Ideology as a Sign System: Semiological Analysis

Introduction. This article substantiates the possibility of semiological analysis in relation to ideology on the basis of the semiological theory of R. Barthes. The subject of the study is ideology as a sign system. The scientific novelty of the study lies in the application of semiological analysis of ideology. The hypothesis of the study is that ideology is a sign system similar to mythology.

Methodology and sources. The research methodology is based on the semiological theory of R. Barthes. The social theories of K. Marx and T. Parsons are used to analyze ideology and its influence on society and social action.

Results and discussion. The influence of ideology on society and social action is a fait accompli. Ideology in this study is defined as a set of ideas and beliefs that express the interests of certain social groups. Ideology is such knowledge that has a political and socio-practical character. Ideological values and norms are an integral part of the behavior of social groups in society and determine it. The semiological dimension of ideology is the expression of such norms and values in social space and communications. The article provides an interpretation of social action taking into account ideological attitudes that determine its political character.

Conclusion. The main conclusion of this study is that ideology is embodied in the social space and serves as a tool to explain the interests of certain social groups, on the basis of which the corresponding semiology is formed, specifically peculiar to the actors of social action. The meaning and sense of ideological norms and values in society, being an integral component of social action, are expressed with the help of ideological semiology.

1. Kokareva, E.A. (2014), “R. Bart semiology: script, ideology, mythology”, Perm Univ. Herald. Series Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology, no. 2, pp. 94–99.

2. Orekhov, A.M. (2018), Sotsial'nye nauki kak predmet filosofskogo i sotsiologicheskogo diskursa [Social sciences as a subject of philosophical and sociological discourse], INFRA-M, Moscow, RUS.

3. Pavlov, D.N. (2015), “Mythologization as a tool of political propaganda”, Moscow Univ. Bulletin. Series 12. Political Science, no. 1, pp. 106–118.

4. Barthes, R. (2023), Mythologies, Transl. by Zenkin, S., Akademicheskii proekt, Moscow, RUS.

5. Saussure, F. (1977), Cours de Linguistique Generale, Transl. by Kholodovich, A.A., Progress, Moscow, USSR.

6. Barthes, R. (2008), “Eléments de sémiologie”, Le Degré zéro de l'écriture, Transl. by Kosikov, G.K., Akademicheskii proekt, Moscow, RUS, pp. 275–352.

7. Feuer, L. (1975), Ideology and the Ideologist, Blackwell, Oxford, UK.

8. Parsons, T. (1968), The Structure of Social Action. A Study in Social Theory with Special Reference to a Group of Recent European Writers, Free Press, NY, London, USA.

9. Schutz, A. and Parsons, T. (2021), Theory of Social Action: The Correspondence of Alfred Schutz and Talcott Parsons, Transl. by Korbut, A.M., Elementarnye formy, Moscow, RUS.

10. Joas, H. and Knöbl, W. (2011), Sozialtheorie, Transl. by Timofeeva, K.G., Aleteiya, SPb., RUS.

11. Luhmann, N. (2007), Soziale Systeme. Grundriss einer allgemeinen Theorie, Transl. by Gaziev, I.D. Nauka, SPb., RUS.

12. Platonova, S.I., Orekhov, A.M., Marcha, V.G., Moiseev, S.V. and Shevchenko, O.K. (2024), Sovremennaya sotsial'naya ontologiya v zerkale rossiiskoi ontologicheskoi traditsii: diskursy i interpretatsii [Modern social ontology in the mirror of Russian ontological tradition: discourses and interpretations], Kosmos, Korolev, RUS.

13. Parsons, T. (2000), Structura of Social Action, Transl. by Bakshtein, I., Belyaeva, G., Sedov, L. and Chesnokova, V., Akademicheskii proekt, Moscow, RUS.

14. Marx K., Engels F. (1955), “Die heilige Familie, oder Kritik der kritischen Kritik. Gegen Bruno Bauer & Consorten“, Sochineniya [Works], vol. 2, Transl., Gospolitizdat, Moscow, USSR.