This blog promotes two
social/political attributes: social
capital and civic humanism. Isaac
Kramnick writes of civic humanism:
…
civic humanism conceives of man as a political being whose realization of self
occurs only through participation in public life, through active citizenship in
a republic. The virtuous man is
concerned primarily with the public good, res
publica, or commonweal, not with private or selfish ends.[1]
While such a notion is probably pleasant
for any good citizen to hear, there are two concerns.
One, why would anyone be so
motivated? Two, in a time when the
dominant political view, the natural rights construct, ignores any such sense
of virtuousness, what promotes civic humanism in modern American life? Yes, the natural rights’ view does not
preclude an individual from harboring such a belief, but it does not encourage
it.
This
blog has commented on motivation, especially as it leads to good
citizenship. After all, if a main
concern of civics education is to encourage students to lead good, civic lives,
the question of motivation is obvious.
This is particularly important in modern life where so much of social
reality is dealing with faceless entities – government, large corporations,
populous urban environments. The
personal touch to public affairs is quite prominent in its absence.
When no one in an extended environment
seems to know how one behaves or, for the most part, cares, it is hard enough
to promote law abiding behavior. Here,
the notion of civic humanism calls not only for obeying the law but dedicating
a significant part of one’s life to res
publica, the commonwealth. Wow!
Now, this blog supports, as opposed
to natural rights, federation theory. This
latter theory, as described in this blog, calls on citizens to abide by the
standard of civic humanism, at least, as an ideal. In turn, that leads to actively “teaching,”
in civics classes, values and arranging content that extolls this virtue.
The blog has explained that this need
not be through propaganda techniques, but through open-ended questioning in
which students strive to solve relevant issues.
The support manifests itself through the topics and questions such a
curriculum utilizes. And, yes, through
such a curriculum a student can reject civic humanism but is called upon to
justify such a position.
But the challenge remains: what motivates one to be receptive to such a
value. Richard Dagger[2] reports
on this question. He shares with his
readers the concerns of Michael Sandel who identifies three sources for such a
motivation.
The first is for people to feel a
sense that one needs a healthy social order – a society that, if not a
commonwealth, is one where citizens readily obey the law and abide by its
norms. If citizens meet their needs, such as
securing a reasonable job, then they are disposed to have positive judgements
of their society.
This includes every individual, in a
spirit of reciprocity, to go along; to do his/her part. This might call for occasional sacrifices as
one fulfills duties associated with citizenship. Yes, there is the problem of the free-rider,
but in a healthy society this is kept to a minimum. And that minimum does not solely depend on policing. If social harmony overly depends on coercive,
police powers, that society will find the financial expense for cooperation to
be prohibitive.
The second has to do with the residue
of living in a functional republic. That
is, going about doing the things one does and be able to do them with
reasonable success, one generally will develop sentimental ties with those
he/she interacts. From that, a person
will generalize that good feeling and extend the sentiment to the population. He/she will develop an emotional disposition
to promote that society or nation. It
feels good to positively support such a commonwealth.
This might reach a level in which
obligations or duties are accepted more readily. One might be ready to sacrifice for the
homeland or the state or the community in which one resides. The sentiment might take the following
form: “These are my folks!”
The third source of motivation
reminds one of Maslow’s highest order of needs.
That is self-actualization. Those
familiar with Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs model know that the sixth
level, a level few attain, is self-actualization. To be so motivated one needs to know oneself
so well that he/she realizes what one really wants out of life.
Not what one wants for other reasons,
like impressing one’s neighbor, but what stems from one’s nature. As Psychology
Today puts it: self-actualization
“represents growth of an individual toward fulfillment of the highest needs;
those for meaning in life, in particular.”[3] Sandel believes a civic humanistic
disposition is part of being human; i.e., to desire promoting one’s society,
one’s culture, one’s community.
In the last posting, this blog
reported on the natural human tendency to being tribal. It turns out that the hypothalamus produces a
hormone, oxytocin, which is instrumental in biasing one in favor of those
people one is taught to believe belong to “Us.”
It further encourages one to be biased against “Them.” That posting described this natural fact as promoting
prejudicial beliefs and that civics education should actively counter this
Us/Theming when it comes to prejudicial judgements and behaviors.
But is there a positive side to this phenomenon? Is the hormone the basis by which a person is
motivated toward finding fulfillment in holding one’s people, nation, community
as an extension of oneself? By so doing,
does that sense lead one to define who he/she is by the positive roles he/she
plays to further the legitimate interests of that greater social entity? If so, one can see substance to Sandel’s third
source of motivation.
This topic will be picked up in the
next posting. Turns out, Sandel’s idea,
as appealing as it is, does have its critic.
The next posting will review that criticism and determine, in terms of
federation theory, how motivation should be treated in an ideal civics
education curriculum.
[1] Isaac Kramnick,
“John Locke and Liberal Constitutionalism,” in Major Problems in American Constitutional History, Volume I: The Colonial Era through Reconstruction,
ed. Kermit L. Hall (Lexington,
MA: D. C. Heath and Company, 1992), 98.
[2] Richard Dagger, Civic Virtue: Rights, Citizenship, and Republican Liberalism
(New York, NY: Oxford, 1997).
[3] “The Theory of Self-Actualization,” Psychology Today, August 13, 2013,
accessed April 5, 2018, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/theory-and-psychopathology/201308/the-theory-self-actualization.
No comments:
Post a Comment