Joseph Knippenberg has an interesting — and enjoyably snarky — post at No Left Turns on E.J. Dionne and WFB. I agree with much that he has to say (which is usually the case), but I’m not sure I can completely agree with the insinuation that “serious intellectual life” and “ideology” are incompatible. I guess I’d agree that being an ideologue makes it more difficult to be a serious intellectual. But I think, Knippenberg may be conflating a few different concepts including “partisan” and “ideologue”, “intellectual” and “philosopher,” “tastes great” and “less filling” etc. (Okay, scratch that last one).

While I suppose I am not a “serious intellectual” — at least as Knippenberg would define it — my view of ideology has always been a mere checklist of values and concepts I consider it worthwhile to consult when greeted by new facts or ideas. Ideology, properly understood, is never a replacement for thinking. But it is a good way to organize your priorities and principles. I think ideologies — all of them — get into trouble when they cease serving as checklists and become more akin to a religious or “us-versus-them” mentality. But I see no reason to believe that intellectual life and ideology are inherent antipodes, especially when you look around and see so many celebrated intellectuals of the left and the right who are obviously carrying around some pretty lengthy ideological checklists of their own.