… what is likely to move the country towards large-scale adoption of personal morality and decency?
I put this question to Noman recently, and I’ve been thinking about it a lot.
Religion starts with the awareness of your own sins and shortcomings, and it calls you to repentance. A person who genuinely “gets religion” has decided to change. He turns his eye inward, and he starts to see all his flaws in a new light, against a strict standard by an impartial judge who can peer into his soul. He becomes very concerned with being kind, fair and polite — not to win points on Twitter, but because that’s the right thing to do. He treats the opposite sex with respect. He doesn’t gossip. He knows that he shouldn’t believe things because they’re convenient, because many of the things he now believes are not convenient at all. He also believes that all people have dignity because they are created by God.
He might also latch on to some really stupid adjuncts that come along with this change, but beneath it all he is a different kind of man.
There is, of course, a minority who “get religion” and then become fire-breathing crusaders who are anything but fair, kind and polite. Unfortunately, they often rise to positions of influence, just as narcissists and jerks become presidents of companies. The fire breathers are one of the downsides of a religious revival.
But in my experience, and in my reading of past revivals, the majority who are effected by religion — the pew sitters — have a newfound sense of personal morality, and while that may not completely transform them, it forms the hook on which appeals to decency can be hung.
That’s what’s lacking right now. There is no underlying desire for people to care whether they’re behaving morally or not. At least not in the traditional sense of “behaving morally.” For most moderns, “behaving morally” means “advocating for my group” rather than conforming to a more neutral and objective set of shared values.
“Decency? To them? They don’t deserve decency. They’re evil! Crush them!”
Now that I’ve given some color to the topic, I put the question again. Aside from a religious revival, what social force is going to rescue us from the ugly divisiveness that’s getting deeper and more dangerous every day?
With religious revivals come religious disagreements, which yield some of the worst divisions known to mankind.
Yes, there are religious disagreements, but beneath them you retain some level of a common foundation.
For example, when asked whether he thought God was on his side, Lincoln said, “I’m more concerned with whether I’m on God’s side.”
That answer shows the underlying agreement that I’m talking about. That there is a truth to which everyone is accountable.
We lack that today. Everyone has their own truth. “Lived experience” is more important than truth.
It’s certainly true that religious disputes in have led to horrible violence, but that seems to be a question of timing. IOW, all disputes led to horrible violence in the past. In more recent times — at least in the west — religious disputes have not been violent.
But the question stands. What — aside from a religious revival — is going to restore a common assumption that decency and truth matter?
It is ironic that you cite Lincoln, for he was in precisely a situation where there was in fact no common understanding. I am sure that a lot of folks down south also thought that they were doing the Divine Will (or however you care to put it).
Anyway, I have no answer to the question at hand. Occasionally there are people who care about truth or goodness. Religion may or may not have something to do with it.
It’s not a panacea but it may help if there’s an increased focus on rebuilding the nuclear family. They take time to communicate and do things together and less time isolated with online/electronic forms of entertainment. They are clear about good social values which govern their family and parents consistently teach and practice those norms…providing a strong/relevant example to their children. When more of that behavior is happening and less of this…https://me.me/i/oh-billy-we-dont-actually-practice-these-things-we-only-d8e874553b8b40e68297c817679cd456…it might have some positive impact.
Yes, that’s a good point. The family is where a lot of those lessons are learned. But what, short of a religious revival, is going to restore a focus on the nuclear family?
Maybe I’m overly pessimistic, but I think our culture needs something major to shake it up.
QUOTE: Maybe I’m overly pessimistic, but I think our culture needs something major to shake it up.
What would you suggest?
BTW, a religious revival just might be the only thing that could be substantial enough to have a broad systemic and sustained impact.
Unity =begins= with forbearance. Not with accusations, not with reparations, not with name-calling, not with a list of wrongs to be made right, not with hatred or the mantle of victimhood. =Start= with an exchange that each side can “get behind”, an exchange each side can honor by demonstrating their probity in tangible ways.
Trust is not given. Never has been, never will be.
It is earned.
I don’t understand how that answers the question.
First of all, “unity” is a complicated word in this context. I think we need unity around a few essentials — e.g., valuing free speech — and we need charity and forbearance in other things. As some have said, in essentials, unity, in non-essentials, liberty, in all things, charity.
But second, and more importantly, what is going to generate this new era of forbearance? What will motivate people to change their behavior and attitudes?
Also, curious what you think of this quote.
From Becoming a Barbarian, which I do not endorse, although it has some very interesting and challenging ideas.
It’s not clear to me that we have a sufficient number of people who want “unity“ war the republic to survive. Until we establish that, I’m not so sure that our first question should be how do we achieve unity.
OK.
Short of a religious revival?
Re-establishment of the labor unions. We can start with repealing all of the “right to work” laws.
We need to give “the little guy” the power of self-determination. With that power will come a more equitable change of status. I predict a politer society will eventually result.
As we’ve discussed before, I’m in favor of labor unions (provided they stick to representing labor, and provided there is some check on them becoming corrupt), but I don’t see how that will increase people’s motivation to put truth and fairness ahead of partisan spirit.
Giving the little guy self-determination …. Eh. Maybe. I don’t know. It’s certainly a circuitous path towards the goal.
It seems to me the most viable options (other than a religious revival) are (1) trying to get fathers more involved with their children, and (2) reforming education.