Inventing the Individual

Siedentop, L. (2014). Inventing the individual: The origins of Western liberalism. London: Penguin Books.

Crisis of belief

I shall begin this book review with Sidentop’s final statement, “If we in the West do not understand the moral depth of our own tradition, how can we hope to shape the conversation of mankind?” He contends that many misguided intellectuals attribute the progress of Western civilization as resting on the foundation of the Enlightenment and the Renaissance of the fifteenth century. Modernity is characterised with the rise of secularism and modern science. With it has come a crisis of belief and questions about the relationship between secularism and faith.

Liberal democratic ideals

Our liberal democratic ideals did not, as many modern humanists believe, stem directly from Ancient Greek and Roman culture. Antiquity was grounded on 'natural' inequality and based on the ancestral family, hierarchical structure and slavery. The government of the Ancient city was based on patriarchy, racism, slavery, and the subjugation of women and the poor. Ancient democracy supported the notion of hierarchy and inequality. Only the male heads of property owning families could vote and make laws that formed the government of the people. This meant that women, slaves, foreigners and non-land owners were regarded as taking on a subservient role, which reflected their proper (natural) place in the world. 

The ancients

The ancient philosophers used reason to prop up this ancient notion of the 'polis' because they viewed world of matter and the cosmos as reflecting their own social hierarchical structures. Thus, the ancients believed that the paternal head was the guardian/priest of the family and property. The family property was the spiritual home of their ancestors. The notion of self was linked to an understanding of their position and status in the 'natural' order.  Thus, philosophical reasoning reflected this 'natural' order and ancient science demonstrated the processes. Moreover, the cosmos, for example, was seen as being composed of something like a hierarchy of concentric spheres, the closer the relationship to the earth and matter the lower the order or status of the sphere.  

The notion of the individual

A radical departure from the ancient 'natural' order was the Christian understanding of human kind: God created rational creatures who were endowed with the ability to reason and were free to make choices. It was an egalitarian understanding  whereby all individuals, no matter what their social status, race, or gender have a soul and are socially responsible. This notion developed into a new sociability,  a ..."sociability founded on the role of the individual conscience, on accepting the claims of a universal moral law. In no sphere did this emerge more clearly than in the status and treatment of women. We have seen that women had played an important part in the growth of the early church." The equal status of men and women in the marriage union was also reflected in society. The Biblical concept of reciprocality whereby you are expected to treat others as you would have them treat you has become known as the "golden rule" and is a foundation for a theory of "natural rights", ..."rights which belong to the individual as such, rights which are in that sense pre-social and ought to serve as a criterion of legitimate social organisation."

The individual and Government

The concept of democracy, liberalism and the notion of the individual and our understanding of natural rights were all developed in the hothouse of Western monastic culture. While Europe fragmented into localised feudal fiefdoms after the fall of the Roman empire the proliferation of monasticism preserved and spread Christendom throughout the West. In contrast to the hierarchical structure of the secular feudal society Western monasticism gave value to the individual and fostered the notion of egalitarianism. In monasteries persons neither had property or differential status but did have individual rights and responsibilities. Thus monasteries were regarded associations of individuals of equal status, for example, an abbot was usually elected by the monks. Thus, it was effectively government from the bottom up and essentially laid the foundation for modern liberal democracies. 

Meaning of individuals

By the time of the Renaissance the rise of individual agency and the development of modern liberal science and liberal society based on reasoned argument was already well underway. Theologians and philosophers in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries developed cannon law which gave legitimacy to the notion that corporations came to be understood as associations of individuals. Thus the final authority of any association is found in the individual.

Springtime for Snowflakes: A book review

Snowflakes
The term 'Snowflakes' refers to the generation centred around the year 2000 to the present and is characterised by having less psychological resilience than previous generations. They are more emotionally vulnerable and take offence with ideas that challenge their own world view. Snowflakes have generally been raised by over-protective parents that give their children a sense of their own uniqueness and entitlement. When they feel emotionally challenged with language,  actions or confronting ideas, in  tertiary settings, for example, they often appeal for help, often through social media or appeal to campus authorities to shame or shut down the opposing views.

Academic climate: in crisis
Many higher education campuses thoughout the the US and other western countries have promoted social justice consciousness-raising or "wokeness". This ideological bias can be evidenced by the prevalence of "safe spaces, " trigger warnings," "bias reporting hotlines," and the "no platforming" of speakers. Such terms and actions as these have found their way into feminist and gender theory and into mainstream college and general university culture. This situation reinforces the vulnerabilities of the snowflake generation and gives legitimacy to a self-righteous and bigoted notion of social justice ideals. The effect of these trends is the stifling of free speech and developing a climate for a no-contest for ideas. Instead of promoting fee speech and open debate many universities and colleges have become close minded and self-censoring.

