1. False consciousness is defined as “an inability to see real conditions because they are masked by false ideas” (93). Does this propose a kind of "factual" faith in getting to correct, or true ideas? How does this square with the idea that there is no getting outside ideology (i.e. we can never be sure)?
2. If all meaning is contextual, all contexts are social, and all societies have recognition of common sense, then are ideologies just differing versions of common sense? What makes something ideological rather than just a local tradition or perspective? How does power or deception factor in? Do only "states" have ideologies, or can smaller social structures create and enforce them?
3. If “the task of literary and cultural theory, then, is not to escape ideology but to account for its workings in the seemingly disinterested and neutral presentations of culture, as well as in our interpretations of those cultural artifacts” (101), how do we reconcile this with the imperative we sometimes feel to work to make practical changes? Does ideology critique empower and lead to actions or create a paralyzing feedback loop or...?
4. Considering the E-lit piece that we looked at this week, are there ways in which it exposes a dominant ideology or invites the reader/player to become aware of certain assumptions?(Someone help improve this questions. It's rough. But I think we should ask something like this. )