What if our political beliefs weren’t just ideas floating in our heads, but were actually shaped by the way our brains are wired? In The Ideological Brain, Leor Zmigrod invites us to zoom in really close on the mental machinery behind our ideologies. Combining neuroscience, psychology, politics, and philosophy, this book challenges the way we think about belief, identity, and what it means to be human in a world full of rigid thinking.

Rather than treating ideologies as just historical or sociological movements, Zmigrod examines them as deeply personal and psychological phenomena. What does an ideology do to its believers? Who is most likely to be drawn to it? And how do our personalities, mental habits, and even brain chemistry influence the ideologies we adopt?

The book makes a compelling case that our politics aren’t just skin-deep. They can become cellular. Our beliefs aren’t separate from our biology; they are shaped by it. And in turn, the political systems we live under can shape the brain itself.

In The Ideological Brain, Zmigrod explores these questions using what feels like a multi-lens approach: the curiosity of a scientist, the concern of a philosopher, the hope of a humanist, and the imagination of an active citizen. She dissects the ideological brain and paints a picture of what a free, open, and tolerant brain might look like.

When I first read the title of this book, I expected a sharp focus on the biological side of ideology. And while that’s certainly there (and done brilliantly) I was surprised to find that a solid chunk of the book, especially early on, discusses the history of ideology itself. At first, I almost DNF’ed it. The introductory chapters were dense and a bit overwhelming, especially if you’re not in the mood for a deep historical dive. But I’m glad I stuck with it. Once the book transitioned into the neuroscience and the psychological architecture of belief, I found myself increasingly drawn in.

In fact, I’ll admit that I underestimated this book. But page by page, my curiosity grew. I was especially hooked when the discussion turned to how our brains crave social approval, how ideological systems reinforce themselves through internal rigidity, and how the antidote to dogmatism might lie in a beautiful trait called intellectual humility.

One of the most thought-provoking ideas in the book is Zmigrod’s take on the concept of freedom. She argues that “an ideology of freedom” is, in itself, a contradiction. Freedom, she suggests, can be a philosophy, a vision of autonomy and openness. But once it hardens into a system, a rigid belief with pseudoscientific or essentialist logic, it begins to betray the very idea it was meant to uphold.

The Ideological Brain is a deeply rewarding read. If you’re interested in how science and politics intersect, or if you’ve ever wondered why some people cling tightly to belief systems while others seem more fluid and open, this book will give you a lot to chew on. It’s a challenging, layered exploration of how our minds work in a world that constantly asks us to choose sides. And maybe, just maybe, it’ll inspire you to think a little more curiously and a little less rigidly about your own beliefs.

Summary

Why Conviction Is the Spark Behind Passion, Purpose, and Community

What gives our beliefs real power is conviction. It’s having an opinion and feeling sure about something deep in your bones. Convictions give us a sense of clarity in a confusing world. They help us discover what truly matters to us, or at the very least, they offer us something to care about deeply. And when we share those strong beliefs with others, they can connect us in powerful ways, turning strangers into a community built around shared purpose and mutual support.

How Our Brains Are Wired to Absorb Beliefs For Better or Worse

Our brains are incredible learning machines: quick to adapt, eager to take in information from the world around us. But that strength can also become a weakness. Research shows that we absorb strong beliefs, especially ideological ones, with surprising ease. When we’re constantly surrounded by rigid systems, filled with strict rules and repeated rituals, our minds begin to mirror them.

Over time, the more we repeat certain behaviors or thoughts, the stronger those mental pathways become. Meanwhile, more creative or independent ways of thinking, if not practiced regularly, tend to fade away. In short, our brains can become trapped in patterns we didn’t even realize we were building.

The Hidden Costs of Ideologies on Our Minds and Freedoms

Ideologies are ideas we agree with and they’re systems that can shape us, mind and body. When we absorb rigid belief systems too deeply, they can quietly chip away at our mental health, our ability to think freely, and even our sense of self.

The danger grows when we fail to recognize how these belief systems work. Left unchecked, extreme ideologies can quietly evolve and spread, even in open, tolerant societies, changing form with each new generation.

Though often packaged as timeless truths, ideologies are anything but fixed. They shift, adapt, and reinvent themselves, often slipping into our lives without us noticing. But the real trouble starts when they demand strict, ritualistic thinking. This kind of rigidity forces us to ignore doubts, silence our inner voice, and give up parts of our creativity. It asks us to become someone else: less curious, less unique, less free.

