David Brooks must have had an awakening since 2016. I recall the night Trump was elected and he was a panelist on one of the MSM outlets and I was watching as a curious Canadian. He was nearly in tears and disclosed how he had been texting some family members expressing their common feelings of being distraught about their fears for the future of the country. Funny how that stuck out in my mind because I thought it was odd coming from an objective journalist or so I thought. Journalism was supposed to be about examining how both sides of the debate felt about an issue and not just “orange man bad” which was the common theme from MSM. As a classical Liberal, I agree with the views he is currently expressing in his new book.
What I have found in the real world is that “how to be a humanist” is expressed best in terms of Christianity, properly pursued. The objective value and sense of self-worth spoken of here must have a divine foundation to be of any consideration. Otherwise, all we have are opinions of ourselves and others; of ourselves, usually heavily weighted in our favour, and of others, at best incomplete. If we find an objective source, such as the idea that we are all stamped with the image of God and, as such, deserve respect, regardless of our worldview or station in life, our way is cleared to create community and serve the common good. It’s what Christians do.
I would extend it to the Judeo-Christian ethos, which is fundamentally humility based. Judge not that ye be judged. Don’t try to remove the speck from your neighbor’s eye before you remove the log from your own. The Golden Rule. Imagine our politics if people lived these rules. The absolutism is what enables the dehumanization.
The Christian Worldview would point out that Christ didn’t come to give us moral lessons. If you believe that, you have missed the main part of his mission.
All the things you listed in your response are good things to practice. What happens when you willfully ignore them? What do you do with the violations, not of some perceived absolute law but of your own conscience?
I wasn't commenting on Jesus' lessons or his existence. I deliberately left my beliefs out of it. I was referring to millennia of the Judeo-Christian values system. And it's wisdom and superiority. One does not have to be religious to see the value of these things.
As to what does one do when when violates one's own conscience or values system? Funny you ask. I almost suggested to Roger that he read Kahnemann's "Thinking Fast and Slow" and Cialdini's "Persuasion". They talk about the ways the human mind conjures up false realities to make painful things go away. I'd say that often applies to the circumstances you bring up. We find ways to say we didn't do X; or, it wasn't really that bad; or....or....or.
To further address Roger's anecdotes. I think the people who behaved terribly, inexcusably, to political apostates are also Kahneman examples. They know what they are doing is wrong, but conjure up justifications. "The person is less than human". "The threat is so great that no discussion can be tolerated.". Etc etc. The human mind is capable of hallucinating whatever it needs to make painful tensions go away. It's an evolutionary trait that was useful at one time; but not now.
Your deliberate hiding is exposed by your questions and comments. You may see it as a value system, and so it is. But it is so much more to a Christian, (properly defined) In the Christian Worldview, there is also a very influential conflict-resolution part, dealing with issues between us humans and also between us and God. To leave that out is to remove the stuffing of the worldview, leaving a faint shadow of mere ethical wisdom we can gain anywhere. It is no wonder that “loving your enemies” is a part of it.
The difference between ethics and morality was covered by a TV character a few years ago. “Ducky” of NCIS fame stated, “An ethical man would agree that it is wrong to cheat of his wife. A moral man would not cheat on his wife.” I care much less about your ethics, which can be self-justified and pretended away, than your morals which is more personal. (while being more universal, interestingly enough)
John Holt, known for his work in promoting the home education movement, early in his ed reformist writings (How Children Fail, The Underachieving School) despaired for the future. This quote shows his despair: “Today freedom has different enemies. It must be fought for in different ways. It will take very different qualities of mind and heart to save it.”
Having concluded that the public education system was unreformable, Holt turned to helping people find alternatives. In these troubled times many have searched for and promoted different behavioral approaches to current problems.
Thanks for reviewing David Brooks latest book and presenting his approaches of appealing to our shared humanity in these troubled and polarizing times. It reminds me of the Quaker belief of “God within” all of us and how we ought to approach others. I look forward to getting his book.
