The Resilience of Inner Freedom

I fear America is sliding steadily toward social disorder and economic disarray. In an atmosphere of deepening crisis, I am concerned about the potential for overreaction by government, police agencies, and citizens. These are circumstances in which terrible things can happen, and indeed are happening.

This week I will share a story with you that illuminates our capacity as human beings to assert our dignity and inner freedom even amidst the most dreadful circumstances.

Responding to the contradictions and injustices we experience in life is challenging. Yet, doing so rationally and responsibly can be a personal statement of transcendent freedom. This is possible regardless of the conditions around us, however difficult they may be.

To be free we must seek to be autonomous individuals first, whole and complete in ourselves, and then to actualize our identity with dignity and perseverance.

We may not like the reality in which we find ourselves. Indeed, it could be nightmarish. But, possessing free will necessitates a commitment to be free in oneself and to engage proactively with the circumstances we face.

If there is a primary requirement for attaining inner integrity, it is the personal determination to do so. In my view, this choice has never been described more eloquently than by Viktor Frankl in the book, Man’s Search for Meaning, the testimony of four terrible years as a prisoner in Auschwitz, the Nazi death camp.

Because his response to that experience is so revealing, I will devote most of this post to his words:

“I may give the impression that the human being is completely and unavoidably influenced by his surroundings. (In this case the surroundings being the unique structure of camp life, which forced the prisoner to conform his conduct to a certain set pattern.) But, what about human liberty?

“Is there no spiritual freedom in regard to behavior and reaction to any given surroundings? …Do the prisoners’ reactions to the singular world of the concentration camp prove that man cannot escape the influences of his surroundings? Does man have no choice of action in the face of such circumstances?

“We can answer these questions from experience as well as on principle.

“The experiences of camp life show that man does have a choice of action. There were enough examples, often of a heroic nature, which proved that apathy could be overcome, irritability suppressed. Man can preserve a vestige of spiritual freedom, of independence of mind, even in such terrible conditions of psychic and physical stress.

“We who lived in concentration camps can remember the men who walked through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of bread. They may have been few in number, but they offer sufficient proof that everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms – to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way.

“And there were always choices to make. Every day, every hour, offered the opportunity to make a decision, a decision which determined whether you would or would not submit to those powers which threatened to rob you of your very self, your inner freedom….

“Even though conditions such as lack of sleep, insufficient food and various mental stresses may suggest that the inmates were bound to react in certain ways, in the final analysis it becomes clear that the sort of person the prisoner became was the result of an inner decision, and not the result of camp influences alone. Fundamentally, therefore, any man can, even under such circumstances, decide what shall become of him – mentally and spiritually. He may retain his human dignity even in a concentration camp.”

As we face our own tests, which we hope will not be so daunting as Dr. Frankl’s, how can we find this resilience within ourselves? Here is a freedom gained through empowered compassion and responsibility as we respond to the turmoil of a transformative age.

No one can do this for us. As we turn our attention to the suffering and confusion of those around us, we are preparing for both the coming hardship and the new day beyond.

Tom

Next week: Liberty and justice made personal.

The Ultimate Freedom…

Farm 5-x

“Every human has four endowments – self awareness, conscience, independent will, and creative imagination. These give us the ultimate human freedom… The power to choose, to respond, to change.”

–Stephen R. Covey, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People

The First Steps to Freedom

The struggle for freedom and fairness in governance has a long and turbulent history. In the past the passion for liberty set citizens against totalitarian authority, and the goal was understood to be protection against the self-serving motivations of governments.  By liberty was meant limits on the power of government to impose its’ will on the community.

Later, people came to believe it unnecessary that government should be independent and opposed in its’ interests to themselves. Consequently, a new demand for short-term elected leaders became predominant.

This idea was assumed at first to mean that elected officials should identify with the people and the interests of the nation. It followed that such a nation would not need to be protected from itself.  Supposedly a democracy would not exercise tyranny over itself.