Neuroscience shows that when we’re deeply immersed in ideological thinking, our brains are physically reshaped by it. These belief systems affect our views and mold the way we process the world, rewiring our mental landscape from the inside out.

Culture Welcomes Difference. Ideology Demands Obedience

There’s a key difference between culture and ideology that’s easy to miss but deeply important. Culture is fluid, often celebrating creativity, eccentricity, and reinterpretation. It gives space for personal expression and evolution. Ideology, on the other hand, offers rigid, black-and-white views of the world. It tells us not only how things are, but exactly how we should think, behave, and relate to others. There’s little room for questioning or individuality.

Where culture allows for flexibility, ideology punishes deviation. When breaking the rules leads to shame, exclusion, or harsh consequences, that’s when you know you’ve crossed the line from culture into ideology. Whether it comes in the form of political systems like fascism or communism, or in seemingly positive movements like eco-activism or spiritual revivalism, ideologies tend to promise utopian solutions, demand strict conformity, and reinforce an “us vs. them” mindset. Their symbols and rituals create a sense of unity but often at the cost of freedom and complexity.

What Your Reaction to Change Says About You

How we respond to change, especially when the old ways stop working, can quietly reveal who we are at our core. It’s almost like an unspoken confession. Deep down, most of us carry two sides:

• One part of us is adaptable and mentally flexible. This version embraces change with curiosity rather than fear. When the world shifts, you shift too, easily moving between habits, thoughts, and routines. You’re not overly attached to rules or structure. In fact, you might even thrive in uncertainty, able to move fluidly through life’s unexpected turns.

• But there’s also another side: the part that resists change. This version clings to what once worked, replaying the old rule again and again, hoping it will somehow start working again. You long for things to go back to how they were, even when the signs are clear that it’s time to let go. This is the cognitively rigid part of you—the one that prefers familiar discomfort over the risk of the unknown.

Of course, most of us live somewhere in between. We might adapt easily in some situations and dig our heels in during others. But recognizing these patterns in ourselves is the first step toward growing beyond them.

How Mental Flexibility Shapes Our Beliefs and Our Freedom

The most open-minded people tend to recognize something crucial: it’s possible to explore new ideas without making everything personal. They can separate intellectual discussions from personal identity, which makes them more flexible in their thinking. On the flip side, those who are mentally rigid often struggle the most with change. They hold tight to dogmatic beliefs, avoid disagreement, and resist updating their views, even when presented with solid evidence.

This mental rigidity affects how we think and plays a big role in the kinds of ideologies we adopt. The link between cognitive inflexibility and ideological stubbornness gives us an important clue about how our brains work. The same kind of rigidity we might show when processing even simple patterns or ideas can scale up to more serious, high-stakes belief systems. In other words, the way we handle small changes can shape how we respond to big questions about the world.

The impact of ideological rigidity runs deeper. It affects our brains, our sense of self, and how we live our lives. It’s about ideas and freedom.

Why the Metaphors We Use About the Mind Matter More Than We Think

When we talk about someone “falling under the spell” of an ideology, we often reach for metaphors that make the mind sound like a helpless victim. We describe it as hypnotized, emptied, sedated, or even regressed to childhood. These images suggest a passive brain, one that’s simply filled up or drained by outside forces. But that view can be misleading.

Our minds aren’t empty jars waiting to be filled. And when we use metaphors that treat the brain like a container, we subtly shift responsibility away from the individual. The believer becomes a passive vessel, overtaken rather than actively participating. These metaphors, while emotionally powerful, can distort how we understand what’s really going on.

That’s the danger with metaphors: they feel like explanations, but if taken too literally, they become a source of confusion. A misleading metaphor doesn’t just blur the truth. It gives people an excuse to avoid examining their beliefs and behaviors. Many of the most common metaphors we use are rooted in an outdated idea called dualism, which imagines the mind and body as separate: one physical, one immaterial. But neuroscience tells a different story: our thoughts, beliefs, and personalities aren’t floating above our bodies. They are shaped by the physical brain itself.

Why Understanding the Brain Means Letting Go of Mind-Body Myths

Many spiritual beliefs rely on an old idea called dualism: the belief that the mind and body are separate, and that our inner selves are somehow nonphysical. This is how people make room for ideas like the soul, the afterlife, or communication with invisible spirits. After all, if our thoughts and feelings are purely biological, there’s little room for something eternal or immaterial.