Social Justice
Social justice principles have promoted diversity and inclusion in most Western societies. Since the 1960s the social justice movement, particularly in America, promoted civil rights for people of all races. Social justice ideals have been important in promoting tolerance and improving the lives of the disabled, women, racial, religious, gender and ethnic groups within western societies.

Overtime time, however,  "social justice warriors" have become intolerant to other voices in society.  Rectenwald contends rather than encouraging diversity and inclusion social justice ideologies have become increasingly authoritarian and anti-intellectual. Public universities and colleges have for centuries been the melting pot for openness, critical thought, creativity, innovation and the fostering of academic rigour using scientific methodology. In contrast, so called "justice warriors" are often blinded by their own self-righteousness (see previous book review) and intolerance, for example, they would not use demeaning and derogative terms used to highlight racial difference but have no compunction about using bigoted terms such as "toxic masculinity" or 'white privilege' to shame and silence others.

Social justice as an ideology
The transformation of social justice into a 'fundamentalist' ideology by the progressive left draws upon Critical Theory (see earlier book review), liberal philosophy and postmodern theory and has led to a paradox of tolerance where pure tolerance is now impossible. Rectenwald contends that some sentiments in society are so intolerant that they become "intolerable". This social justice ideology draws from linguistic constructivism, rather than language representing reality it instead, constitutes a kind of social reality. This theoretical perspective takes the view that rather than describing a physical act it is itself a material agent. This orientation promotes terms such as "discursive violence" and "hate speech" not as a description of distasteful language but rather the social justice believer equates opinion with violence itself.

Dogma and the new religion
Linguistic and social constructivism is a type of philosophical and social idealism that enforces moral absolutism, which demands that all citizens should be of the one mind - a religious fundamentalism .  Rectenwald believes ..."Once beliefs are unconstrained by the objective world and people can believe anything they like with impunity, the possibility for assuming a pretence of infallibility becomes almost irresistible, especially when the requisite power is available to support such idealism. In fact, given its willy-nilly determination of truth and reality on the basis of beliefs alone, philosophical and social idealism necessarily becomes dogmatic, authoritarian, anti-rational, and effectively religious" (see also Is postmodernism a religion). This is at odds with the Christian notion that all individuals are equal, responsible, and should be free to make their own choices; principles promoted by Martin Luther King and others during the civil-rights movement.

The Book:
Rectenwald, M. (2018). Springtime for snowflakes: Social justice and its postmodern parentage. Nashville: New English Review Press.

See also:

'Deplorable professor' sues NYU

Stephen Hicks: falsification of Marxism and the development of Postmodernism

Dr Alan Kirby on Post-postmodernism

Review: The Righteous Mind

Cover image from Amazon

Reason: a slave to emotion
The righteous mind is by nature a mind that is moralistic, critical and judgemental. Haidt contends this characteristic has been reserved for the righteous conservatives but is now exhibited by the post-modern progressives in society. It would seem that adherents to contemporary notions of social justice would hold that truth as being relative and rationalism as being delusional.

Generally people seem to condemn some distasteful actions very quickly, in doing so they tend not to use sufficient time to think carefully but act from a feeling orientation. Haidt supports Humes contention that most people are slaves to passion. For most of us our passions are automatic. This is particularly pertinent in an age where social justice and political correctness are emotionally sensitive issues. Ever since the Age of Enlightenment reason has been held to be our most noble attribute. However, arguments in the public sphere are no longer focussed on truth.  In the postmodern era truth is relative and has given way to passion and tribalism.

Reason and faith
Haidt claims that, "In the decades after Hume's death the rationalists claimed victory over religion and took the moral sciences off on a two-hundred year tangent." However, Haidt does not develop this important notion to any extent. He briefly mentions the contribution of Christianity to Western civilisation and progress. He also discusses the ethics of utilitarianism and deontology but does not elaborate on the sacred and man's relationship of being made in 'God's' image. This relationship elevates mankind as co-creators and as beings that are imbued with dignity. Creativity values both reason and faith. Reason without faith leads to reason's demise just as faith without reason is doomed to fail.

Six foundations: understanding the righteous mind
Haidt develops a particularly interesting premise on which to view current social development where both faith and reason are facing darker times. He draws a distinction between liberals, libertarians and social conservatives by showing how they are different and what drives their particular world views within contemporary society. Such values cut across political party lines to varying degrees. This is a useful tool in understanding the mess we are in at this moment in history.