However, as Americans well know, the notion that citizens have no reason to limit their power over themselves only seems reasonable to those who have no experience with popular government.

After two hundred years of experience we know that “self-government” can be fragile and complicated. “The will of the people” often turns out to be the will of the most actively dominant portion of the citizenry, usually the majority, but quite possibly those with overbearing economic or financial firepower.

The American founders took great pains to control any possible abuses of power. As we saw in Chapter Four: Freedom and Order, the Constitutional Convention of 1787 recognized the importance of limiting such dangers throughout an uncertain future.

Liberty came to mean the freedom of each to live our lives as we see fit, so long as we do not impose ourselves on the well-being of others.

As an ideal, this is not so simple in practice. It was controversial then and it is controversial now. And, as I have suggested, the changes and challenges of the ensuing years have given us much to ponder.

Finding ourselves facing the dangers, complexities, and tensions of the present turning point, I believe the American people would do well to step back and reassess the values, principles, and general attitudes with which we can best regain our poise and seek a shared vision and purpose.

In short, I propose that the first steps to freedom will be those that lead to problem-solving and cooperation – if we are to avert catastrophe. And, I believe that this can be done most effectively when addressing felt-needs in our local communities. We will learn by doing, and act we must.

The first steps are challenging, but straight forward:

1) To engage as neighbors, which means learning to listen and to truly understand one another, and then to rise above our differences to resolve problems and address local needs.

2) To recognize the diversity of knowledge, skills, and experience we have available to do what needs to be done; our survival might depend on it.

3) To identify the extent to which we share values, and to build a level of trust that ensures we have neighbors we can depend on when the going gets tough.

4) To commit ourselves seriously to the ultimate purpose of seeking a vision of the future we can hold in common – a future we can all respect and believe in.

In focusing on first things first, we must learn the ways of community that Americans once practiced so well in the vibrant civil society of our past.

Such is the purpose of this little book. The pages that follow are devoted to finding our way through the difficulties and perplexity of this most difficult endeavor.

As we begin to take these first steps, I think we will find it helpful to reflect on the meaning of freedom in our personal lives. For it is deep in our own souls that we must first build confidence in our personal ability to prevail over fear and loss.

There is no greater strength to be found than knowledge of the freedom we control within ourselves. Indeed, it is through this primal freedom that we gain the capacity to respond to life’s tests with grace.

Tom

Next week: The resilience of inner freedom

Dear readers: I wish to thank all those who kept me in your thoughts and prayers during the past two weeks. My surgery went well and I am recovering rapidly. I keep finding more ways to appreciate you, and I look forward very much to continuing our conversation. (Please see the Facebook page, where there is active reader engagement.)

To Act With Integrity

We each have a sense of self, a coherent unity within ourselves, a feeling of integrity that defines our identity in our own minds. This sense of self is challenged by the conflicts and incongruities we are forced to contend with, between the material and the moral, the physical and the metaphysical, and the various unresolved concerns in our lives.

The moral philosopher Mary Midgley describes this experience rather well I think:

“I am suggesting…, that human freedom centers on being a creature able, in some degree, to act as a whole in dealing with… conflicting desires. This may sound odd, because freedom sounds like an advantage, and having conflicting desires certainly does not.

“But it is not a new thought that freedom has a cost. And the conflicting desires themselves are of course not the whole story. They must belong to a being which in some way owns both of them, is aware of both, and can therefore make some attempt to reconcile them.

“…The endeavor must be to act as a whole, rather than as a peculiar, isolated component coming in to control the rest of the person. Though it is only an endeavor – though the wholeness is certainly not given ready-made and can never be fully achieved, yet the integrative struggle to heal conflicts and to reach towards this wholeness is surely the core of what we mean by human freedom.” (1994)

Each of us, consciously or otherwise, adopts a system of morality upon which to base decisions and guide our way in the world, either a formal religious system or one assumed or devised by ourselves.

Whether it is weak or strong, sloppy or consistent, or we even think about it very much, our personal morality serves as the grounding for our sense of identity and our actions. It is impossible to function without it.

