attaches of our age. But neither term has the to this label in many disparate areas breadth and extension of ideology; of dispute. The end result is that neither concept has exercised such the very term ideology has bee inclusiveness as ideology; and ideologized. neither\or has replaced so many Initially, ideology refers to a others as has ideology. It is not to pattern of thought, a way of life, be wondered, then, that the study of and a political course of action-in religion, that many-headed Hydra of other words, a more or less coherent modernity, is inextricably, even system of ideas-that are bound to intimately, linked to the notion of sets of ideas with little or no ideology. connection to reality, indeed are opposed to experiential reality. Ideology as Category Ideology thus presupposes a gap between theory and practice, between Ideology does not take its idea and reality. It is only when the origins in Western culture's belief in the primacy of thought is antiquity or even in the Middle Ages, attacked as the reverse of what the as do so many other political and actual state of human consciousness social concepts. Rather, it is in the is, that ideology also assumes the overthrow of these older, traditional secondary meanings of illusion and categorical systems during the French self-deception. In this form, then, Revolution (1789) that the word first ideological criticism becomes the was formed. In the beginning, the so process by which unrecognized called French Ideologists sought only impediments in the process of to name their new science, but due to establishing truth are revealed. Napoleon's later use of the term, and For the purpose of the study of religions, however, it is important emphasizing that ideology, properly to conceived, would hl' nothing other than a part of zoology. This is so, according to Destutt, because all ideas take their origin in the senses note that the current primary and achieve expression in language. reference of the concept ideology is By investigating the relationship to a special form of illusion, namely between ideas and the (linguistic) the belief that ideas are the chief signs that matched them, hl' hoped to elements in human politics and achieve for his science of ideas the history. Despite logical consistency, same strict precision that rules in the presence of scientific such other fields as mathematics and rationality, and even practical the natural sciences. As such, evidences, what characterizes ideology would be the scientific ideology in its usual applications is basis of human society: politics, the hidden, even repressed role of law, morality and education would the key historical, social and flow from it. economic interests, motives and The influence exercised by the determinations that produced the Ideologists, however, throughout seemingly disembodied system of ideas revolutionary and post-revolutionary to begin with. France, especially in the form of a- religious and empirical teachings in the schools, led to a clash with The History of Ideology Napoleon. Initially hl' had been friendly toward the Ideologists, even It was the French Ideologist, inviting Destutt to accompany him on Antoine Destutt dl' Tracy (1754- his military campaign in Egypt. But 1836), who first coined the term after assuming sole power in France "ideology" (1801-1807). As the in 1799 (the coup of the 18th founder of a science of ideas, Brumaire), Napoleon saw the need to Destutt hoped to study the origin of consolidate his position by human conceptualization, not as norms restoring, in a controllable form, but as products. Such a science both church and state (Concordat with would, in his view, serve as a the Roman Church, 18(1). This move foundation for the rest of human led inexorably to a break with the knowledge. Following the English anti-theological and liberal philosopher John Locke, Destutt teachings of the Ideologists. There sought merely to observe and describe was little doubt in Napoleon's mind the actions of the human mind, that the Ideologists, now disqualified by him as merely and they viewed their victory for "metaphysicians and fanatics," were freedom as the reverse of his version working counter to his notions of of ideology. But in the ma in, supreme power. Indeed, their concepts ideology remained at the mid- of state and society were, for the nineteenth century a term of derision Emperor, but abstract theories that and a polemical slogan-a sense of the had nothing to do with political term that we still find in use to reality. By giving the term ideology this day. a new meaning, Napoleon attempted to Of long-lasting importance for make the Ideologists ridiculous: an the development of the term ideology idea is for him no longer a sensually is, of course, the role played by grasped content projected by the Karl Marx. Tracing the history of human imagination, but rather merely ideology in Marx's writings is a theory disconnected from reality. extreme\y complicated. For one thing, As such, any discourse about ideas the key text authored by Marx and was disqualified as substanceless Engels dealing with ideology, The theorizing. With one blow Napoleon Germl1l1 Ideology (1970 [184546]), had turned ideology into a pejorative was not published in any form until characterization of all philosophical early in the twentieth century (1903 theories, particularly those that may 