Symbolic forms are context-specific and excluded from Allen’s ideological model.

Evidence

Despite being so integral to previous conceptualisations therefore, symbolic forms find no place in this new ideological conceptualisation. As considered previously, symbolic forms are also socially, politically, geographically, economically, historically and theologically specific, specific that is to the contextual setting within which they are produced, constructed, recognised and decoded, where the ideological content they disseminate and the processes involved in their subsequent reception creatively and constantly re-interpreting and re-evaluating the symbolic forms in order to ‘make sense’ for that specific contextual setting. — Chris Allen, Islamophobia, 906

Categorization

• DEFINE: Key definitional move: Allen drops symbolic forms entirely from his ideology framing because their meaning shifts by context.

Related

• Symbolic forms are context-specific and cannot anchor a definition (similarity 0.95)
• Context-specific symbolic forms can share identical underlying operative modes (similarity 0.87)
• Overemphasizing outward symbols obscures Islamophobia’s underlying ideological content. (similarity 0.84)
• Ideology is best conceived as systems of signifiers shaping social action. (similarity 0.80)