It is our integrity as “whole persons” that resists the onslaught of disintegrating forces in our lives. When we lose consciousness of this effort and succumb to the fragmentation imposed by the incoherent impact of advertising and mass media that constantly bombards us, we lose control of our independence as individuals.

This is particularly challenging I think for those who choose to disregard the teachings of the great religious traditions, which supply us with rich and textured guidance. For the reader who is religiously inclined, the way forward is generally well-lit – at least in principle.

If the reader is non-religious, the task will be to ground oneself in common decency, to focus ones’ vision on the highest good, to abide consistently by an ethical code, and to bring healing and encouragement to those around us.

Let’s be clear, however: This is quite difficult, especially when we rely on our own devices.
Each of us is called to step forward to participate in the affairs of the community we have chosen as our home, and to engage with our neighbors respectfully as active listeners and facilitators motivated by a desire to encourage and empower.

We can only ensure the integrity of our purpose by means that are in harmony with our purpose. Mahatma Gandhi said it best:  “They say ‘means are after all means’. I would say ‘means are after all everything’. As the means so the end.” (1937)

This assertion was stated somewhat differently, but just as explicitly by the economist and political philosopher F. A. Hayek, when he wrote: “The principle that the ends justify the means is in individualist ethics regarded as the denial of all morals.” (1944)

These are not theoretical statements. Rather they express a profound truth. The integrity of means must always provide the standard of reference in every endeavor.

If each of us holds our personal integrity clearly in focus, attends to moral responsibility, and respects our neighbor as we ourselves would wish to be respected, we should not find ourselves at odds with justice.

The manner in which we respond to our personal differences will determine who we are and the freedom we are capable of knowing.

Tom

In Two Weeks: Finding a transcendent resilience through inner freedom

Dear readers: I am scheduled for surgery next week. Consequently the blog will be on pause very briefly. I hope to have the next post ready for you on Friday, February 19.

The Freedom Within

Our freedom to make choices, however limited, defines us as human beings. Without freedom of choice there could be no morality and no capacity for personal integrity. Yet many of our choices in life restrict subsequent alternatives.

The choice of career, of a love-mate, and the decisions to have a family, to stand by a friend, or to embrace a religious faith, all limit future choices. And if we are caring human beings, we find our choices further constrained by our sense of responsibility as members of family and community.

Most of us are mature enough to recognize that freedom is impossible if we abandon responsibility. So, where do we find freedom? What is freedom, really?

The integrity of political, economic, and religious freedoms should always be a concern, and particularly so in times of crisis. However, the difficulties confronting the individual are always paramount. We each find ourselves facing our own tests, and each must respond on the basis of our own sense of integrity.

In the coming weeks, I will explore the difficulties we can experience when seeking personal integrity through clear-thinking moral, spiritual, and mindful self-control in the face of civil disorder or repression.

In times of hardship and distrust this is a vital matter.

Each of us could choose to walk away from the human crisis, but even then we would be confronted by the necessities of nature and circumstance.

Any attempt to walk away comes at great cost, limiting our personal opportunity to grow and mature through the challenges and tests of human relationships. Indeed, most of us find meaning in the commitments we make to our families and friends.

In this time of historic social disruption the potential for finding honor and satisfaction is at its’ greatest.

Whatever our decisions, when we think about what is most important to us – in addition to our loved ones – many of us would place value on self-respect and the freedom “to be ourselves”. We prefer to explore opportunities for ourselves without interference, to have autonomy in making our own decisions, and to seek goals that we have chosen for ourselves.

Let us reflect then on what freedom means when we seek it as self-possessed individuals, and on the attitude with which we can best respond to the social fragmentation and dysfunction that confronts us daily.

It is primarily in the context of tests and difficulties that our identity as human beings comes into focus.

Some of you are not committed to a religious tradition. Those who have religious belief will recognize that the guidance we receive from religious teaching, while critical to personal development and our ability to remain steady in the face of crises, also sets clear limits to appropriate behavior and constraints on free choice.

