Quote Originally Posted by Dingy
But what truly perplexes me is why we call the world we live a 'material world', when we create spirituality (thus the spiritual world), we create ideas and ideologies (thus the ideational realm), why then would we call our world 'material' if we didn't believe in the existence of another kind of world elsewhere. Damn, language is so prejudiced.
Ooh, I finally found a use for Sociology class. It's Francis Bacon's Idol of the Marketplace. He theorized on the existence of four idols that cloud our understanding of true reality.

Taken from here
3. The Idols of the Market Place. These are hindrances to clear thinking that arise, Bacon says, from the �intercourse and association of men with each other.� The main culprit here is language, though not just common speech, but also (and perhaps particularly) the special discourses, vocabularies, and jargons of various academic communities and disciplines. He points out that �the idols imposed by words on the understanding are of two kinds�: �they are either names of things that do not exist� (e.g., the crystalline spheres of Aristotelian cosmology) or faulty, vague, or misleading names for things that do exist (according to Bacon, abstract qualities and value terms � e.g., �moist,� �useful,� etc. � can be a particular source of confusion).
Basically, our own languages affect how we see and interpret our world. The division of the world into material, spiritual, and ideological, among others, is a convenience to denote how certain things, theories, and their ilk can affect themselves and each other, but can also pigeon-hole us into limiting it to that.