Idealist vs. Materialist Concepts of Culture
IDEALIST VS MATERIALIST 'S CONCEPT OF CULTURE
Culture is complex and can be defined in various ways. The difficulty in defining the term ‘culture’ can be seen from the problem and the interest of sociology of culture (Williams, 1981). Culture can be said as problematic as the term ‘culture’ cannot be used to define everything that the society do. The difficulty. Despite the complexity of the term, it can be most usefully seen from two positions; the idealist and materialist, which are the results of earlier kinds of convergence of interest (Williams, 1981, p. 13-14). This essay will be discussing the idealist and materialist view on culture and how these two concepts differ. Generally, idealists and materialists have different opinions and ideas in explaining culture. Idealists on one hand say that culture is caused by human consciousness (their moral, opinions, imaginations and ideas), which then results in civilization. Materialists, on the other hand claims that a nation’s state of economy is what makes culture. Simply put, while idealists emphasizes on the ‘informing spirit’ of a whole way of life; materialists emphasizes on a ‘whole social order’ within which a specifiable culture, in styles of art and kinds of intellectual work, is seen as the direct or indirect product of an order primarily constituted by other social activities (Williams, 1981, p.2). Therefore, it is distinct that we are looking at two different approaches to addressing culture. The notion of idealist has long existed within the society. According to Matthew Arnold, a Victorian poet and critic, he defined culture as the “best that has been said and thought in the world” (Barker, 2012, p.40). This Arnoldian view of culture is very much related to an idealist approach, which defines culture as synonymous with the high arts, and it is seen as autonomous from social relations. So, are idealists ideal? What exactly does the word ‘ideal’ mean? Oxford Paperback Dictionary defined
Culture is complex and can be defined in various ways. The difficulty in defining the term ‘culture’ can be seen from the problem and the interest of sociology of culture (Williams, 1981). Culture can be said as problematic as the term ‘culture’ cannot be used to define everything that the society do. The difficulty. Despite the complexity of the term, it can be most usefully seen from two positions; the idealist and materialist, which are the results of earlier kinds of convergence of interest (Williams, 1981, p. 13-14). This essay will be discussing the idealist and materialist view on culture and how these two concepts differ. Generally, idealists and materialists have different opinions and ideas in explaining culture. Idealists on one hand say that culture is caused by human consciousness (their moral, opinions, imaginations and ideas), which then results in civilization. Materialists, on the other hand claims that a nation’s state of economy is what makes culture. Simply put, while idealists emphasizes on the ‘informing spirit’ of a whole way of life; materialists emphasizes on a ‘whole social order’ within which a specifiable culture, in styles of art and kinds of intellectual work, is seen as the direct or indirect product of an order primarily constituted by other social activities (Williams, 1981, p.2). Therefore, it is distinct that we are looking at two different approaches to addressing culture. The notion of idealist has long existed within the society. According to Matthew Arnold, a Victorian poet and critic, he defined culture as the “best that has been said and thought in the world” (Barker, 2012, p.40). This Arnoldian view of culture is very much related to an idealist approach, which defines culture as synonymous with the high arts, and it is seen as autonomous from social relations. So, are idealists ideal? What exactly does the word ‘ideal’ mean? Oxford Paperback Dictionary defined
References: Adorno, T. W. (1979). Television and The Patterns of Mass Culture. In H. Newcombe (Ed.), Television: The Critical View (pp. 239-259). New York: Oxford University Press. Adorno, T. W. and Horkheimer, M. (1997). The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception. In J. Curran et al. (Eds.), Mass Communication and Society (pp. 349-374). London: E. Arnold. Barker, C. (2012). Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. London: Sage Publications. Hawkins, J. (1979). Oxford Paperback Dictionary. New York: Oxford University Press. Marx, K. (1973). The Materialist Conception of History. In T.B. Bottomore & M. Rubels (Eds.), Karl Marx: Selected Writings in Sociology and Social Philosophy (pp. 67-80). Ringwood: Penguin. Maximoff, G.P. & Rocker, R. (1953). The Political Philosophy of Bakunin: Scientific Anarchism. New York: The Free Press. Schiach, M. (1989). TV: Technology and Cultural Decline. Discourse on Popular Culture (pp. 178-181). Oxford: Polity Press/ Blackwell. Swingewood, A. (1997). The Theory of Mass Society. The Myth of Mass Culture (pp.8-10). London: Macmillan. Williams, R. (1981). Towards A Sociology of Culture. Culture (pp. 9-14). Glasgow: Fontana.