I expect those of you who are principled but not religious, if you value your self-respect, will never-the-less find yourselves constrained by ethical principles, by your personal dignity and sense of justice.

Religious or otherwise, I think it fair to say that our responses are influenced by our attitude toward life: our sense of belonging, our capacity to appreciate others, and our readiness to engage fully in life while attempting to remain balanced and unperturbed amid the confusion and negativity that life often brings our way.

We may care about human suffering; we may wish to avoid negativity and calamity; yet our personal feeling of freedom depends upon an ability to think creatively and function effectively when the going gets tough, even extremely tough.

This is a daunting task. To be free we must seek to be autonomous individuals first, whole and complete in ourselves, and then to actualize our responsibility as people in the real world.

We may not like the reality in which we find ourselves. Indeed, life can occasionally become nightmarish. But, free will necessitates a proactive response with a commitment to be free in oneself and to respond rationally.

Tom

Next week: Moral Integrity, Self-respect and Responsibility

Freedom or Paralysis

We all know the discomfort of unwelcome constraints imposed by our workplace, our families, and society in general. Freedom for the individual, it seems, is relative. As we mature we come to see purpose in the underlying order of things and recognize that often we cannot advance our interests without it.

We generally understand and accept the limitations we experience in life, however much they chafe. Still there are aspects of freedom we value highly despite the complications and challenges they present.

As individuals we value freedom of opportunity. We also have preferences concerning the control of processes that impact on our personal lives, and preferences concerning the processes that operate in society.

There is much of value to discuss here, but I wish to focus on our response to life’s inevitable constraints, especially in the context of crises, and the choices we can make if we wish to work effectively with others.

There are rules we accept that regulate such things as athletic contests and the marketplace, which make it possible to ensure fairness, to strategize and compete. And, it is the certainty of fairness and predictability that allows an economy to be productive and our lives to be sane.

Similarly, it is fairness, honesty and respectfulness that are most conducive to constructive dialog and decision-making in any organization or community. This is what leads to trust, and trust is essential if we are to reach our compatriots.

When we find ourselves confronted with unpredictable and chaotic conditions, our first steps can always be to address the need for order that allows respectful and meaningful communication.

Progress toward social and economic reconstruction in our communities will require that we work together in a civil manner, regardless of our differences. Problem-solving cannot take place otherwise.

We cannot assure safety in our communities or create effective organization if form and structure, or varied opinions, are viewed as limitations to liberty.

The iconic conservative philosopher Richard Weaver, who we heard from in the previous post, would say this goal represents a formidable task; that it would require us to confront a national character uncomfortable with form, resistant to leadership, and impatient with any systematic process. He called America “a nation which egotism has paralyzed.”

We have seen how this egotism has diverted our attention from serious purpose: in our infatuation with expensive toys, in our descent into personal and public indebtedness, and in a sordid media voyeurism that forgoes all pretensions of privacy. Weaver called it “the spirit of self, which has made the [citizen] lose sight of the calling of his task and to think only of aggrandizement.”

Is it this “spirit of self” that has led us to the meaningless disorder in which we now find ourselves, where self-indulgence overwhelms motivation, rational judgment, and foresight?

I see some truth in this, but I believe we must look more deeply into the character of a people who have risen to every test in the past. Americans are smart, resilient, and creative. In the difficult years ahead I expect we will gain a deeper understanding of freedom and will respond with a maturity imposed by necessity.

All form has structural limits. It is the consistent dependability of this reality that allows us to launch ourselves into new frontiers of learning and experience, to control the direction of our efforts, to instigate, organize, create.

Without the constraints of necessity, which include our own values, we would have no capacity to direct our energy and intelligence, to explore new ideas or undertake new ventures.

For the individual, the ability to exercise discipline overcomes the limitations imposed by nature and society. Surely the discipline to leverage inspiration against the constraints we encounter in life provides the power to actualize our freedom and transcend the material difficulties in life.

