Ideology seen as pathological, as a "belief"
Post-enlightenment - tended to belittle the significance of non-rational or non-scientific ideas
Equating ideology with non-rational
Distate for religion and also class membership and privilege
"There is no good reason why one should guard sociology against religious bias but not from distorting economic interests"
The readiness with which social science declares idiology non compos mentis seems to manifest a self-serving one-sidedness.
The conventional social science view of ideology fails on 3 counts: 1) one-sided "If truth is whole, then the normal social science view of ideology is untrue" (Hegel) 2.) Lacking in historical seriousness. Conforms to the formal requirements of historical analysis, ritualistic 3) non-reflexive. it glimpses but can't grasp the way itself is ideologized because of its own structural situation
Viewpoints grounded in powerful social forces are taken more seriously than they might otherwise; they are 'credited'. Things that we don't have to justify are defeated historically.
Marx's critique of ideology was a critique of the leading social science of the time; as belief systems evolved from religion to philosophy to science, the claim to "self-grounding autonomy" was increasingly built in.
Marx's critique of the "ideological" means that the thinker falsely thinks himself autonomous, was applicable to Christianity; created by, rather than autonomous from, God.
Marx - argument on "ideology" targeted beliefs about society that made scientific claims
For Marx, ideology was "a belief system that made pretentious and unjustified claims to scientificity"
"Suspecting philosophy as archaic, it provides no ground onto which one can step back to appraise the new science it proclaims. It provides no basis in whose terms one can critically examine the assumptions of science itself; science has become isolated from a larger, more encompassing view of reason."