Idealism is when you think that the world is determined by ideas, materialism is when you think that the world is determined by material. Facts don't care about your feelings! :gun-shapiro:
Idealism is when you think that the world is determined by ideas, materialism is when you think that the world is determined by material. Facts don't care about your feelings! :gun-shapiro:
Just to check idealism is where you think ideas come internally from who you are while materialism is where you think the ideas you have are a product of your surroundings and environment?
so an idealist watching back to the future would think that Marty's parents should have ended up the same as they are the same people so should have always acted the same way
Idealism is more like thinking that the ideas of man drove the course of history and social development. As a prominent example, western liberals often attribute their prosperity to their values and "democracy" or the "free market" and whatnot. Another example is a baby leftist diving into and ancom worldview and being frustratingly confused as to why nobody seems to give a shit about the lack of actual freedom and democracy that isn't possible under capitalism. (This was me at one point). The example you gave is downstream of that, but probably not the best example. I think it would be better described by the term "essentialism".
On the other hand a materialist will recognize that people's ideals have some effect on the way society is organized, and the way historical events unfold, but the material world shapes all of these things and forms a "dialectic relationship".
In other words, idealism is when you think that the world is determined by ideas, materialism is when you think that the world is determined by material :very-smart:
There's an inherent contradiction with Idealism because Ideas work or do not work largely depending on the material environment where you apply them. Furthermore, there's the question of how ideas emerge in the first place. We are all influenced by the conditions of the world around us and the world that Was (our memories, formative experiences, and the stories of others), so the idea that Ideas themselves don't form based on material conditions is just flat out wrong.
But it wouldn't be wrong to say that materialists would also say that ideology is the product of a material infrastructure
It cuts both ways with material forces having the stronger effect from my understanding.
I think it's an oversimplification to phrase it as a one way interaction, and carries the implication that ideology doesn't matter, which would introduce a huge blind spot to one's analysis. In a "chicken or the egg" sense the material world obviously existed first and shaped the ideologies of people and continues to do so. It is ridiculous for liberals (and monarchists, and other idealists) to view their ideals as done sorry of "triumph" over the material world without further analysis (which would obviously expose them to the uncomfortable contradictions that they've created for themselves).
oh yeah totally
the ideological whatever reinforces the material thingy
wrong
Your right I simply forgot to consider human nature
nope