We cannot leap without a firm foundation beneath our feet; we cannot fly without wings.

It is in the encounter between discipline and necessity that we find the ground of freedom.

Tom

Next week: The freedom within.

Dear readers: Your thoughts and feedback will be very helpful to me.

Renewal of Our Core Values

Answering questions about what has gone wrong is never comfortable. Some truths are not pretty. But, revitalizing core American values and the restoration of a once vibrant civic spirit will require that we recognize what has been lost and why. I believe an honest appraisal is in order.

The current difficulties have developed over a long period of time. The gradual loss of a commitment to integrity in all areas of life has left Americans without the interwoven fabric of community relationships, without a soulful center or shared sense of purpose.

We find ourselves dominated by materialism and immersed in a homogenized culture with little conscious identity. Where is there a meaningful commitment to community, to the dignity of mutual respect, to embracing shared responsibility for local needs?

Most significantly, in my view, Americans have become obsessed with immediacy. We want what we want and we want it now. Reason and foresight have been eclipsed by a fixation on material appearances, and yet we are unabashed about entertaining ourselves with violence and degrading behavior.

Even the once humiliating liabilities of personal debt seem to be of no concern. All possibility of generating real wealth is abandoned in exchange for false appearances bought with future income.

Strange as it may be, we have essentially abandoned the future.

The moral bankruptcy and distortions of logic represented by this posture have influenced almost everything in our national life. An undisciplined attitude has led us to the brink of disaster, and our insistence on freedom from institutional and cultural restraints is fraught with contradictions.

For example, our respect for the individual requires that we honor the independent integrity and privacy of each citizen, and yet we have abandoned this principle out of fear for our own safety.

Similarly, we have failed to see that privacy has been sacrificed when we welcome the obscenity and titillation of mass media into our homes. Personal integrity is lost to a fascination with “the raw stuff of life,” in the words of the conservative American philosopher Richard Weaver:

The extremes of passion and suffering are served up to enliven the breakfast table or to lighten the boredom of an evening at home. The area of privacy has been abandoned because the definition of person has been lost; there is no longer a standard by which to judge what belongs to the individual man. Behind the offense lies the repudiation of sentiment in favor of immediacy.

Richard Weaver wrote these words before the advent of television. And he was not the first to make such an observation. A quarter century earlier George Bernard Shaw commented that “an American has no sense of privacy. He does not know what it means. There is no such thing in the country.

Weaver warned Americans of a self-destructive streak that would ultimately lead to a crisis. He pointed out our fascination with specialization and with the parts of things at the expense of understanding and respecting the whole. He argued that an obsession with fragmentary parts without regard for their function necessarily leads to instability.

Such instability is insidious, penetrating all relationships and institutions. In his words, “It is not to be anticipated that rational self-control will flourish in the presence of fixation upon parts.

This is not the fault of government – except to the extent that government, managed by people like ourselves, has joined whole-heartedly in the party. In a democracy it is tragically easy for government policy to degenerate until it serves the worst inclinations of a self-interested electorate.

Consequently we have descended into the financial profligacy of the past fifty years and are now the most indebted nation in history by a wide margin. Ours has been a twisted path, but with a clearly visible end. And, the implicate outcome remains ignored.

If we are to recover our balance, it is essential that we recognize the wrong-headed thinking that got us here.

Values and principle are not in question; only wisdom. What we are challenged to do now is to reconsider the way we think.

Tom

Next week: Freedom or paralysis.

Dear readers: I would be grateful for your thoughtful remarks and feedback.

The Will to Freedom

During the period when America was first being settled by Europeans, the emerging identity of the new nation was influenced powerfully by a hopeful confidence in the future: the belief that freedom would lead ultimately to general prosperity and peace.

A new understanding of history had, in the words of Duke Professor Michael Allen Gillespie, “opened up the possibility that human beings need not merely accommodate themselves to the natural world. Instead they could become masters of nature and reshape it to meet their needs through the methodological application of will and intelligence. This new understanding of the relation of man and nature had profound implications for man’s own understanding of his place time.”

