It's possible to substitute the abstract nature of a society of thinkers with the concrete nature of a society of actual agents. This would require an interpretive philosophy, not an ideology. The concrete content of an ideology is found in the eyes of its enemies, or, according to a different reading, in its distorted reproduction of reality. A logical universe of such a society of thinkers would, in contrast to the real world of particulars, be really of no interest. The "real" character of an ideology is therefore only apparent, and it is possible to reduce it to a rational science by substituting an abstract and vaguer subject, the thinker, with the objective social social actors. In the end this philosophical difference between the "real" and the "imaginary" is nothing but the difference between a master-signifier and a slave-signifier. If the master-signifier, "the real," is, for me, the list of the objects of my thinking, then the slave-signifier, "the imaginary," is nothing but the subject whose manifestations are understood by the master-signifier. In the mean time the mass are divided in opinions, of which opinion alone can make the general idea. The ideas of philosophers being, in respect to the sentiments of the multitude, the same all over the world, it follows that in every country the masses are always enslaved by philosophy.