But if we want to truly understand how ideologies take hold in the brain, we need to move past that dualistic thinking. The brain isn’t some mysterious, ghostly machine. It’s made of the same stuff as the rest of the body: water, fat, protein, blood vessels, nerves. It’s an organ with structure and function, connected to everything from our heartbeat to our gut to our tiniest toe.

Every thought, emotion, and belief, even our deepest dreams and most powerful convictions, comes from the brain. They’re not floating in from somewhere else; they’re generated by real biological processes. While it can be helpful to talk about the “mind” as our experience and the “brain” as the physical system, science shows they are two sides of the same coin. Change the brain, through injury, experience, or care, and you change the mind too. There’s no convincing evidence that a human mind exists without a brain behind it.

The Surprising Origins of Ideology and How It Lost Its Way

When Count Antoine Louis Claude Destutt de Tracy first coined the term idéologie, his goal wasn’t political. It was scientific. Inspired by the structure of Greek philosophy, he envisioned idéologie as the study of how humans form ideas. It was meant to be a rational, objective science, focused on understanding the origins of belief. According to Tracy, this new science would rely on two tools: sensation (how we take in information from the world) and deduction (how we reason through that information to form thoughts and uncover truths).

Ideology was meant to challenge superstition, not support it. It aimed to build a more thoughtful and enlightened society. Tracy and his fellow thinkers, who called themselves the idéologistes, believed that with the right knowledge and critical tools, people could become more lucid, curious, and mentally free.

But as ideology moved out of the academic sphere and into the public arena, it began to change. It quickly became political, a vehicle for utopian dreams and social reform. And over time, its meaning kept growing and shifting. Today, ideology is a slippery term. It can refer to systems of power, cultural norms, social control, or even everyday thoughts. It’s become so broad that almost anything can be called ideology, making it hard to define and even harder to escape. In trying to describe everything, ideology sometimes ends up meaning nothing at all.

How the Predictive, Social Brain Makes Ideology So Appealing

The human brain is, above all else, a prediction engine. Its first and most fundamental function is to learn from experience and anticipate what happens next. From our earliest days, our brains absorb millions of sensory details: observing, reacting, and forming connections. Over time, this flood of input becomes a mental model of reality: a set of expectations about how the world works, what people do, and what we can or cannot control.

Babies, for instance, quickly develop a sense of cause and effect. With every repeated action, they begin to predict what outcomes to expect. This isn’t just about physical rules, like gravity or object permanence, it also includes social patterns. As we grow, our brains also become experts in decoding relationships, understanding communication, and detecting subtle cues in others. This is how we learn what’s socially acceptable and what’s not. Somewhere in this learning process, we also begin to understand hierarchies, power, and the limits of our own influence in different situations.

These predictions, however, don’t emerge in isolation. They form based on how the world responds to us. If our actions are met with approval, fear, confusion, or silence, our brains log that data, reinforcing some beliefs and adjusting others. And importantly, the brain doesn’t want to live in a fantasy. It’s not satisfied with false models of the world. It actively seeks to be accurate. It’s constantly testing and updating its assumptions to better reflect reality, striving to reduce surprises and improve outcomes.

Two core principles guide this incredible learning process.

• First, the brain is built for action. It’s designed not just to think, but to move and respond, to make decisions quickly and effectively. To do this, it craves simple, efficient rules. It prefers clear shortcuts over complex calculations. Why? Because figuring out every situation from scratch is exhausting. By developing heuristics (mental shortcuts based on experience) the brain conserves energy and reacts more efficiently to life’s demands.
• Second, the brain is deeply communicative. Survival and reproduction hinge on social connection, so our brains evolved to crave attention and belonging. We’re wired to participate in group life. We don’t just want to understand the world. We want to feel understood by it. This is where the emotional side of cognition comes in: we need to feel seen, heard, and acknowledged by others. This desire for connection fuels our social behavior and shapes our identity.

Put together, these two drives, predictive clarity and social connection, make ideology incredibly attractive. Ideologies offer pre-packaged explanations of the world and clear scripts to follow. They remove the burden of constant uncertainty by providing structure, meaning, and a sense of order. At the same time, they give us something just as vital: community. When we adopt an ideology, we also adopt a shared language, common symbols, and a place within a group. We gain belonging, recognition, and purpose.