The “will to freedom” as conceived and understood by philosophers and treasured by Americans from the beginning, thus became the dominant theme on a continent that seemed unlimited, but for the noble peoples it displaced.

We have not been willing to tolerate anything that stands in our way, including those once proud and independent indigenous American peoples.

The contradictions hidden in the vision of absolute freedom and unlimited prosperity have remained largely unconscious and unresolved, whether they be social, economic, or physical. Forced by extraordinary circumstances, our attachment to inflexible absolutes is today pitching us into a confusion of emotionally charged philosophical and political conflicts.

Several related questions were raised in previous posts.

Do we still think we can make ourselves “master and possessor of nature” without respect for the balances that life on earth depends upon?

Is absolute freedom possible, given the complexity and destructive potential that science and technology have opened to us? What do we expect, for example, of rapidly advancing surveillance technologies that are capable of prying into every corner of our lives?

Finally, what do the new realities we face today suggest about the meaning of freedom? Can we address these questions thoughtfully and retake control of our destiny as wise, creative, and courageous people?

The historic questions have taken on a contemporary character, but they are essentially the same questions. Earlier generations evaded these questions by exalting science and materialism above all else. Consequently, the denial of a rational God and the suppression of religious perspective diverted attention from a logical contradiction that transcended philosophy and belief.

When the constraints and limitations imposed by belief in an all-knowing and all-powerful God were disposed of with the cry of “God is dead!” they were immediately replaced by constraints and limitations imposed by belief in a supposedly mechanical natural world.

It was, of course, assumed that science would soon master nature, human beings would succeed in perfecting rational governance, and humankind would realize absolute freedom.  But, nature proved to be far more complex and unpredictable than was expected. And, having rejected the God of traditional religion, humankind has found itself confronted with a severe discipline imposed by nature, but without the grace or guidance of a loving Teacher.

And “rational governance”? Well, we have certainly witnessed in graphic terms the manner in which self-appointed leaders of “rational thought” led us into the totalitarian nightmares of communism, fascism, and Nazism.

Please make no mistake: This past is not far behind us.

If we are to reconsider the cataclysms of the first half of the twentieth century and the horrific consequences of the many bungled attempts to control human destiny – politically, economically, and scientifically – we might start to see the future more clearly. Indeed, we might then avoid potential disasters before they befall us.

The unresolved philosophical problems inherited from the past will continue to torment us if we fail to understand them. And, the danger can worsen with sloppy definitions and confusion about the requirements and limitations of freedom and prosperity.

Agreement among us is not required, but understanding the consequences of our actions in the real world is of immense significance.

We cannot neatly sidestep such fundamental unresolved questions, which I would suggest have embedded themselves deeply in the American psyche.

I look forward to reading your comments.

Tom

Next week: Transcending Our Limitations

A Conflicted Legacy

The emergence of modern civilization from philosophical roots in Europe generated ideas and social ferment that influenced the early American identity profoundly.

The new ethos was grounded in the belief that a rational humanity, freed to recreate the world through the power of reason, must be capable of discovering effectual truth. And, as noted in the previous post, this belief was accompanied by the expectation that human beings would soon master nature.

From these convictions there arose a faith that we would, in the words of philosopher and political scientist Michael Allen Gillespie, ultimately secure “universal freedom, general prosperity, and perpetual peace.”

It was under this dynamic influence that the American identity began to take shape.

The idea of a promising future for humankind was powerful, inspiring confidence in the potential to free ourselves from the shackles of an oppressive past. And, for the thousands of European immigrants disembarking in the New World, a working knowledge of philosophy was not required.

Everyone knew what America represented, and the promise, however primal and unformed it might be, came to root itself deeply in the emerging American identity.

Europeans were fascinated by the self-assured confidence of the American character, and Americans were energized by their freedom from the fetters of European cultures, institutions, and domineering governments.

