By nature, human beings tend to have a worldview. Here, I classify worldviews as achieved and received. The first is one that a human being consciously strives to develop: they study, observe, and engage with the world to understand the meanings and implications of events and phenomena. Thus, they possess a worldview, are aware of it and choose their actions accordingly.
The second type is what an overwhelming number of people have; they follow traditions and what they have been indoctrinated into. Generally, people do not realise that they live according to an ensemble of doctrines. Agencies, practices, and fellow human beings inculcate these doctrines, shaping their minds. Even the most liberal societies have such mechanisms. People follow them habitually, little realising that what they consider natural behaviour is often the working of a manufactured product, consciously designed with specific purposes.
Most people are either unable or lack the means or opportunity to develop their own worldview consciously. They tend to imbibe what is given to them. A more significant fact is that most people cannot have an independent, consciously curated worldview. This incapability—arising from orientation or circumstances—makes people subject to ideologies and their constituent doctrines, which provide ready-made plans for action and conduct.
Here, the point is that although an ideology may appear unquestionably good to its adherents, it may not necessarily be good for individual human beings, communities, or humanity at large. Those who can detect the doctrine behind every human action—biological or sociological—can devise benign ideologies and equip them with mechanisms to suppress or sideline malignant ones.
My concern here is to raise awareness of the ideological work institutions need to undertake.
Niraj Kumar Jha