Who needs theories?

This is actually a false question! Everyone has theories, we need theories to get out of bed in the morning and perform anykind of activity whatsoever. Acts need intentions and intentions need concepts. For these concepts to be useable they need to be arranged into a conceptual framework, a view of reality, a theory. The problem is some idiots think their theories are facts rather than theories. If they are always 100% right this is never dangerous. Unchallenged belief is usually a fatal condition however. The larger and more complex the activity the greater is the need for theory.

If we want to do absolutely nothing, and just lay back and vegetate of course we don't need theories. But any successful action needs good theory to make it possible. New situations require new theories (which in turn spawn new possible actions) and existing theories can be forever expanded, extending our possible activities. Theory is power.

There could be attempted objections to this, a mystic might say they are following their own inner light. Similarly a naive Marxist might believe that in working with the 'historical process' theories generate themselves as we encounter new practical problems. Other people have said that they have no rational goal and act purely according to their feelings, achieving things 'naturally'. But these are all still theories and govern how they act. One fundamental thing they have in common is the ancient theory of an ordered cosmos.

It is clear that we need to have theories in order to act at all. Some people of course think that they already have all the answers and that the theoretical side of politics is all sewn up. This is a dangerous illusion. Theories are never complete they are only ever useful hypotheses that give us a place to stand and various degrees of leverage in our activities. They are always improvable. They might sometimes even be wrong, luck has often been mistaken for expertise. But sometimes theories are never put to the test and serve a psychological purpose rather than a practical one. Such theories could be counterproductive to successful action.

Accepting this rational, theoretical approach doesn't automatically imply being 'logical' or becoming a 'rationalist'. When they have one working theory many people think that's all they need. They often work on the assumption of a guiding theory that states, on the occurrence of competing theories, that one must be right and the other wrong. But they miss out a lot if they take this approach and may not be completely successful because of it. There is little evidence that the world is that black and white (and little more that it has shades of grey). Successful people seem to select theories like specific tools to perform specific tasks.

Some might argue that theoretical work is just too much thinking and not enough activity, it might even get in the way of activity they claim. But this is a strange argument, most of us have plenty of time for both. In the political context it is not likely that radical change will happen in the immediate future, so we are certainly not short of time here. Both theory and activity are interrelated and test and reinforce each other, but they have their own spheres of application. Sometimes just sitting and thinking before action is the crucial difference between success and failure.

A related objection might be that constantly changing ideas or holding more than one theory is not a good foundation for a successful, ongoing political project. But is the impossible ideal of a single, unchanging 'truth' that everyone agrees on a better foundation? Clearly we cannot abandon ship and build a new one in mid ocean, but we can build a better one while still sailing in the first. A flotilla would be even more useful!

The idea of somekind of agreement is also important. This is particularly obvious in politics. Joint activity requires joint intention which requires shared concepts. This does not necessarily mean total agreement just some form of consensus and co-ordinated plan. Thus political theory formation requires consensus. We also need a sense of a common goal that can only be clarified only through dialogue.

These are the problems faced by any theoretical group and the solutions will probably be many and varied.

Finally it should be remembered that theory is not ideology. The latter is a system of beliefs thought to be true, the former a system of concepts held as a hypothesis. Theories are indispensable and can be liberating, ideologies are often dangerous and imprisoning.