What does "humanism" have to teach the church?
David Brooks' piece in the New York Times yesterday, on 'The New Humanism," may offer reflections that might help the church to learn and re-learn from the best psychological research and philosophical reflection. Hat tip to Donald Schell for the heads up on the article.
The New Humanism
By David Brooks in The New York Times
When we raise our kids, we focus on the traits measured by grades and SAT scores. But when it comes to the most important things like character and how to build relationships, we often have nothing to say. Many of our public policies are proposed by experts who are comfortable only with correlations that can be measured, appropriated and quantified, and ignore everything else.Yet while we are trapped within this amputated view of human nature, a richer and deeper view is coming back into view. It is being brought to us by researchers across an array of diverse fields: neuroscience, psychology, sociology, behavioral economics and so on.
This growing, dispersed body of research reminds us of a few key insights. First, the unconscious parts of the mind are most of the mind, where many of the most impressive feats of thinking take place. Second, emotion is not opposed to reason; our emotions assign value to things and are the basis of reason. Finally, we are not individuals who form relationships. We are social animals, deeply interpenetrated with one another, who emerge out of relationships.
This body of research suggests the French enlightenment view of human nature, which emphasized individualism and reason, was wrong. The British enlightenment, which emphasized social sentiments, was more accurate about who we are. It suggests we are not divided creatures. We don’t only progress as reason dominates the passions. We also thrive as we educate our emotions.
This ran this morning in our local paper. I had also heard an interview with Brooks yesterday. My first reaction was, "Well, duh!"
My second, though, was to appreciate a voice counter to the radical, monistic individualism that has pervaded our political discourse (including where faith comes into the discourse). As one who believes that the fall of Western Civilization began when Margaret Thatcher said, "There is no such thing as society. There are only individuals, and sometimes they come together for common needs," I can only hope that this marks only the first voice of many to call us back to a balance of individual dignity, and social integration and responsibility.
Marshall Scott
Posted by Episcopalhospitalchaplain.blogspot.com![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/nav-commenters.gif)
|
March 9, 2011 10:25 AM