Title: Ideology and suffering What is realistic about critical theory
Domain: philosophy

Question: How to understand the radical realists' attempt to develop an empirically grounded ideology critique that eschews moral premises, in light of the connection between radical realism and the Frankfurt School, particularly Theodor W. Adorno?

Background: 1.Radical realism, as an influential variation of realism in political theory, seeks to expose the tainted origins and problematic functions of beliefs in the justifiability of existing practices and hierarchies by epistemic ideology critique rather than moral concepts such as justice or rights. | 2.Raymond Geuss and Bernard Williams emphasised that can epistemic ideology critique certainly be effective critical reflections. | 3.There are some scholars who suggest that the realist movement could contribute to ‘reinvigorating’ the first generation of the Frankfurt School, or at least be brought into a fruitful conversation with it.

Definitions: 1.ideology critique:A form of philosophical and socio-political analysis aimed at uncovering how dominant belief systems—ideologies—function to sustain power relations, obscure social contradictions, and produce forms of false consciousness. It seeks not merely to describe ideas but to expose their historical, material, and political functions, thereby enabling emancipatory insight and action. | 2.radical realism:A philosophical position that affirms the existence of a mind-independent reality while emphasizing that our access to this reality is always mediated by historically and socially situated perspectives. It is “radical” in its insistence that critical inquiry must confront the deep, often hidden, structures of the real—especially those that are obscured by ideology, power, or dominant discourse. | 3.moralism:The philosophical stance or attitude characterized by the excessive or inappropriate application of moral principles, often involving the imposition of moral judgments without adequate attention to context, consequences, or the complexity of political and social realities. It tends to reduce complex phenomena to matters of individual virtue or vice.

Methodology: 1.Examining the affinities between radical realism and the Frankfurt School, especially the work of Theodor W. Adorno. 2.Discussing some further strategies for debunking ideologies without appealing to moral norms, namely by drawing on the reliabilist approach to epistemology and addressing the problem of motivated reasoning.3.Questioning the desirability of eliding moral ideas in the critique of ideologies by highlighting tensions within the arguments of radical realists and refer to central claims from the early Frankfurt School.