1904), and in its entirety only in have laid claim to some practical 1932. Apparently, both Marx and political legitimacy. As a Engels thought that the notion of consequence, ideology was seen ideology was so transparent that a throughout Europe as the hallmark of precise delineation of its meaning dreamers, theoreticians, doctrinaire was unnecessary. The result was a professors, people of principle, myriad of different nuanced uses of writers of fiction, insane the term in their writings, which in projections, and so on. This was turn led to a wide number of Marxian- especially true for the followers of based conceptions of ideology that natural law theory and the supporters could simply not be undone by such of a restoration of the monarchical late revelations of what Marx and political order that had been swept Engels may have thought ideology was away in the tide of the French at the beginning of their careers. Revolution. True, and particularly in What is clear, however, is that Marx Germany, there was also a positive found the notion of ideology conception of ideology: Goethe, and associated with Napoleon to be the later Heine, saw the power of ideas proper one: ideology for him was, at realized in the wars of liberation least to begin with, an act of fought precisely against Napoleon, theorizing that was distant from reality, and above all foreign to legendary position-consciousness does political practice. From this point not determine life, but rather life of departure it was not long before determines consciousness-was that, in Marx spoke of his now famous the Marxian view, morality, religion, "alienated consciousness," a metaphysics, and other ideologies consciousness permeated by abstract lose any claim to social and projections and mental spider webs. historical autonomy. Since Marx and Only later was one able to see that Engels argued that the genuine already in The German Ideology Marx relationship between humans and and Engels had made this reality lies in the material interpretation of ideology even more preconditions of life, it was easy precise. Here they took on the so- for them to proceed to the analysis called Young Hegelians, those critics of the products of human action as of Hegel who, in the judgment of Marx the source of an empirical and Engels, had stood reality (and confirmation. Reality was expanded to also Hegel) on its head: ideas, include, however, not only the concepts, thoughts, projections do material conditions but also the not determine human life and history social conditions of human life, to maintain that position is to turn namely the class interests that were the true relationship between being hidden by ideologies. In fact, in and consciousness ideologically later Marxian thought, this becomes upside down. Of course Marx and one of the chief tasks of ideology: Engels did know what that to hide the true interests that lie relationship should be: it is only behind the goals and acts of the individuals, their actions and the power-wielding classes (e.g., the material conditions of their lives nobility, the bourgeoisie). This that determine their history; the forgetting of the genuine, material entire mental production of human motivations for thought and action is beings is conditioned by the the product of self-delusion rather development of the products of their than conscious intention: ideology is labor and the exchange of those therefore a process of self- products. According to Marx and alienation. Consciously or not, such Engels, ideologies, unfortunately, self-alienation as found in religion, see this process in reverse: rather morality, and so on, is therefore than viewing the progression of revealed as a lie. Ideology results consciousness from material from the attempt to make the super- production, ideologies maintain the structure of ideas autonomous and independence of thought and spirit. independent of the true relationship One consequence of this between consciousness and reality. Indeed, for Marx religion is one of history. Rather, the consciousness those areas of human activity that, that is ideology is the duplication by its very nature, must understand of the society from which it springs. its norms and beliefs as eternal, Although Herbert Marcuse viewed holy and, above all else, as ideology as restricted to the one- unchanging; as such, religion strives dimensional reality of technological to break the connection between development, Jürgen Habermas went itself and the class interests that even further, finding ideology in the lie at its foundation. Religion, in identification of possessions and other words, is ideology per se. humanity. One of the most recent The post-Marxian development of attempts to reconceptualize the socialism and social democracy, notion of ideology is found in the however, led to often quite different work of the sociologist Niklas results. Georg Lukacs (1955), for Luhmann (1977) who sees ideology as example, considered a reified or the "value system by which members of independent consciousness as the a society determine which product of capitalism's terrible consequences of their actions are effect on the worker. Such an acceptable and which are not. For autonomous consciousness must achieve Luhmann ideology is primarily, if not ideological maturity, must gain completely, comprehensible as a accurate knowledge about its true