These distinctions are given some extra depth by considering six foundational elements that further differentiate current political and social groupings: care/harm, liberty/oppression, fairness/cheating, loyalty/betrayal, authority/subversion, and sanctity/degradation as moral foundations. For example, the political left strongly rests on care/harm and liberty/oppression which support the ideas of social justice and emphasise compassion for the poor and the marginalised. In contrast, conservatives care more about the fairness/cheating foundation.

He finishes with some good advice for the the next time you find yourself seated beside someone from a different orientation. Don't just jump straight into the conversation to defend your point of view by bringing up contentious issues of morality. Start by establishing some common ground, use a bit of praise and express some genuine interest the other person's concerns.

Haidt, J, The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. London: Puffin.

Also read:
The death of postmodernism and beyond Alan Kirby

The Limits of Critique

Cover image from Amazon

Modern-day critics
Modern day critics of literature unmask and delve between the lines to determine hidden truths and repressed beliefs. It stems from Marxist critical pedagogy, that requires consumers of literature to adopt a critical and questioning approach to reveal embedded social and political power relationships that lie, often unnoticed, within text and other works of art. Critique is now the dominant form of interpretation in literate circles. Rita Feleski examines critique and situates it among other forms of literary examination and credits it with a worthwhile contribution. However, it does have its obvious limitations. It is essentially a poststructuralist notion of language whereby the practitioners of critical literacy search for discourses and reasons why they are included or left out of texts.

Suspicion
Interpretation is often motivated by a spirit of disenchantment and skepticism or outright condemnation. Freud and Nietzsche join Marx as the creators of this art of critical interpretation. They have instantiated a system of suspicion of motives.

To the postmodern critic meaning is not always apparent. It must be disentangled and discerned. Rather than revealing ultimate truth it seeks to unveil hidden meanings and power relationships. This view has been given impetus by post-structuralist language thinkers such as Foucault and Derrida, who have entrenched the notion of suspicion and made truth a relativist quagmire, particularly when combined with Marxist and Freudian thought. "This entrenching of suspicion in turn intensifies the impulse to decipher and decode. The suspicious person is sharp-eyed and hyper alert; mistrustful of appearances, fearful of being duped, she is always on the lookout for concealed threats and discreditable motives. In short: more suspicion means more interpretation".

Society and contemporary culture
The consequences are catastrophic because the focus on suspicion and skepticism serves as a catalyst for political dissent. Those that are marginalised and victimised are more likely to harbour mistrust of the motives of others. What now pervades contemporary culture is a sense of disbelief. "While poststructuralist critique rejects hidden truth and dogged or naive pursuit of ultimate meaning, it engages nonetheless in what I (Felski) call a second-level hermeneutics - a method of reading that looks beyond the individual text to decipher larger structures of cultural production." Emotional cues in text and film, for example, are intertwined with inferences and judgements that give vital clues to the characters and their world view. However, we must be cautious about imposing their own ideas and prejudices, in effect this has a serious ethical and moral dimension. In the end it comes down to an austere exercise in demystification rather than attention to aesthetics and associated affective qualities of a work. of art.  In other words, it is a metaphorical act of 'digging-down' rather than 'standing-back'.

Postcritical interpretation
Felski maintains that the act of criticism is an integral part of Western civilisation. Part of being a responsible individual in society is having the privilege to dislike and have a desire to bring about change. However, forms of disagreement in democratic societies has been couched in particular and acceptable forms that legitimate diverse views. Felski believes that ..."critique, as we have seen, is not one thing but an eclectic array of philosophical tenets, political ideologies, and modes of interpretation." Moreover, we in the west have built walls around cherished world views and interpreted art and public discourse through a narrow sense of mistrust and disbelief. The antidote to the critique of suspicion is what Felski calls a 'postcritical interpretation.

Postcritical interpretation takes into consideration a variety of critical perspectives and traditions. Rather than 'digging down' and 'standing back' critiques should engage with works of art and  appreciate aesthetics. This wider approach seeks to recontextualise what we know and to view our world with new perspectives. Often works of art, whether the written word, film, art, etc have the potential to reorient and refresh our situational perspectives. Such works may often stem from different regions, periods and personal world views but are always embedded within various religious, philosophical and cultural contexts. Thus, critique should not only be concerned with skepticism but should also consider beauty and creative work's inherent ability to challenge our own thinking and to open up new possibilities. Without this tolerant and wider view of critique we will become slaves to narrow ideology and dogmatism.

Felski: R. (2015). The Limits of critique. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

See also:
Postmodernism is dead -what comes next - Alison Gibbons