Tuesday, July 7, 2020

Of Two Worldviews


Christ the True Vine, 16th-century Greek Icon

In our moment in history, it seems there are, broadly speaking, two perspectives on the past, two approaches to education, and really two distinct worldviews that are in competition. 

At the outset, I concede that I am painting with broad strokes; I find the distinction has some merit, nonetheless. 

These two views may be encapsulated in these two sentiments:
“The Ancients were children compared to us.” (Bernard le Bovier de Fontenelle, Conversations on the Plurality of Worlds)
Vs.
We are as “dwarfs perched on the shoulders of giants…. we see more and farther than our predecessors, not because we have keener vision or greater height, but because we are lifted up and borne aloft on their gigantic stature.” (John of Salisbury quoting Bernard of Chartres in the Metalogicon)

---

The first is what I might call the “progressive” or “Enlightened” view.  This perspective assumes the superiority of contemporary thought and sensibility in most every respect to what has come before; it has a great confidence in the “progress” of human society.  This perspective does not look to the past for wisdom or with a reverence for previous generations, but rather looks down on past ages as inferior to our own time; it was backward in what is most important.  It views the past and what has been inherited primarily in terms of its faults, and by extension, prioritizes re-making society today according to its own ever-evolving ideals.  This view seeks revolution and not reform in facing societal evils.

We see this perspective in the way in which the contemporary teaching of the humanities is approached.  The goal in this view is not only to promote such “social progress,” but to encourage the student to decide who they are and empower to follow that impulse while expressing themselves in whatever way they choose.  There is an emphasis in all of this on the sex, race, and sexual orientation of the person.  Happiness is understood as coming from following what you feel makes you happy.

In presenting history with this perspective, the focus is typically on social movements and societal reforms that confront of the faults of the past.  History is viewed as the slow work of humanity overcoming its inequalities and injustices as it gradually arrives at our own superior time and society.  The characters in history most worthy of imitation, in this view, are usually the ones that are “ahead of his time” and who reject the norms of their society.  The hero is the one who is not bound by custom or tradition, but who rejects the status quo to promote “equality,” “fairness,” and a “better world.”  The heroes are the revolutionaries, protesters, and dissenters.  How could it be otherwise when past societies were so characterized by injustice?

In literature and the arts, this view manifests itself, once again, in highlighting the vices and failings of the inheritance of previous generations and in prioritizing self-expression.  The works that are read often champion the wisdom of the young over and against that of their elders; it’s the activist teenager that knows better than his grandfather who is “stuck in the past.”  These works seek to inspire their readers to promote social change and “progress” according to contemporary sensibilities.  At the same time, there is a profound nihilist and dystopian streak in such literature, as hope for such progress and change is often bleak, and there is no deeper or more profound purpose to human life.  Since the arts and literature are viewed as especially about self-expression, it seems obvious that the frustrated protester would express feelings of despair and of the disorders of society.

This worldview views religious faith with a great deal of skepticism.  Indeed, the notion of Divine Revelation is implicitly, if not explicitly, rejected, as religious doctrines are subject to contemporary standards and attitudes.  If religion is practiced at all, it is primarily a sentimental exercise that focuses almost exclusively on affirming the practitioner and addressing questions of social justice and promoting humanitarian goals.  In the end, appeals to science are preferred and, at times, take on the role of religious faith.  There is a profound confidence in the ability of the natural sciences to explain reality.

In the last analysis, from this perspective the humanities might be useful for encouraging social action and self-expression, but it is the fields of science and technology that are really the most important for human flourishing.  Hence the prominent place for “STEM” education.  The goal is to promote a world ever more thoroughly based on science and equality.

---

On the other hand, we have what I might call the “traditional” or “Classical” view.  This perspective is grounded in a profound respect for history and for past generations.  Indeed, it views the inheritance of past ages as one of the greatest gifts we enjoy and a source of great wisdom.  It readily admits the progress of society in some areas, especially in terms of technology, but it also has a profound humility in realizing that any such progress is only possible because of the achievements of our forefathers.  Further, while it concedes that society has advanced in some areas it would also view it as regressing in others.  This perspective grounds itself in ideals received and truths handed on.  The heroes in this view are those that manifest virtue; the one that confronts evil and disorder, not by remaking society, but calling it back to its core ideals.  In facing societal evils, it seeks reform, not revolution.