Answer: 1.Elements of ideological flaws and the Marxist affinities with radical realism | Realists focus on practices of self-justification; that is, moments in which might makes right. When a regime resorts to overt coercion to bend the will of its subjects, ideologies have not fulfilled their function – their power lies in being a covert kind of influence, difficult to see. | The most radical members see good reasons to find ideal theories of justice ideologically suspicious. Their scepticism rooted, at least to some extent, in the being/consciousness doctrine of historical materialism. | Conclusion: Realists draw inspiration from Marx and critical theory, which is why they tend to endorse, roughly speaking, a conception of ideologically distorted beliefs, attitudes and desires as shaped and formed by powerful interests within contexts of inequality. | 2.Strategies for debunking ideologies without appealing to moral norms | Radical realists should be keen to avoid what Williams described as a 'vulgar Marxism' that rejects all moral ideas as unworldly prejudices. | Radical realists should want to say something more moderate, namely that moral theories that abstract from political facts risk being prejudice-ridden. | Feasibility can be fetishised, as radical realists could argue by drawing on Adorno. Conceptions of usefulness and comprehensibility will bear the stamp of the powers that be and might thus be delusional themselves, especially since we tend to have a poor grasp of when it is really impossible to do things differently. | For radical realists, critique of such ideological claims about necessity and nature can be powerful. It historicises concepts and ideas that claim to be universal. | Conclusion: It's a powerful strategy to criticize such ideological claims about necessity and nature. | 3.Doubts as to whether a critique of ideologies should elide moral reflection | An evident way to debunk legitimation stories without resorting to moral principles is to show that they contradict empirical facts. radical realists wish to reject the epistemic warrant of beliefs in light of the reasons to mistrust the circumstances under which they arose. They rely upon an epistemological theory of reliable verification: A belief is epistemically suspect if it depends on premises that originate from the same source by which it is supposed to be justified. | A particularly promising form of critique assesses the function of beliefs, appeals to concepts and institutions that justify and sustain a political and economic order. | In such cases, however, it becomes difficult to grasp in what sense critique can or should remain outside of the moral realm to address the cui bono question: Who benefits from certain beliefs being firmly held, and what are the implications of exposing this? | Critical Theory Test by Williams: The critical question is counterfactual: If the disadvantaged were to come to know 'properly' why they really hold a belief, 'would they give it up?'One begins with particular convictions and imagines reflective questions the disadvantaged might pose. A person following these reflective steps would realise they are in a precarious position to judge whether their trust in the official stories is justified. And practical consequences follow from such a process of enlightenment. | Conclusion: There are multiple ways in which schemes of political self-justification can be evaluated without rooting criticism in a moral normativity. | 4.Limits of ideology critique of radical realists | Realists claim they can achieve similar objectives as morality-based ideological critiques without the 'risks and complications introduced by moral premises'. But avoiding moral premises entails risks and complications of its own. It can give rise to an undialectical mode of thinking that dreams of closing off entire realms of reflection while maintaining a posture of value neutrality. | Raise three challenges to radical realists via Adorno: First, Realists do not say that the relativity of judgments to constellations of power is problematic in a moral sense. But mere mistrust of the content of beliefs and the purposes of practices, given that they are a product of motivated reasoning is not enough to discredit them. Second, Realists, given their desire for moral abstinence, might fail to account for the normative presuppositions that explain their critical attitude towards the effects of power. Third, knowledge about the true origin of beliefs as well as the pliable nature of the order of things is not only difficult to gain and appreciate; it would also not suffice to liberate us from illusions since ideologies serve multifarious deep-seated needs and desires. There is reason to question the explanatory power of the radical realist ideology critique and the extent to which it can serve as an 'instrument for agents'. | Revisiting Adorno's reflections on the elements of fascist propaganda: The function of fascist propaganda is a kind of wish-fulfillment or gratification. This distortive communication is amplified by forms of moralisation that organise the world along simple dichotomies of black and white, good and evil. Radical realists will have difficulty comprehensively criticising this kind of abuse, because it requires reflection on those moments of inversion in which the cruel comes to be seen as just, and anti-democratic wishes are cloaked as democratic. | Conclusion: The ideology critique of radical realists, which bypasses morality, has notable limitations. | 5. Ideology critique should reclaim moral concepts from their distortions | Moral anti-moralism: it holds that illusions of individual responsibility and equality of opportunity hide the oppressive and alienating aspects of capitalism, which allows misery to persist amid overflowing richness. | Adorno found talk of responsibility ideologically suspicious. It distracts from how individuals are constituted and constrained by market pressures and social coercion, hiding the fact that most kinds of economic difference arise from factors beyond their control. | Adorno's ideology critique is driven by the moral belief that all senseless suffering should be abolished, grounded in an empirical observation that should make us not feel at home in this world: The forces of production and our technological capabilities are developed to such an extent that it is materially possible that no one would have to go hungry anymore or be homeless. Still, millions live in misery, which creates a strong apologetic necessity to justify suffering that could be prevented. | Realists would be right to ask for justifications for the reflective standing of those able to discern abuses of moral concepts and lend a voice to suffering. Yet they would also have to concede the limits of their approach and acknowledge that there are kinds of radical criticism that only an experience-led, moral Ideologiekritik can make, even if that introduces complications. | Conclusion: Only on the basis of a moral anti-moralism can we detect how ideological distortions turn ideas of the good and just into a 'cover of evil'. | | Conclusion: Bringing early critical theory into a long-overdue conversation with the realist movement in political philosophy is productive. Unlike radical realists, however, Adorno thought that a crucial task of critical theory is to reveal how concepts such as freedom, responsibility and democracy can become apologetic instruments for the unacceptable. The latter requires a dialectical critique that rescues morality from moralism, which disguises the cruel as just and diverts our attention away from the real causes of suffering and pain.

Checklist: 1. Does the answer include content on the elements of ideological flaws and the Marxist affinities with radical realism? | 2. Does the answer include content on strategies for debunking ideologies without appealing to moral norms? | 3. Does the answer discuss whether a critique of ideologies should elide moral reflection? | 4. Does the answer include perspectives on the limits of ideology critique of radical realists? | 5. Does the answer include the view that ideology critique should reclaim moral concepts from their distortions?