the study of society and human institutions.
>
> second, what if science itself is a form of ideology? i mean, hello?,
> there are plenty of scientifically proven 'theories' out there that work as
> ideologies. and, when you get right down to it, isn't the mathematical
> formulae used to scientifically thest the truth of a theory ulitimately
> nothing more than a language?
You might want to distinguish between a scientific theory and the uses to which it is put. Darwin's theory of natural selection is a scientific theory that has been and is put to use by reactionaries seeking to legitmate capitalism, inequality, racism, patriarchy etc. There is nothing per se ideological about the theory of natural selection. It does point out certain constraints within which people act. Ideological science is sham science e.g. _The Bell Curve_ and T.D. Lysenko. Steven Rose and S.J. Gould, amongst others, have done a lot of work exposing ideological science.
>
>
> and if the 'intelligentsia' are implicated in the ideology machine then how
> can science possibly be used as a way to gauge the truth of a claim.
by telling the truth to the best of their knowledge and abilities. Knowledge is fallible. A scientific theory may be wrong.
>
>
> and, if you say, well we need to develop rigorous methods for establishing
> objectivity then don't you need to then rely on mathematical formulae and
> so forth....
mathematical formulae are necessarily true a priori.... 2+2=4 is true regardless of ideology.
Sam Pawlett