Differences between Ideology and Science

1.Certainty of answers- many people find comfort in ideologies because they off absolute truth and certain answers. They provide people with feelings of assurance and sense of security. In contract social scientific theories offer only tentative answers and admit to uncertainty. May people are uneasy with the persistent uncertainty, hesitation, and tentativeness of scientific theories. Social science theories require us to have high tolerance for ambiguity, to ask questions continuously, and to live with persistent doubt.

2. Type of knowledge system differs- ideologies offer a close d system of knowledge that changes little. Ideologies claim to have all the answers and do not require improvement. In contrast, science is an open-ended knowledge system that is always growing and changing. It’s answers and re incomplete and subject to revisions as we acquire new evidence and knowledge. Theories continuously evolve, grow, or develop toward higher levels- sometimes slowly, sometimes quickly; sometimes directly, sometimes only after a temporary reversal or diversion.

3. Type of assumptions- both ideologies and social scientific theories contain assumptions. The assumptions in ideologies tend to be fixed, inflexible, and unquestioned. Most ideological assumptions originate in one of three sources: religious belief or faith, a value-based position or the point of view of a particular social position. When they originate in a particular social location ideologies protect and advance that one sector of society. Social science differs from ideology by an attempt to be neutral with regard to assumptions or, if not entirely neutral, very explicit and open about its assumptions.

4. Use of normative statements differ- ideologies contain many normative assumptions, statements and ideas. They advance a normative stance or position. A normative statement is one that contains “what ought to be.” It tells us what is desirable, proper, moral, and right versus undesirable, improper, immoral or wrong.  An ideology, like a social theory, tells us what is and why but goes beyond that to have a “what should be.” Ideologies blur the distinction between a descriptive, fact-based assertion- this is what happened or how people live- an explanation- this is why it happened or why people live this way- and a normative position- this should have occurred or is how people should live. In social theory, normative-moral positions are detached or separated from the descriptive statements and explanations, while in ideologies; the normative positions are integral to and embedded within the descriptive statements and explanations. This makes it impossible to remove the normative positions from ideologies.

5. Use of empirical evidence differs- the primary distinction between scientific theory and ideology involves empirical evidence. Supporters of an ideology will selectively present and interpret the evidence in way to protect and ideological belief. Often they emphasize personal experience, conformity to a core value conviction, or religious faith as an ultimate type of evidence that overrides careful empirical observation. As a closed belief system that already has “the answers,” ideologies resist or deny contradictory evidence. When and ideology confronts overwhelmingly negative or contradictory evidence,, the ideologies do not bend or change. From an ideological worldview, believers will selectively reinterpret, treat as an exception, or declare negative evidence as irrelevant to the ideology’s claims. Believers in an ideology react with fear and hostility toward people who disagree. Social theories are open systems of belief and explanation; they welcome all evidence. Because social science theories are open to continuous debate, modification, or change, they are constantly evolving. Using all evidence including refuting evidence science is seeking proof to dispute it’s own ideas rather than disregarding important evidence life ideologies.  

6. Demand for logical consistency differs- ideologies often contain logical contradictions, and many ideologies rely on circular reasoning. There are many forms of circular reasoning; some are logical fallacies or errors in true logical reasoning. They simply repeat a statement in slightly different for stronger terms as evidence or reasoning for it. They typical response to finding a logical contractions or fallacy in an ideology is to den it or cover it up. In contrast, we as social scientists insist that theories be logical consistent. We are constantly trying to root out and remove all logical fallacies. If we discover a fallacy or contradiction, we revise the theory or replace it with a deferent on that does not contain a fallacy or contradiction.

7. Transparency differs- the distinction between ideology and theory has implications for the way we conduct research studies. In social scientific research, we are aware of a theory’s assumptions, concepts, and relationships and make them explicit. Theory and its place in research are very public; we as scientists hide nothing. Combines with visibility is a welcome to challenges and open debate. In contrast, ideologies often contain features that are obscure or difficult to pinpoint. Ideologies frequently often areas clouded in mystery or secrecy; they seek to obedience and deference, not serious challenge or debate.

Author W. Laurence Neuman and Krista Huff