In this way, ideologies are more than just belief systems. They’re brain hacks: offering answers to our deepest cognitive and emotional needs. They simplify the world and help us navigate it. They help us act with confidence and connect with others. That’s why, even when flawed or extreme, ideologies can feel so comforting. They speak directly to what the brain wants most: to make sense of the world and to feel like it matters.

Why Ideological Thinking Feels So Natural to the Brain And So Hard to Let Go

Ideologies are belief systems and they’re designed to do exactly what our brains are wired to crave: predict what’s going to happen next and communicate who we are to others. It’s no coincidence that the structure of ideologies mirrors how the human mind works. Both are built around patterns, certainty, and a need to feel understood.

Ideologies tend to rely on two central pillars: a rigid doctrine and a rigid identity.

The doctrine offers a clear, all-encompassing explanation of the world. It claims to know what’s wrong with society, what needs fixing, and how we should all think, behave, and relate to one another. Everything is sorted into black and white: good vs. evil, true vs. false, right vs. wrong. This sense of moral clarity can feel deeply satisfying, especially when life feels uncertain or chaotic. And because these doctrines are often framed as perfectly logical or self-evident, questioning them can feel like questioning truth itself.

But rigid beliefs don’t exist in isolation. They live inside people. And some people cling to these beliefs more tightly than others. This psychological trait is known as dogmatism: a kind of cognitive stubbornness where a person resists opposing views, punishes disagreement, and refuses to shift their perspective even when faced with solid evidence.

The opposite of dogmatism is something called intellectual humility. People with this trait are open to changing their minds when the facts demand it. They’re comfortable with complexity, welcome diverse perspectives, and don’t need everything to be clear-cut. But for those with low intellectual humility, nuance feels threatening. They prefer simplicity, certainty, and one-size-fits-all answers.

Interestingly, dogmatism can grow out of two very different roots. Sometimes it stems from intellectual servitude: a tendency to follow the crowd and rely on authority figures instead of thinking independently. Other times, it’s fueled by intellectual overconfidence: the belief that one’s personal insight or upbringing grants special access to the truth. Whether due to education, religious faith, philosophical reasoning, or social identity, this belief in exclusive understanding makes it easier to dismiss all other viewpoints.

So, to think ideologically is to cling tightly to a doctrine and closely guard identity boundaries. It means resisting change, avoiding doubt, and dividing the world into allies and outsiders. And because this way of thinking offers both predictability and belonging, it aligns powerfully with the brain’s natural preferences, even when it closes us off from growth, understanding, and truth.

How Mental Rigidity Shapes Not Just Our Minds But Also Our Politics

Mental rigidity isn’t something that stays neatly tucked inside our heads. When our thinking becomes inflexible in one area, it often seeps into others. The way we interpret ambiguous images or process subtle shades of difference can mirror how we react to complex people, ideas, and political realities. In other words, a mind that simplifies the world into binaries (this or that, right or wrong, in or out) tends to bring that same cut-and-dry approach into every corner of life, from perception to policy.

Researchers have found that even in childhood, the way we handle perceptual ambiguity which means the gray areas between clear categories, can reflect how we’ll later handle social and political ambiguity. Children who preferred rigid, rule-bound solutions to abstract tasks were often the same ones who grew up to prefer strict divisions between social groups, strong national borders, and ideologies that favored sameness and control.

This is because cognitive rigidity erects mental borders. These are invisible psychological walls that make it hard to navigate complexity, rethink assumptions, or empathize with different perspectives. And sometimes, those internal walls inspire real-world ones, physical borders, social segregation, and rigid political systems. The more a person’s brain struggles to make abstract leaps or flex in response to change, the more likely they are to support external systems that reflect that same preference for order, stability, and homogeneity.

What’s especially revealing is that this mindset often correlates with specific ideological leanings. For instance, right-wing ideologies, which tend to prioritize tradition, hierarchy, and resistance to rapid change, are often associated with a more rigid cognitive style overall. But this connection isn’t only about political labels. It’s also about how people process the world. The more inflexible someone is in how they think and perceive, the more inflexible they tend to be about who belongs, how a country should be governed, and what kinds of change they’re willing to accept.

The boundaries in our minds shape the boundaries we build in the world. Our inner architecture, such as how we think, how we adapt, how we deal with uncertainty, echoes in the social and political structures we support.

