Uncritical worldviews are mechanically imposed by one’s social environment

Evidence

Having first shown that everyone is a philosopher, though in his own way and unconsciously, since even in the slightest manifestation of any intellectual activity whatever, in “language”, there is contained a .specific conception of the world, one then moves on to the second level, which is that of awareness and criticism. That is to say, one proceeds to the question-is it better to “think”, without having a critical awareness, in a disjointed and episodic way? In other words, is it better to take part in a conception of the world mechanically imposed by the external environment, i.e. by one of the many social groups in which everyone is automatically involved from the moment of his entry into the conscious world (and this can be one’s village or province; it can have its origins in the parish and the “intellectual activity” of the local priest or aging patriarch whose wisdom is law, or in the little old woman who has inherited the lore of the witches or the minor intellectual soured by his own stupidity and inability to act)? Or, on the other hand, is it better to work out consciously and critically one’s own conception of the world and thus, in connection with the labours of one’s own brain, choose one’s sphere of activity, take an active part in the creation, of the history of the world, be one’s own guide, refusing to accept passively and supinely from outside the moulding of one’s personality? — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 1167

Categorization

• XREF: The contrast between mechanically-imposed and consciously-chosen worldviews prefigures later discussions of ideological interpellation and hegemony. — connects to: Social movement frames are leadership-produced worldviews that give activists ideological context. — Donatella della Porta et al., Mobilizing Against the Odds: Solidarity…, 33