There were ample crises and controversies, of course, to arouse and vitalize the new nation as it struggled to find its feet. We did not agree on much. The country was saddled with the unfinished business of its European past: the scar of slavery, the tensions between moneyed and working classes, and the prejudices of religion, race, and nationality.

Yet, a potent hopefulness prevailed as wave after wave of new arrivals powered the growth of a seemingly insatiable industrial economy. The ideas continued to generate a confident vision on both sides of the Atlantic throughout the nineteenth century.

But then things started to go terribly wrong.

Professor Gillespie has described the shock of events in the twentieth century:

“The view of history as progress was severely shaken by the cataclysmic events of the first half of the twentieth century, the World Wars, the Great Depression, the rise of totalitarianism, and the Holocaust. What had gone wrong? Modernity, which had seemed on the verge of providing universal security, liberating human beings from all forms of oppression, and producing an unprecedented human thriving, had in fact ended in a barbarism almost unknown in previous human experience.

“The tools that had been universally regarded as the source of human flourishing had been the source of unparalleled human destruction. And finally, the politics of human liberation had proved to be the means to human enslavement and degradation. The horror evoked by these cataclysmic events was so overwhelming that it called into question not merely the idea of progress and enlightenment but also the idea of modernity and the conception of Western civilization itself.”

We have admired the generation of Americans who prevailed during the Great Depression and World War II. We like to call them “The Greatest Generation.” They did not forget. They remained proud and frugal for the rest of their lives, though many of their children failed to understand.

They are mostly gone now. How many of us today know what they knew? …We, who have drowned ourselves in materialism purchased with debt.

What happened?

I believe we have tried to walk away from the past with little understanding of what had happened. Both the fear of debt and the horrifying perversity of the war have been largely repressed and lost to memory.

The practical limits of freedom in a complex world have started to close in on our lives, unforgiving in the absence of rational judgment and moral responsibility.

Are we ready to reflect on where we have come from and to confront the present confluence of crises with our eyes wide open?

Tom

Next week: The Will to Freedom

Freedom and Individualism

Colonial America was influenced significantly by philosophical ideas concerning freedom and the control of nature that many of us take for granted today.

One of the most influential of these ideas is the concept of independent human individuality, generally attributed to such thinkers as Petrarch and Erasmus, which emerged to form the conceptual foundations for the humanist movement.

Individualism has sometimes been associated with egotism and selfishness, but the concept was originally conceived as respect for the validity of the views and experience of the individual within his or her own sphere, and the ideal that each of us should be encouraged to develop our own natural gifts.

Humanism developed as a dialog among Christian thinkers and generated considerable controversy. Some of the resulting conflicts have never been resolved. The particular ideas that ultimately became most influential in the development of western civilization focused on the will to freedom and the notion of human control over nature.

Writing of this history, the American philosopher and political scientist Michael Allen Gillespie, a professor at Duke University, has observed that “modernity has two goals – to make man master and possessor of nature and to make human freedom possible. The question that remains is whether these two are compatible with one another.” (2008)

These ideas had a profound impact. First appearing during the European Renaissance, the historic transition from medieval to modern times, humanism gradually crystallized into the conviction that an ideal future civilization would bring freedom and prosperity to the world through the progress of science and rational governance.

To many the United States of America came to embody that promise.

The philosophical contradictions were, however, swept under the carpet and remain to this day. The fact that nature and the physical realm, (as well as the inevitable constraints of a complex society), impose limits to freedom rarely enters into consideration.

What limits? Well, we care for our families, whatever that requires. We cooperate with the necessary requirements of our employment. We commit ourselves willingly to civic engagements: athletic teams or dance recitals for our kids, charitable organizations and religious communities, all of which can take up most of our wakeful hours. And, we rarely fail to notice the impositions made upon us by government and the weather.

As with our social circumstances, the physical environment is an ever-present reality in our lives. We normally take these things for granted. But, there is more. The challenges to our sense of personal independence and integrity seem to be everywhere now. Even our principles are challenged.