function of human society, not as class situation-l11ust, in other separate and autonomous thought. words, reach a state of authentic class consciousness. At that point, for Lukacs, ideology is no longer a Critique and Evaluation theory independent of practice, but instead is the location of unity Religion, observed the between theory and practice. This is, sociologist Peter Berger (1969), is however, a position that neither Marx the "audacious attempt to conceive of nor Engels would have represented. the entire universe as being humanly Nor would Theodor Adorno's (1964) significant." Or put another way, understanding of ideology have been religions are systems of meaning, and happily accepted by Marx and Engels. as such they are ideologies. For if Ideology in his sense is precisely the history of the term has taught us society itself, but society in its anything, it is that, whether essential appearance. For Adorno considered to be false or authentic, there is no false consciousness that ideologies are precisely systems of is independent of society, making ideas that are organized to produce ideologies somehow stand apart from meaning for human actions. And religions are exactly such relationships between all the constructions, claiming to be models players. for all other theorizing. Religion is Mythology is perhaps the most therefore not simply one ideological difficult of these categories to creation among others-though it is determine, and at the same time the certainly that-but also a key node most relevant to understanding both for the distribution of power or ideology and religion. For control over the texts and limits of mythologies deal directly with consciousness. Luhmann is therefore constituting data as self-evident; correct when he maintains that the analyzing mythology seeks to key to understanding ideology is its understand not only how this process function: a religion represents just works, but also to what purpose it is such a function as the self-evident undertaken. It is only within such a pattern of human experience, and thus framework that we can ask about of reality. religion, ideology, world-view and But religion and ideology are not the cosmology. only constructs to share the function One can perhaps most easily of providing meaning: world-views, grasp the function of mythologies as mythologies and cosmologies also the metacodes which govern the choice strive to systematize human meaning. (selection) of the actual Are they therefore a\1 the same as interpretive codes used to decipher ideology? Hardly! Despite Ninian experience and the expression of Smart's (1981, (983) tendency to mix experience. Myths, in other words, and match these categories, the lines both govern the choice of a code of distinction are important to (world-view, cosmology, ideology, observe. A world-view, for example, religion) and judge its application. deals with the difficulty of Precisely as meta-code, mythologies comprehending the relationship establish what gets to count, or what between humans and the world in which is considered self-evident in a they are located, and imposing a culture, be that in the realm of the meaning upon that connection. A so-called sacred or the general cosmology, on the other hand, strives cultural code. to present as complete a picture as Religions, as specific forms of possible of the relationship between ideology, are culture-wide the world and the nature that interpretations or code applications, inhabits that world, humanity dedicated to making manifest the included; such a presentation may or latent meaning behind the text of the may not lead to the establishment of culture at large; myths, particularly meaning, or a pattern of in their manifestation within a religion, are the governing tools or result of human consciousness. Among codes by which this product is the key functions of consciousness is performed. These basic tools or codes to process the myriad stages of are always about relationships: identification with which human origins to world to humans. A major beings construct the world around consequence therefore of them. As the chief too! for doing so, understanding religions as ideologies consciousness makes use of is that they only make sense when definition, or the establishment of viewed as human productions rather relationships as objects which are than as external impositions. consequently subject to use and Finally, religions also allow the control. To identify both self and accessing of world-views and world and have them remain stable and cosmologies by establishing an separable, consciousness stamps them absolute claim to do so: the meaning as independent and external, rather of the world, or a World-view, and than seeing them as the products of the representation of that world, or cultural and representational a cosmology, can only, according to imagination. As a result, humans are religion, be interrelated by means of constantly bringing forth new that religion and its mythology. identifications and linking them up Precisely, however, because religions with previous identifications in a are ideologies, and therefore feverish attempt to provide changeable, every person has a world- definitions capable of covering all view, and every person has a possible experiences. Such a cosmology, but not every person has a plurality of definitions, in turn, religion. demands