To Örebro University

I will propose a unified analytical frame, or a general theory, of the inner structure of social and political thought or ideas, as well as idea-systems. I will reconstruct and modernize the (not totally original, yet partwise forgotten) hypothesis that all social and political thought consists of three generic thought dimensions, underlying the symbolic surface of the language-use: first, values or value-judgements (V); secondly, descriptions and judgements of reality (D); thirdly, prescriptions, recommendations or practical proposals for action (P). These three, I hold, are always directly or indirectly combined in argument-sequences of practical reasoning. I term these argument-sequences VDP–triads. Such triads – this is the kernel of my proposed general theory – form the argumentative (dialogical or dialectical), action-guiding and action-directing backbone of the common ideal-type political ideologies (such as liberalism, conservatism, feminism etc.). They are also present as the inner argumentative backbone of deliberative political debate, public policy, and opinion-forming political propaganda; and of the cultural beliefs and action-guiding or action-accompanying thoughts in everyday, social and political communication and language. My proposed general theory is thus content-oriented and morphological, regarding the thought-content and inner structure of ideas and idea-systems; not functional or causal, regarding the societal role or spread of ideas, or the psychological or historical origins of them.

The theory-developing method is synthesizing and reconstructive, based on a concept-historical, concept-critical and theory-critical investigation of the prevailing knowledge situation. I use already existing theoretical building-bricks from the three main theoretical traditions regarding ideas: the political science knowledge tradition regarding ‘political ideologies’, as well as a bunch of approach-specific concepts like ’policy’ or ‘doctrine’; general social theory regarding ‘culture’ respectively ‘ideology’; and the Marxist and post-Marxist notions of ‘dominant Ideology’ and ‘dominant Discourse’. All these three theoretical traditions have conceptual shortcomings in some respects, as I see it, or have tenable theorems in other respects. Thus, I find some theoretical building-bricks useful, while others are disregarded or dismissed. My proposed general theory consists of three parts: 1) a theoretical anchoring in general social theory; 2) a theoretical model (the VDP-triad); and 3) a two-level analytical scheme, involving the fundamental and the operative levels of action-guiding or action-accompanying thought. As a scientific hypothesis, brought forth through critical analysis of the prevailing knowledge situation, and a subsequent, reconstructive and synthesizing effort, I consider my proposed general theory (hypothetically) as the argued ‘strong alternative’ compared to the other theoretical alternatives.

My elaborations start from a meta-theoretical perspective of political understanding and from the notion of the rationalizing mission for the social sciences, especially political science, vis-à-vis the actual problems of the contemporary situation, the proposed public policies and the positions of various actors in the political debate. The theory is intended for use in descriptive, content-oriented and classificatory analyses of social and political ideas (idea-analysis); and in systematic, empirically, logically and normatively rationalizing criticism of the same ideas (idea-criticism).

This article is the second part (Part II) of a longer essay with the aim to propose a unified analytical framework, or a general theory, of ideological thought content. As we saw in Part I (in Statsvetenskaplig Tidskrift 2018/2) I suggest that all social and political communication and language consists of three basic kinds of thought: values (V), descriptions (D) and prescriptions (P). These are connected in quasi-logical sequences of practical reasoning. On these grounds I propose the theoretical model of the VDP-triad. I also present an attached analytical scheme for content-oriented idea-analysis and idea-criticism. The scheme involves two basic levels of ideological thought – present in all social and political thought and language – the fundamental level (of philosophical principles, worldviews or human nature) and the operative level (of practical analyses of the situation and practical suggestions for action). My general method in theory development is presented as reconstructive theoretical synthesis, drawing on earlier, prevailing theories and empirical research of the ideational phenomenon in society. Part One consisted of Chapter One, ‘Bringing ideas back in’ (Sections 1–7), and Chapter Two, ‘Encircling the proposed general theory’ (Sections 8–14).

  Part Two, here (published in Statsvetenskaplig Tidskrift 2018/3-4) moves from hypotheses and preliminaries to actual, constructive theoretical work. Chapter Three is titled ‘The three main concepts of ideology in the prevailing knowledge situation; and the three main concepts of discourse’. This chapter contains a critical investigation of the three main theoretical traditions in contemporary social science regarding the ideational phenomenon in society, each with a concept of ‘ideology’ of its own. In Section 16 we find the sociological knowledge tradition and the concept of ‘culture’ where ‘ideology’ is seen as a sub-variant of ‘culture’. In section 17 we find the political science knowledge tradition and the concept of (plural) ‘political ideologies’ in parties and organizations on the input side of the political system. In section 18 we find the Marxist tradition with the notion of ‘the (dominating) ideology in society’, including the Foucauldian concept of a ‘(dominating) discourse’; I thus include Foucault and the Foucauldians in the Marxist family tree. In Section 19 I turn to the concept of ‘discourse’ as it is used in the discipline of linguistics, in studies of social and political language. My main concern is how the concept of ‘ideology’ in the prominent research program Critical Discourse Analysis is related to the linguistic concept of ‘discourse’. Later, in Chapter Four, Section 20, we will brush against some more conceptualizations in other, approach-bound terminologies regarding social and political ideas.