By definition the word “freedom” implies that there is something we wish “to be free from.”
Many things can chafe in life, particularly the actions of others. Domineering and dysfunctional institutions are particularly aggravating in a time of deteriorating conditions. Yet, human beings have risen above the natural constraints in life to find meaning in a free society.

What is it that the world gained with the founding of the United States?

I believe we will find it useful to reflect on the development of our assumptions about freedom, a range of ideas that are central to the American character and have co-existed for 200 years with apparent ease, but which contain certain logical inconsistencies.

Clear thinking is of great importance today. A lack of clarity could subvert our best intentions, allowing muddled assumptions to fester behind the tension and contentiousness that threatens our self-confidence at the present turning point.

I suggest that we each reflect on what freedom means to us personally, not simply as a principle but in our immediate lives. We will explore this and related questions here in the coming weeks.

Tom

Next week: A Conflicted Legacy.

Can we be different?

GoldPour 3 Golden Band

“Democracy… while it lasts is more bloody than either aristocracy or monarchy. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide.”

—John Adams, second President of The United States

Dear readers: Are we, as Americans, somehow different? Are we prepared to pull ourselves together in the crucible of crisis – to forge a rational, humane, and sustainable future?

Tom

Grit and Grace

Americans today face a critical moment in time, arguably as profound as any in our history. Freedom of opportunity, social justice, and the preservation of our ability to seek personal goals are all at stake. The character of the nation appears to be in question. Our sense of identity as a people has been shaken.

We are experiencing the present adversity as an American crisis, and it is. But it is taking place in the context of a great turning point in the human story, a period of time when an unprecedented number of monumental crises are converging across the globe.  Our own crisis is inextricably intertwined with the affairs of the world.

Never has there been a greater need for the stability of the American vision.

I have proposed a simple, yet demanding course of constructive action that can lead toward agreement concerning shared values and principles. If we have the will, it can also provide a platform for seeking a shared vision of the future, and drafting a strategy for getting ourselves there.

This will be extremely difficult for Americans to carry off. But, I do not believe we have a choice. Without a willingness to engage with one another in this a way, I do not expect this nation to survive as a democratic republic.

We must find our way with both grit and grace, navigating through complex, interacting crises. We face a transition that can be expected to dominate the course of the 21st century.

The outcome will depend on our character as a people, and our understanding of the fundamental structural change in social, economic, and environmental realities that will confront us each step of the way.

Necessity presents us with stark, uncomfortable choices. We can give free reign to anger and disillusionment, allowing ourselves to be dragged down to a demoralized helplessness. Or we can determine to stand firmly together as a people, rising above our differences to meet the challenges that confront us.

Are we prepared to preserve core values, even as we forge a genuinely American response to the evolving conditions of an unexpected and unprecedented series of crises?

Will we have the vision, courage, and fortitude to commit ourselves to principled means and constructive action?

I will not offer a political philosophy, nor will I speak of ultimate goals. Fundamental values and a shared purpose must be determined by the American people. Rather, I will propose the means for doing this.

Both this blog and the forthcoming book identify principles I consider necessary for undertaking this endeavor, and suggest the qualities of character, attitude, and responsibility that can bring us through a profound turning point in our national experience.

I ask that we turn away from the dishonesty and deceit of partisan politics to address the needs and problems in our local communities.

A practical approach is offered that transcends religious, philosophical, and partisan views. It leverages the strength of local communities willing to foster genuine unity while capitalizing on their diversity.

I leave the ultimate vision of the future to you: the American people.

In addressing the epic challenges confronting us in the coming years, it will be necessary to manage our relationships and responsibilities with honesty and integrity. These virtues must be sought determinedly and without faltering, however dark the prospect.

I ask Americans to rise above our differences in the conviction that however immense the tests we face, however the world changes around us, however diverse our personal circumstances, this nation must not be permitted to abandon its founding vision and ultimate purpose.

Tom

A note to regular readers: If you wish to offer your encouragement, you may do so by clicking on the “Follow” button on the right side of the page. When it comes time to publish, numbers will make a difference.