David Brooks must have had an awakening since 2016. I recall the night Trump was elected and he was a panelist on one of the MSM outlets and I was watching as a curious Canadian. He was nearly in tears and disclosed how he had been texting some family members expressing their common feelings of being distraught about their fears for the future of the country. Funny how that stuck out in my mind because I thought it was odd coming from an objective journalist or so I thought. Journalism was supposed to be about examining how both sides of the debate felt about an issue and not just “orange man bad” which was the common theme from MSM. As a classical Liberal, I agree with the views he is currently expressing in his new book.
What I have found in the real world is that “how to be a humanist” is expressed best in terms of Christianity, properly pursued. The objective value and sense of self-worth spoken of here must have a divine foundation to be of any consideration. Otherwise, all we have are opinions of ourselves and others; of ourselves, usually heavily weighted in our favour, and of others, at best incomplete. If we find an objective source, such as the idea that we are all stamped with the image of God and, as such, deserve respect, regardless of our worldview or station in life, our way is cleared to create community and serve the common good. It’s what Christians do.
I would extend it to the Judeo-Christian ethos, which is fundamentally humility based. Judge not that ye be judged. Don’t try to remove the speck from your neighbor’s eye before you remove the log from your own. The Golden Rule. Imagine our politics if people lived these rules. The absolutism is what enables the dehumanization.
The Christian Worldview would point out that Christ didn’t come to give us moral lessons. If you believe that, you have missed the main part of his mission.
All the things you listed in your response are good things to practice. What happens when you willfully ignore them? What do you do with the violations, not of some perceived absolute law but of your own conscience?
And you still seem to believe Jesus didn’t exist.
I wasn't commenting on Jesus' lessons or his existence. I deliberately left my beliefs out of it. I was referring to millennia of the Judeo-Christian values system. And it's wisdom and superiority. One does not have to be religious to see the value of these things.
As to what does one do when when violates one's own conscience or values system? Funny you ask. I almost suggested to Roger that he read Kahnemann's "Thinking Fast and Slow" and Cialdini's "Persuasion". They talk about the ways the human mind conjures up false realities to make painful things go away. I'd say that often applies to the circumstances you bring up. We find ways to say we didn't do X; or, it wasn't really that bad; or....or....or.
To further address Roger's anecdotes. I think the people who behaved terribly, inexcusably, to political apostates are also Kahneman examples. They know what they are doing is wrong, but conjure up justifications. "The person is less than human". "The threat is so great that no discussion can be tolerated.". Etc etc. The human mind is capable of hallucinating whatever it needs to make painful tensions go away. It's an evolutionary trait that was useful at one time; but not now.
Your deliberate hiding is exposed by your questions and comments. You may see it as a value system, and so it is. But it is so much more to a Christian, (properly defined) In the Christian Worldview, there is also a very influential conflict-resolution part, dealing with issues between us humans and also between us and God. To leave that out is to remove the stuffing of the worldview, leaving a faint shadow of mere ethical wisdom we can gain anywhere. It is no wonder that “loving your enemies” is a part of it.
The difference between ethics and morality was covered by a TV character a few years ago. “Ducky” of NCIS fame stated, “An ethical man would agree that it is wrong to cheat of his wife. A moral man would not cheat on his wife.” I care much less about your ethics, which can be self-justified and pretended away, than your morals which is more personal. (while being more universal, interestingly enough)
John Holt, known for his work in promoting the home education movement, early in his ed reformist writings (How Children Fail, The Underachieving School) despaired for the future. This quote shows his despair: “Today freedom has different enemies. It must be fought for in different ways. It will take very different qualities of mind and heart to save it.”
Having concluded that the public education system was unreformable, Holt turned to helping people find alternatives. In these troubled times many have searched for and promoted different behavioral approaches to current problems.
Thanks for reviewing David Brooks latest book and presenting his approaches of appealing to our shared humanity in these troubled and polarizing times. It reminds me of the Quaker belief of “God within” all of us and how we ought to approach others. I look forward to getting his book.
"this approach is especially valuable for journalists"- beautifully teed up.
What a gift Tara!