January 06, 2006: Althusser and history of ideas
Althusser makes possible for the first time a non-subjective history of ideas. The concept of the problematic enables precise definition and comparison of bodies of thought with extreme rigor.
For example, that Cultural Feminism is the same ideology as the dominant sexist patriarchism, with the value signs reversed.
Or, that nearly all of Psychology post-Freud exists within Freud's problematic of The Unconscious, even those currents which reject Freud's work itself.
Or, that much of "New Age" spiritualism is Neoplatonic, swimming in the underground stream which derives ultimately from Plotinus.
Comments
I wonder why Thomas Kuhn's concept of a "paradigm" continues to be used in certain circles, whereas "problematic" never caught on. What is it about "paradigm" that more easily is sustained by the dominant ideology, whereas to take "problematic" seriously would challenge and open up the dominant ideology?
Posted by: Ted Stolze | January 11, 2006 08:47 AM
Can't claim to know for sure, but maybe some guesses:
1. The problematic of the dominant ideology is organized around the central concept of abstract individuality. This is its "object" in Althusser's terms. That problematic will tend toward definitions of the "problem of knowledge" in terms of individual subjectivities: how do I know something?, rather than, how is something known? Kuhn's concept of paradigm is one example.
2. The spontaneous ideology of scientists themselves, based on practice, tends to reinforce the same subjectivity. "I work with theories; science is in my head." Seems to me that Kuhn's contribution is to systematize the spontaneous philosophy of the scientists, as Althusser called it, in a way which makes sense to many scientists. You certainly read a lot of press interviews with working scientists who talk about how new developments could lead to a paradigm shift.
3. Althusser's "mode of exposition" doesn't help. His project was a political intervention against the rightward drift of the PCF, so that his texts are all about Marx, Lenin, and so on. Professional scientists in the west are unlikely to ever encounter Althusser's work and if they did, they're unlikely to find what's interesting in it for them. Perhaps some day the right grad student in need of a thesis will come along and reformulate Althusser's work in a context which will speak more readily to scientists and to philosophers of science.
Just thinking out loud!
Posted by: Mark Phillips | January 11, 2006 02:51 PM