C-49. Ideologues: a fixed rudder

That far too many among us have closed and closeted minds because of an ideology subscribed to … this is a challenge not lacking in recognition. It has not been an easy problem to solve either, precisely because of that closed mindedness. Interestingly, when such a position is abandoned, conversion may occur: an equally closed position is assumed … as the new ideology is embraced.

It makes little sense to have a fixed rudder when, as situations differ and/or change, adjustments become necessary – unless one’s course is fixed and cybernetic non-singularities (VIII) the only information required, here just for remedial steering. But the closed and closeted mind (unexposed not just inattentive) may not be prepared to profit even from cybernetic stop signals.

This smacks more of a stabilizing keel (see I: Pbeh) than a fully functional rudder, of an overemphasis on a stable equilibrium rather than the neutral equilibrium of an active behavioral entity (XI). It makes even less sense if one is to compose productively, to solve problems (C-47) and not merely to decide on the relevance of collision-pertinent conditions to one’s adopted course – if attended. (Oblivion, but not a benign oblivion. Also taxing and vexing, because there are other step takers with whom collisions may occur.)

There is, however, a more fundamental ideological problem which, if solved, would go a long way toward helping to solve the “closed mind/ideology” problem. Ideologies are learned products. They are learned by the mind-bound, who have no experience – no instruction in, nor practice with, the process by which ideas emerge. Encouragement to be “critical thinkers” is largely fruitless – unless that is interpreted simply as a call to register agreement or disagreement. (This simplicity is an impediment to our understanding.)

What has been missing in our education, formal and informal, is a curriculum in composing, of composing ideas and solutions , and the reasons for ideas and solutions being needed (e.g., partial order’s incomplete instruction and not just one’s ignorance). To a critical thinker, the latter reasons should quickly bring the ideologue’s dogmatism into question. How facile, how absurd the notion that we have no responsibility to continually develop our capabilities to handle the behavioral problem, to become better prepared to solve our many situational problems, that we can rest (sic) assured in an ideological nest.

(c) 2012 R. F. Carter