“In our western world, we live in a culture that stresses the importance and significance of the individual, while at the same time downplaying the importance of God. These two emphases, the significance of the individual life and the absence of God, cannot go together without creating an intolerable restlessness inside each of us.”
There is an interesting cultural shift taking place. I believe it centers on the role individualism plays in the marketplace of ideas in American culture but creeps into the rest of the world. I find it interesting that the left, right, and everyone in between seeks to promote individual rights, values, or ideas while also trying to control what these individuals can and cannot do. This isn’t a new phenomenon, but one that seems to be moving toward the center of our cultural stage. What I am getting at is that when we lift individualism as an example of an ideal society, we lose sight of our need to develop shared values to combat the dark side of individuality on a large scale. I may not be intelligent enough to discuss something of this magnitude thoroughly, but it is an itch that I feel I must scratch.
The American ideology is so closely connected to liberal individualism, Western philosophy, and the right to choose your own path with the variables in our lives that are within our control. I think that this is good and right in a majority of circumstances. The concerns that arise continue to present themselves as viable in our politicized environment, which I am beginning to see as a good thing. The discomfort that increasing politicization has on our culture can catalyze change in a positive direction by breeding growth and reconnecting with the values that shape a healthy culture. Unfortunately, the issue is that we see a regression into our bubbles of comfort rather than traveling forward into the newness of an ever-changing culture.
This divide's paradoxical nature is that both the right and the left promote the idea of “individual rights” while placing constraints on what those rights should look like in our overarching systems. Someone on the right may say “my body, my choice” when referring to an individual’s right not to wear a mask amid the COVID-19 pandemic, and someone on the left may say the same thing when referring to the rights of a woman to have an abortion. I am not here to discuss these statements' veracity, but I want to show that both attempt to emphasize an individual’s rights. The critical distinction between either of these statements lies deep within their values.
As a current MBA student, I am becoming fascinated with the importance of values in the world of business. Still, sometimes we like to keep those ideas within the confines of the classroom or the workplace rather than recognizing the impact of values on our lives as individual decision-makers and guides of group engagement. Patrick Lencioni defines values in a business setting as the “deeply ingrained principles that guide all of a company’s actions.” For this discussion, I would like to broaden his definition beyond the confines of strictly business and open the door to a person or group’s actions.
Values guide our decision-making and, as a result, shape our beliefs, though this relationship causes our beliefs and values to feed one another in many circumstances. As division drives the interactions in our cultural discussions online or otherwise, I know that I am not the first to recognize the divide in values on both sides of the aisle. This may be connected to the “meaning crisis” that many prominent philosophers and theologians dig into as we are stuck at home.
As our meaning becomes less secure, we begin to latch onto the things that we hold dearly about ourselves to define and guide how we go about our lives. So, if I were to value what my sexuality says about me, then that would begin to take a greater hold of my identity rather than just a piece of the pie. The same could be said for something as small as movies, which for me, in some of my more lonely days, became a great comfort, a lens for looking at the world, and a crutch for my identity. I began to value the ideas, creative process, critical thinking, and even loneliness of watching a movie in my apartment over other tasks that were probably more influential on my mental and physical health. In short, what we hold in high esteem matters, as it shapes how we view ourselves and those around us.
The concerning aspects of individualism in a world lived behind screens separate us from our shared humanity and heightens our smaller beliefs to untouchable values. So, for the sake of arguing, I will use my movie analogy once again. Say someone says they don’t like movies. When movies become an outsized piece of my identity, this statement becomes an attack on my value. This is what makes sports rivalries feel like attacks on personhood rather than just a trivial athletic event. When our identity becomes tied to things that people express vitriol and hate toward, the water begins to muddy between the things that used to be small aspects of our lives and the totems that genuinely define our being.
When our values begin to contradict one another’s values, the cornerstones of individuals start to crumble. They crumble because we have no shared value, no shared truth. As we begin to focus on the feelings of ourselves and our decision-making solely, we undoubtedly begin to cross the lines of the values of those around us.
In truth, the problem with individualism and the ideals of “pursuing my truth” is that when taken to the full extent or even a marginal place beyond that of shared, objective truth, we lose the ability to interact with each other beyond argumentation. When experience becomes the sole measure of reality, we have no sense of value apart from the likes and dislikes that make up our being. The idea of there being no objective truth is a statement of objective reality. It proves itself wrong.