In the humanities, this traditional view prioritizes the pursuit of the true, good, and beautiful, with an emphasis on looking to the wisdom of the past.  Student are encouraged to learn who they are by nature and to conform themselves to reality in seeking after their proper end.  There is an emphasis on the humanity of the person, rather than the accidents of race or sex; his being a rational animal with unique dignity distinct from the other animals is the decisive truth about the person.  Happiness is understood as coming from accepting what you are by nature and seeking after your proper end.

In history, for example, there is a two-fold focus on moral formation and an appreciation for the inheritance of the past.  History from such a view seeks to train the moral judgment of the student, presenting exemplars for imitation along with cautionary tales of vice.  It also imbues the student with a profound reverence for past generations, a gratitude for the wisdom received, and a foundation upon which to flourish in one’s own time.  There is a skepticism toward dismantling what has been inherited.

In literature and the arts, the traditional view seeks to preserve the beautiful and ennobling.  The mission of the artist is not just self-expression, but the profound expression of the truth about reality.  The story and the work of art is valued for its ability to inspire and to convey truths in a compelling way.  Newer forms of literature and art from this point of view are grounded in the history of their craft.

This worldview, in its perspective on religion, has an attitude of reverence and expects that humanity should rise to the moral imperative and challenges of Divine Revelation, rather than seek to change it.  Virtue is difficult, but worth the struggle, as it makes us most human.  The natural sciences and human reason are seen in concert rather than conflict with true faith.  Nevertheless, the limits of human learning are acknowledged and there is a humility about our ability to unfold the mysteries of the universe.

In the end, there is an appreciation for the need for the human person to be well-rounded to flourish, and hence the prominent regard for the liberal arts in education. The goal is to promote a world that grows in continuity with the wisdom of the past ever more marked by truth, goodness, and beauty.

---

To be clear, I would also affirm the good intentions of folks in both categories; I do not intend to demonize anyone.  Also, as I noted at the outset, I freely acknowledge that I over-generalize and this division is imperfect and certainly open to debate.

At the same time, I find this does usefully tease out some of the profound divisions and differences in our society today.  In questions of education, especially, we see not just a matter of different pedagogical techniques, but of different worldviews.

In considering questions of the past, I would observe a particular danger in viewing it primarily or exclusively through the lens of failures and “progressive” change: even if such a view spoke truthfully of past faults, it prejudices the audience against that past if there is not a similarly true highlighting of past heroes and wisdom.  For example, if in presenting your family history, I only spoke of the faults and failures of your ancestors, you would not have an accurate understanding of that family, even if everything said was true.  No person, family, or society is characterized solely by its faults.  Further, a love and appreciation of those strengths can surely provide a reason for seeking to preserve and improve that thing rather than dismantle or destroy it.

For the Catholic, with our belief in the Blessed Trinity, Divine Revelation, the Incarnation, and the historicity of the Church founded by Christ, along with our understanding of the human person made in the image and likeness of God, we should have a reverence for the past, for ancient institutions, for tradition, and for the harmony of faith and reason.  The Catholic who subscribes to the “progressive” worldview cannot help but come into conflict with the history, the doctrines, and the saints of the Church.  It is no wonder such Catholics seem to ignore the theology of the Church dating to before the mid-20th century.  Unfortunately, in assuming the superiority of the ideals of contemporary society, they effectively deny the legitimacy of Divine Revelation and the Church’s perennial teaching.

Further, a truly Catholic education must aim at the greatest good for the human person: salvation.  If assisting students in knowing their purpose as human beings – to know, love, and serve God in this world, so as to be happy with Him in the next – is not the priority, it is not a Catholic education worthy of the name. 

The beauty of this priority is that when love of God and His revelation is the priority, the love of neighbor and appreciation for the aspects of reality gleaned from the various disciplines are added on as well.  This is not a vision that stunts or narrows the person but opens them to the reality of existence itself!

Live well!

No comments:

Post a Comment