   Chapter four, ‘Working towards the general theory’ (Sections 20–22) is a kind of bridge between the critical explorations of the theoretical traditions in the prevailing knowledge situation (in Chapter Three) and the actual reconstruction-construction of the proposed general theory. In Chapter four we will meet a flowerbed of analytical concepts used in various empirical approaches, like ‘belief-system’, ‘frame’ or ‘policy’ (Section 20). I show a possible way how these concepts might be integrated in my general theory of ideological thought-content, the VDP-triad. Or to put it the other way around, how the concept ‘ideological thought-content’ of the VDP-triad would be possible to use in any of these different approaches. After that we meet (Section 21) the underlying assumption of communicative actions and interactions as the social theoretical anchorage for my theorizing (see also Part I, Section 8; and Section 16 here below). We also meet the underlying assumption of language in my theorizing (Section 22), where the (ordinary) social and political language in communicative actions is proposed to be generically dialogical, dialectical or argumentative (see also Part I, Section 14; and Section 29 here below). Chapter five, at last, is titled ‘Proposing the general theory’ and is doing exactly that. In the Sections 23–28 all building-bricks and connective fittings that have been brought forward so far in the foregoing chapters are assembled, ending up in the VDP-triad as the backbone of my proposed general theory. Section 29 is a comment on the intricacies of the methodological use of the VDP-triad, the procedure of interpretation in the process of discerning and describing the three basic kinds of thought involved in all social and political thought, communication and language. Then follows Chapter six, the conclusion (Section 30), where I summarize the perceived merits of my proposed general theory, suggesting it as ‘The strong alternative’ among other, available theoretical suggestions.

In this chapter, the basics of “Qualitative Analysis of Ideas and Ideological Content”, as a methodological approach, is presented from a quite original perspective. A unified analytical model is put forward as the starting point, termed ‘The VDP–triad’. The model is developed from the basic notion that all social and political communication and language consists of three generic, fundamental thought-dimensions: values (V), descriptions (D) and prescriptions (P). These three are connected in quasi-logical, argumentative sequences of practical reasoning – VDP-triads – which give social and political communication or discourse (text or talk) an action-guiding force, and hence an ideological or political meaning. Since all society and politics is made up of structured actions and interactions, all society is dependent on ‘meaningful’, action-guiding communication and language. Ideas or ideological content, thus, is related to the preservation or change of the social order, that is, the preservation or change of the institutions of society; as when traditional patriarchal soiciety, for example, is giving way for modern, liberal institutions. In this way, the analysis of ideas is connected to all political analysis; whether of the thought of movements and parties, media messages, governmental debates or public policies.  Methodologically, five types of investigation and analysis of ideas is presented in a six-fold table: on the one axis the distinction is made between content-oriented respectively explanation-oriented modes of idea-analysis, on the other axis three epistemological attitudes are discerned, the descriptive, the critical and the normative. Together these make up the five types: 1) descriptive, interpretative idea-analysis, 2) assessing and scrutinizing idea-criticism, 3) normative proposals from the side of the researcher, 4) historical and empirical explanative analysis, and 5) ideology-critique, explaining and dismantling the social function of ideas. The first of these, descriptive and interpretative idea-analysis, is regarded as basic to all the others, containing the basic method of qualitative idea-analysis. The VDP-triad is complemented with and analytical scheme, with two basic levels, the fundamental level (of worldview, basic values and human nature) and the operative level (of practical thought in practical situations). Finally, two illustrating analyses are performed, to show the practicality of the VDP-triad and the analytical scheme. The first regards the party platform the British Women’s Equality Party (WEP), founded in 2015. The second regards the speech of His Holiness Pope Francis, delivered in the UN General Assembly, also in 2015.

Background: Hirsutism has a negative impact on women’s quality of life. The relation between quality of life, anxiety, depression and the level of hairiness has not been described.

Aims: To investigate the correlations between the levels of hairiness, quality of life, anxiety and depression. Methods: 200 patients from Malmö, Örebro and Uppsala, who had been in contact with the clinics for problems with excessive hair growth, were invited to answer a self-administered questionnaire including sociodemographic questions, EQ- 5D index score, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Ferriman- Gallwey scale (F-G); of these, 127 women participated in the study.

Results: The mean values were: EQ-5D index 0.73 (SD = 0.27), EQ visual analogue scale 61.0 (SD = 22.6), HADSanxiety 9.5 ± 5.3 and HADS-depression 6.5 ± 4.6. The mean DLQI was 11.8 ± 8.4, indicating a very large effect on patients’ lives. All were significantly correlated with the amount of hairiness.  

Conclusions: Higher levels of hair growth were significantly correlated with a lower level of quality of life and symptoms of both anxiety and depression.