How Nationalism Reflects the Brain’s Desire for Clear Boundaries

Nationalism is often linked to right-wing politics, and for good reason, it tends to flourish in ideological spaces that emphasize tradition, hierarchy, and a strict sense of belonging. But that connection isn’t universal. Nationalism, at its core, isn’t tied to any one political party. It can exist across the spectrum, because it taps into something deeper than policy preferences: it speaks to how people think about identity, belonging, and group superiority.

While political ideologies deal with a wide range of issues, from economics to healthcare to education, nationalistic ideologies are laser-focused on one thing: defining who is “in” and who is “out” of the nation. Nationalism draws rigid boundaries around culture, history, and identity. It idealizes the past, elevates a sense of national dominance or uniqueness, and tends to view the nation as something pure and unchanging.

At the heart of this worldview is a craving for certainty and order. Nationalism depends on strict categories, clear rules about who counts as a “real” member of the nation and what behaviors, languages, or traditions are considered part of its culture. It’s a form of ideological rigidity that maps neatly onto cognitive rigidity: a preference for black-and-white thinking, fixed groupings, and a resistance to ambiguity or change.

So while nationalism often appears alongside certain political ideologies, especially on the right, it’s really a psychological posture, a way of organizing the world that favors control, homogeneity, and unambiguous identity. And because it’s rooted in how we perceive and process difference, it can appear anywhere the brain seeks order through division.

What Does It Mean to Be Liberal? It Depends Who You Ask

When someone identifies as liberal, the meaning of that label isn’t always straightforward. In fact, it often depends on context and on which version of liberalism we’re talking about. There are two common interpretations, and while they overlap, they’re not the same.

The first sees liberalism as a mindset: one rooted in open-mindedness, scientific thinking, and intellectual humility. In this view, being liberal means being receptive to evidence, welcoming of diverse perspectives, and resistant to rigid ideologies of any kind. It’s less about political affiliation and more about a general commitment to inquiry, freedom of thought, and respect for complexity. This kind of liberalism doesn’t like boxes. It’s about questioning them.

The second interpretation is more traditionally political. It aligns liberalism with left-wing values, including a focus on individual rights, social diversity, and economic justice. This version of liberalism champions policies that promote equality, protect the vulnerable, and support state involvement in ensuring basic welfare for all citizens. It emphasizes inclusion, fairness, and collective responsibility.

Importantly, this political form of liberalism is not fixed. Its shape changes depending on the country, the political party, and the era. What counts as “liberal” in one time or place might look very different in another. So while liberalism often signals a certain openness or social concern, its exact meaning is always being redefined by culture, politics, and history.

Why the Far Left and Far Right Aren’t So Different, At Least in How They Think

The extreme left and extreme right might seem like polar opposites. But when researchers looked more closely, not just at political opinions, but at how people think, they discovered something surprising: both ends of the spectrum shared a similar kind of mental rigidity.

This phenomenon, often called the “rigidity-of-the-extremes” effect, shows that individuals with extreme political views, regardless of whether they’re far-left or far-right, tend to struggle with cognitive flexibility. That means they’re less likely to adapt to new information, less able to shift perspectives, and more resistant to updating mental frameworks, even in neutral, nonpolitical situations.

The idea echoes the old horseshoe theory in political science, which suggests that the political spectrum isn’t a straight line but a curve. At the edges of that curve, the far left and far right begin to resemble one another. Not in content, but in style of thinking. Both tend to show a high intolerance for ambiguity, a strong desire for certainty, and a black-and-white view of the world.

Whether the belief system is rooted in communism or fascism, what unites the extremes is not just ideology. It’s a shared cognitive style. When minds are rigid, it becomes harder to think creatively, tolerate opposing views, or embrace complexity. That’s why the problem with extremes isn’t just political. It’s psychological.

Is There a Gene for Dogmatism? How Dopamine May Shape Our Flexibility and Beliefs

It might sound strange, but our tendency to be open-minded or rigid may be influenced not just by upbringing or education, but by biology. More specifically, by dopamine, the brain chemical that plays a central role in how we learn, what we like or dislike, and how we form habits and respond to surprise.

Dopamine isn’t just about pleasure. It’s a key player in the brain’s reward system, guiding our reactions to the world around us. And where dopamine goes in the brain can make a big difference in how flexible or stubborn we become. Research shows that cognitively rigid individuals often have a specific genetic profile that affects where dopamine is concentrated. In these people, there tends to be less dopamine in the prefrontal cortex (the area responsible for decision-making, self-control, and abstract thinking) and more dopamine in the striatum, which governs instinctive, habitual responses.

