Dear Wil,

I'm not sure that I understand your objection, but here's an answer
to what you may have in mind. My understanding of Marx's theory of
ideology is that he thinks that each ideology reflects the class
interests of the people who endorse it. That means that ideologies
(unlike "sense-experience," "perception," "reason" and the like) do
not have a foundation in the reality that we all share: they
represent only the special concerns of certain groups of people. So
if Morality, Religion, and Absolute Mind/Spirit "belong to the
ideological sphere," they have no foundation in the reality that we
all share (what Chenyuquan refers to as "our everyday lives"), but
instead they represent only. so to speak, special interests. They
have no "firm foundation" in the sense that there's no good reason
for everyone to endorse them, but only for those whose special
interests (class interests) they reflect. As far as I can tell, this
is what Marx believes.

Does this make what I was trying to say clearer? Do you still disagree?

Best, Bob

>Bob,
>
>Because something is 'ideological', that means that it has no firm foundation
>-- and you attribute a position like this to Marx "in particular"? You would
>have a hard job showing that, I assure you.
>
>I hope that you at least accept that some of us -- myself, certainly -- might
>interpret things a good deal differently.
>
>Yours,
>Wil
>
>In a message dated 3/6/08 5:49:04 PM, philosop@... writes:
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello Chenyuquan,
>>
>> You misunderstand me. I certainly do not think that Morality,
>> Religion and Absolute Mind/Spirit "belong to the ideological sphere."
>> (Is that what you meant by "ideolocial" (Is that what you meant by "i
>> part of our everyday lives. I agree with Hegel about this, and I
>> disagree with the Materialists, Atheists, Skeptics and Naturalists
>> who argue that these concepts have no firm foundation, and are merely
>> "ideological. "ideological.<wbr>" I think that one of Hegel's greate
>> is that he showed how these concepts _do_ have a firm foundation.
>> This is the main goal of his major works, the _Phenomenology of
>> Spirit_, _Science of Logic_, _Encyclopedia of the Philosophical
>> Sciences_, and _Philosophy of Right_.
>>
>> I hope that Chinese scholars appreciate this accomplishment of
>> Hegel's, which is one of the important ways in which Hegel disagrees
>> with Karl Marx (in particular). It is very unfortunate that Marx did
>> not appreciate or agree with this accomplishment of Hegel's, because
>> without Morality (etc.), human life is a disaster.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Bob W
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>**************
>It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money &
>Finance.
> (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001)
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>Homepage: http://hegel.net
>Hegel mailing lists: http://Hegel.net/en/ml.htm
>Listowners Homepage: http://kai.in
>Group policy:
>slightly moderated, only plain Text (no HTML/RTF), no attachments,
>only Hegel related mails, scientific level intended.
>
>Particpants are expected to show a respectfull and scientific
>attitude both to Hegel and to each other. The usual "netiquette" as
>well as scientific standards apply.
>
>The copyright policy for mails sent to this list is same as for
>Hegel.Net, that is the copyright of the mails belongs to the author
>and hegel.net. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or
>modify the mails of this list under the terms of the GNU Free
>Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version, published
>by the Free Software Foundation. The mails are also licensed under a
>Creative Commons License and under the Creative Commons Developing
>Nations license (see footer of http://hegel.net/en/e0.htm )
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

--
Robert M. Wallace
2503 E. Olive St.
Shorewood, WI 53211
USA