a catalog or ranking of their Traditional religions, however, relationships of one to another; particularly those in Western culture tests are produced which allow one to and those claiming universal locate new definitions within the legitimacy, reject any identification catalog. These catalogs are with ideology as inauthentic and ideologies. destructive. For them religion cannot The presence of such catalogs in be ideology for the simple fact that human lives, and more particularly in religions (or their religion) are commonly shared human lives, leads true and thus certainly are not in inevitably to a struggle over the any sense manifestations of an power to control their formation and alienated consciousness. In contrast, their application. Who, for example, the view represented here, following defines the ranking with a particular Louis Althusser's (1971) lead, holds catalog? How, and with what force, is that ideologies are the inevitable that primary definitional act exercised? The answers to these were created cannot be called into questions form the stuff of question. Religion, on the other ideologies, or the dynamic process by hand, frequently serves as the label which such catalogs cease to be ever for those systems of legitimation, changing, contestable systems of which attempt to anchor their judgment and, instead, come to be foundation outside of, or external understood as self-evident and to, the ideologies being legitimated. fundamental to human existence. Such In either case, stability is the self-evident systems of definition desired product. And stability and classification must constantly be promises a constant, unvarying legitimated in order to head off the pattern of relationship between collapse of the intricate patterns of inside and outside, or more relationship, which make up the prosaically, between self and others. supportive ideologies. Any society, I In overcoming separation and would argue, is forever and distinction, stability of ideology inextricably bound up with the becomes both inclusive and exclusive, process of sustaining its basically that is, it assumes all experiences shared catalogs of definitions and available to the society in question classifications for human experience and rejects all those experiences of the world. Any society, in other which might be used to question the words, is always producing and accepted set. legitimating sets of ideologies. But what happens if such In order to sustain such sets, questioning does occur? What happens or systems of ideologies, authority if the stability, no matter how is needed to impose them on those powerfully enforced, breaks down and segments of a society, which may have the catalog of definitions, which constructed quite different, or makes up a society's ideologies no variant catalogs of definitions. longer is understood to be self- Force may be employed, and the role evident? Inevitably, chaos and the of law codes to regulate the function competition of ideologies results. It of such force in maintaining broad- is precisely religion, however, based ideologies is well known. always the preeminent discourse of Constitutions for example, have as definition, that is opposed to such their reason for being the provision chaos. Together with law, religion of such a self-evidently understood works tirelessly against the and accepted framework for ideologies dismantling of ideological systems, and their attendant rules of trying to stem any encroaching chaos enforcement (law), that the very by shoring up the once-self-evident basis of the societies for which they catalogs of definitions which are the substance of a society's ideologies. as studying religion. If we were to Religion, in other words, is always take the notion of religion as the enemy of revolution, since ideology as our point of departure, revolution can only mean the then three directions offer subversion and destabilizing of contemporary and future scholarship ideological systems. As such, the most fruitful sources for the revolution is also the ever-present study of religion: tracing the shadow of religion. Where you find natural history of religions; the history and religion, ideology and interaction between religion and the revolution both lie at their roots law; and the anchoring of a theory of and are not far behind. For both religion in the biological sphere. history and religion are not true in A so-called natural history seeks to the sense that their stories are trace the emergence, or prima I full, complete and forever identity; development, or mature unchanging, though each would have identity; and dissolution, or death you believe that is indeed the case. of identity. Understanding religion Rather, history and religion are only as ideology grants us the flexibility interpretations, are better, to apply such analytic categories to ideological narratives: how one religions. This is so because views, represents and comprehends a tracking the development or patterns subject, event or experience is very of change in a particular religion much dependent upon the ideology over time allows us to understand it underlying the interpretive effort; as ideologically determined, that is, that is why history and religion are as contingent. Without a coherent so full of mysteries, not clarity. account of the process of change that There are no real artifacts to go on: lies between the narrated emergence you have to reconstruct it all. Due and the present point of observation, to the interspacing of ideology establishing the identity of a between us and reality, the past, religion becomes difficult if not present and future are not self- impossible. And without an identity, revealing: we have to make it up. Not there is not intelligibility. One every ideology is a religion, but need only witness the current chaos every religion is ideology. reigning in the world of Christian origins: soon tracing this area of study will have mainly ethnographic Ideology and the Study of Religion interest. There is widespread agreement The result of such an approach that doing religion is not the same would mean that one never comes to closure on what constitutes the of the intimate relationship between object of such a history. The target, religion and the law, as well as to or particular religion under review, the broader political setting in would always be shifting, would which law is found. A colleague of always be contingent, would never be mine observed some years ago that the final, just as with our other parallel to the slogan of that well- rational objects of knowledge. known Jewish teacher of antiquity, Indeed, the evidences that one might Jesus of Nazareth, who said that the adduce for such a history would also meek shall inherit the earth, was always be in movement. The ethical, none other than the observation of moral, ritual and intellectual that contemporary social critic and choices that adherents of a specific baseball manager of the 1950s, Leo religion consider to be demanded by Durocher, who noted that nice guys their beliefs, or demanded by finish last There are very real religion in general, Would constantly tensions between these two stances, be changing, would never be absolute. tensions that come from competitive A natural history of a religion could ideologies. In our own time we have never, therefore, posit the reality seen National Socialist Germany co- or, better, the validity of any opt the major Christian churches in religion's claims or persuasions its spasm of totalitarian control and (beliefs) as the object and self-destruction, using particularly intelligibility, hut rather only the Roman Catholicism to organize public origins, the history and the death of ritual and the celebration of fascist such claims and their resulting political dominatiol1. Again, in functions. In other words, desire and Yugoslavia, or more specifically need are not identical: a genuine Croatia, we have seen the church co science of religion would acknowledge opted by a national movement hardly that a choice of reality does not distinguishable from its German constitute hegemony over all of masters; now Archbishop Stepinac, who reality or over others. Study of welcomed his fascist allies with such religion, precisely as ideology, is cmhusiasl1l, is being praised by the not the giving or bearing of Roman Catholic Pope as a martyr and testimony to the truth of a has been beatified. In the United particular religion, or of religion States there continues sharp in the abstract: it is not an act of controversy over whether the Congress belief. and the states should amend the The question of what place Constitution to permit prayer in religion occupies in our larger school classrooms; the struggle is, social life is an almost classic case of course, over the questions of "which prayer?" and "whose preying upon ourselves? What if the composition?" Religion and law, in ghosts of predators past, and still other words, is one of the most chase the human species displays its thorny but also most potentially strategic adaptations for surviving fruitful areas for the study of those predators? Other constructions religion today precisely because it are, of course, not only possible but is in the law, and in a religion's likely if one were to take seriously relationship to the law, that the the ideological character of struggle between competing ideologies religion. becomes most clear. Understanding religions as As biologists probe ever deeper ideologies will liberate the study of into the structure of the human religions and their traditions in brain, as the final mapping of the ways we can only dimly anticipate, human genome becomes ready for us in leading to more profound, and more the next few years, more and more accurate ways of determining both the students of religion are questioning role religions play in wider society, the possibility that religion is hard- and the definitions of what gets to wired into the human genetic count as religion in that society. structure. Or at the very last, that evolutionary hangovers (experiential adaptations), rather than specific genes, lie at the heart of the human creation we call religion. What if, for example, we were to view religion as a set of artifacts, artifices and strategies by which the human species moved from being a prey species to a predator species? In other words, what if the ideological understanding of religion took as its point of departure a notion of religion as a complex strategy designed as a system of values, reinforced by ritual, to locate our origin and our fate ol1tside of ourselves, with the goal of this strategy being the effort to cope with an initial prey experience and eventual shift to outright predation, ultimately ending in