This distribution matters. People with higher prefrontal dopamine are generally better at adapting when the rules change or when the environment throws a curveball. They can pause, reevaluate, and shift their approach, traits tied to mental flexibility. But when dopamine is concentrated more heavily in the striatum, instinct tends to override reflection. And this neurological setup may set the stage for dogmatic thinking, an unyielding adherence to fixed beliefs, even in the face of new evidence.

Genetics plays a role here too. Certain gene variants, like the Val allele of the COMT gene (linked to lower prefrontal dopamine) and the C allele of the D2 receptor gene (linked to higher striatal dopamine), are more common in people who show strong mental rigidity. It’s not a blueprint for belief, but rather a biological tilt toward certain cognitive styles. These genes don’t determine our destinies, but they do shape the possibilities.

Still, it’s important to remember that genes aren’t everything. Biology is fluid, not fixed. We are each the product of ongoing interactions between our genes and our environment. What we experience, how we’re raised, the challenges we face, and the culture we live in all interact with our biology in complex, dynamic ways. While dopamine may lay the groundwork for how flexible or rigid we are, the life we live on top of that wiring is full of options, paths, and potential for change.

How Religion Reflects and Reinforces the Brain’s Deepest Patterns

Among all forms of ideology, religion stands out as one of the most powerful and memorable. That’s because religion isn’t just a set of beliefs. It’s a way of living, acting, and identifying. It’s deeply performative. Rituals, prayers, and community gatherings don’t just express belief; they shape the mind through repetition and structure.

But not all religious believers think the same way. Research shows that there’s wide variation in mental flexibility among people of faith, and much of that depends on how frequently and intensely they practice. The more devout the practice (daily prayers, regular rituals, and strict adherence to doctrine) the more likely someone is to show rigid thinking patterns on cognitive tests. Conversely, people who engage with religion more casually or loosely tend to be more flexible thinkers.

Interestingly, the most cognitively adaptable individuals weren’t lifelong atheists or agnostics but people who had once believed and then left their religion behind. These newly secular individuals often outperformed even lifelong nonbelievers on tests of creative thinking and mental flexibility. On the flip side, converts to religion (people who adopted a new faith) tended to show the highest levels of rigidity, even more than those who had practiced religiously their entire lives.

Of course, the big question remains: does religion cause mental rigidity, or are people with more rigid thinking styles drawn to religion in the first place? The science hasn’t fully untangled that yet. It’s likely a bit of both.

What we do know is that religion taps directly into the brain’s core needs, the need to predict the world and the need to feel connected and understood. Religion provides stories and explanations for the unknown, comfort during uncertainty, and a sense that someone—God, the universe, a higher power—is always listening. It offers agency in the face of chaos, attributing meaning to coincidences and purpose to chance.

In that sense, religion is a kind of ultimate cognitive fit. It gives the brain what it’s wired to want: order, belonging, answers, and attention.

What an Ideological Brain Looks Like And How We Break Free

So, what does it mean to have an “ideological brain”? It’s a mind that is rigid in thought, emotionally reactive, and physiologically dulled to the suffering of others. It’s a brain that finds comfort in rituals, absolutes, and binary categories—us vs. them, right vs. wrong. It resists nuance, avoids doubt, and clings to certainty like a lifeline.

But not all ideological minds look the same. Each person is a unique mix, a cocktail of personality traits, cognitive styles, emotional wiring, and even genetic influences. Some people may be more biologically prone to dogmatic thinking, while others may lean toward openness and playfulness. Our ideological tendencies reflect these deeper layers of who we are.

What ideology often pushes out is what science, creativity, and genuine conversation thrive on: curiosity, flexibility, and the willingness to be wrong. Ideological thinking tends to shut the door on open dialogue and evolving ideas. It’s allergic to questions that don’t have neat answers and suspicious of play, ambiguity, or irreverence.

To step out of ideology’s grip is a creative and emotional one. It means learning to engage with multiple voices, to take things less seriously, and to go off-script. Freedom, in this sense, isn’t about rejecting belief entirely. It’s about reclaiming the ability to question, imagine, and revise. It’s about staying open, mentally, emotionally, and socially, in a world that so often rewards the opposite.

---

Author: Leor Zmigrod

Publication date: 25 March 2025

Number of pages: 304 pages

---