We must be willing to push up against old ideas so entrenched within our systems to adequately make room for new ones. There is a fear seeping into our culture of relatively new ideas like Critical Race Theory or Intersectionality, and in some cases, I think these concerns are founded. These may not be useful as a comprehensive worldview, but deepening our understanding of our neighbors' experiences will always be helpful. We tend to jump at things that make us uncomfortable but do not question the integrity of the truth that has shaped us since our beginnings.
Do you think the ideas of Plato or other Greek Philosophers would hold weight in our culture if their pederastic relations were publicized as they would be in the present day? I believe they would be canceled and the immense possible contributions lost or discredited. I am not suggesting that the ideas that shape western culture be cancelled, but rather that we do not let our beliefs go unexamined. It is worth considering the actions of the founders of our cultural meaning-making and recognizing how these ideas impact our systems, institutions, and faiths. To find values amid our meaning crisis, we must be willing to acknowledge we are flawed, and our decisions may not always be in our best interests.
“Compassion constitutes a radical form of criticism, for it announces that the hurt is to be taken seriously, that the hurt is not to be accepted as normal and natural but is an abnormal and unacceptable condition for humanness.”
When we categorize our identity based on the aspects of our life that are likes or dislikes over the things that are at the core of our being, we risk our individualism hindering the pursuit of the common good in our society. Ultimately, the common good should be our highest pursuit. However, there will be disagreement over what this “good” should and could be on a large scale when there is no agreement on a commonly held objective truth. Individualism’s ultimate end is where we all have our own “good” fighting for ourselves. Put merely, individualism’s end is a disaster. I believe we are getting closer and closer to watching this end begin to play out.
I believe the antidote to such an end is compassion. Frederick Buechner defines compassion as “the sometimes fatal capacity for feeling what it's like to live inside somebody else's skin. It is the knowledge that there can never really be any peace and joy for me until there is peace and joy finally for you too.” Compassion requires us to live outside of ourselves, beyond what we may see as good for ourselves, and expand that to encompass not only the neighbor I love but also the ones I despise.
Despite the title of this piece, I want to be clear that individualism as a means of differentiating ourselves from those around us, thinking freely, and following passions have great merit in a prosperous society. However, individualism as an end to goodness and fulfillment will only leave us wanting, separated from one another, and divisive as we seek the truth. When we become the arbiter of our truth, and our realities inevitably differ, we lose our meaning as humans and children of God.
Differences are inherent to our humanity. I am not seeking a homogenized viewpoint. However, I believe that a high-functioning society cannot properly exist without foundational agreed upon values to build upon. This is the danger of both nationalism and progressivism as guiding stories for our reality. Both seek a homogenized view. Nationalism seeks to unite beneath the facade of greatness found in “the good old days” that more than likely were not suitable for people beyond a select group. Progressivism seeks to say that future progress is inherently better as it moves forward, leaving the flaws of the past in the past. Progressivism cannibalizes itself for the sake of the future.
Obviously, summing up these ideologies in just a few brief sentences does not do them justice. Still, I believe it is essential to see that both seem to assert the power of individualism while seeking to bring a homogeneous group together against their cultural enemies.
The Forward Tension
Where do we go when the primary narratives controlling the moment take us into unhealthy worlds of individualism and group dynamics? We must live in the tension that lies in a life shaped by gratitude and lament. This isn’t just some centrist or accusatory “bothsidesism.” Pressure creates change and also brings us together beyond our specific proclivities.
Gratitude breeds contentment. It fosters an attitude in our communities that should keep us from unnecessary wants and desires that lead us into selfishness, pride, and self-righteousness. Lament creates empathy and oneness in our communities to fight for the areas around us that need changing, listen to those hurting, and cry with those mourning. Individualism separates us from these aspects of life and encourages us to solely seek the pleasures and wants that elevate us.
I believe that the communal areas of life provide reminders of where we came from and where we are going. Knowing that we are not alone in our journeys creates a shared experience with one another. The goal of individualism seeks to provide answers to our problems in our actions and beliefs specific to our knowledge and pleasures. This should not be our way of life. However, if we let gratitude and lament draw us beyond ourselves and knit us together, we can move forward together. We have lost a lot this year, and I believe that there is hope so long as we recognize our faults, lament for what has been lost or unchanged, and be thankful that we can shuffle ahead with one another.