Social Theory Reading Note (3)
pdf
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Boston College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
215
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
Pages
6
Uploaded by costamo
1) Author(s): Bellah, Robert N., Richard Madsen, William M. Sullivan, Ann Swidler, and
Steven M. Tipton
2) Title of selection:
Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American
Life : With a New Preface
Chapter 1; The Pursuit of Happiness, Chapter 2; Culture and Character: The Historical
Conversation
3) Pages: Chapter 1; 3-26, Chapter 2; 27-51
4) Summarize the gist of the piece in your own words (one or more sentences):
Understanding the American identity becomes more complicated when more than one
person is questioned. This is due to America’s overarching connection with
individualism, where everyone had their own ideals and values.
5) Define the major concepts (1 to 5 of them) and note the author's example (with page
references):
(1) Individualism - “a calm and considered feeling which disposes each citizen to isolate
himself from the mass of his fellows and withdraw into the circle of family and friends;
with this little society formed to his taste, he gladly leaves the greater society to look
after itself” (Bellah et al. 37).
(2) Utilitarian Individualism - the real focus is on moral self-discipline and self-help, not
primarily on extrinsic rewards.
(3) Expressive Individualism - the “softer” form of individualism in which each person
realizes their lives according to their immediate desires. (Bellah et al. 33, 46).
6) Outline answer(s) to the reading question(s):
Chapter 1
With which individual do you identify more, Brian Palmer, Joe Gorman, Margaret
Oldham, or Wayne Bauer?
I identify with Margaret the most, as she seems the one who is most grounded in reality.
Brian and Joe are the most idealistic, with each dependent on something (Brian being
family and Joe being community). She recognizes that not everything is fair, and that is
okay, but it is up to people to put in the effort to achieve a sense of their own ideals. Yet,
her thinking is also problematic as it is so individualized that it does not take into
account the needs or wishes of others.
How does each define happiness?
●
Brian’s idea of happiness comes from an idea of true love, which he defines
as a “husband-and-wife type of relationship - that is founded on mutual
respect, admiration, affection, and the ability to give and receive freely”
(Bellah et al. 5). After his won divorce, he marries another divorcée, who
brings four children on top of Brian’s three. To anyone else, this may seem
like a crowded household, but it brings a sense of energy, devotion, and
commitment sufficient to make their family life a joy.
●
Joe’s idea of happiness is defined by moving away from childhood and into
adulthood. “Being like a kid means lacking an appreciation of one’s
responsibilities to one’s fault and one’s community”, while success (or I guess
happiness in his success) “means achieving the goals set by your family and
community” (Bellah et al. 8). As the director of the anniversary celebration, he
looked to focus on the interdependence of community by doing things
together and getting as many people as possible active. For Joe, “success
rather applied to the experience of togetherness the community has created
partially through his efforts” (Bellah et al. 10).
●
Margaret’s happiness comes from “placing individual fulfillment higher than
attachment to family and community” (Bellah et al. 13). She is more focused
on realistic human nature and modern social life, which sees people varying
tremendously in their values and experiences. For her, happiness cannot be
won “without a realistic willingness to make the effort and pay the costs
required” (Bellah et al. 15). An example of that cost would be the wellness to
give in order to make a relationship work. Not everything is going to be ideal,
and to be happy, you need to realize that reality, but make an effort to bring
your reality closer to that goal.
●
Wayne agrees with Margaret that an individual needs to think for themselves
and break from their family conventions and the limitations of tradition. His
happiness is found “when they (people) have power over their lives, each
individual will have a greater sense of efficacy and the marvelous feeling of
personal growth” (Bellah et al. 10). From their evolution of consciousness, a
“better” society will be made. Wayne finds defining this “better” society a bit
difficult, but in a broad sense, it would be a society where housing tenants
had similar, if not the same, power as their landlords. He is more focused on
the rights of an individual and a fair chance of asserting them but does not
offer an explanation as to how those rights would be shared in a complex
society. Everyone might have the right to housing, which would ensure some
aspect of their happiness, but in a society where housing is not distributed
fairly or there is not enough to satisfy every need, who has more of a right to
that good? Wayne never answers this and describes how his own personal
growth in the area of political activism has broadened his own sense of
responsibility. I think this causes an issue because there is no goal of
self-improvement, which can be harmful as seen with Durkheim.
How does each define success, freedom, and justice?
●
Brian finds success and freedom in his familial security over everything else.
He has struggled with divorce and money but realizes that his success is
measured by his desire to have a family life. He finds his freedom in
balancing his work and family life but doesn’t really seem to care about much
outside of his family unit. It is very clear that his happiness and attention are
directed at his goal - devotion to marriage and children -, which counters his
earlier goal of monetary success. Perhaps this is the justice in his life? But
each is described as an idiosyncratic preference, “rather than as representing
a larger sense of purpose of life” (Bellah et al. 6). Maybe the justice is
changing his goals from himself to the lives of his children.
●
Joe thinks success is exemplified in a successful community where everyone
feels active and involved. While individuals have freedom over their actions
(which is a good thing), they should choose to help their community. He does
have a strong sense of justice since his community service work is clearly a
labor of love, and he even finds that his position in his community is bigger
than his position in his company. However, he finds it hard to understand the
fear of minority groups that many of the townspeople have, but his
shortcoming is his desire for nostalgia and return to a mythical past, which
provides little help in understanding how his town “might work out its
contemporary problems and (with) almost no framework for thinking about
Suffolk (his town) in the context of the larger society” (Bellah et al. 13).
●
Margaret has a vision of individual fulfillment that involves deep
self-knowledge, wide tolerance of differences among people, and an amateur
willingness to accept responsibility for one’s own life through which one might
find success. While she has the freedom to fulfill her own desire, she has no
reliable way to connect her won fulfillment to that of other people, “whether
that her own husband and children or the larger social and political
community of which she is inevitably a part” (Bellah et al. 17.) She holds a
sense of justice by stating that the most important thing in life is doing
whatever you choose to do as well as you can, so she realizes there are
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
differences in life that divide people, and appreciates those fundamental
differences, but also acknowledges their potential and importance in
relationships and life in general (Bellah et al. 14). However, with the previous
statement, the fulfillment of the individual is always prioritized, so, does that
even matter when you could potentially harm others in your pursuit of
fulfillment? I think not, which is the issue with her stance, but also many of
their viewpoints as there is an overemphasis on individualism.
●
Wayne is a complicated case because, at the time of the interview, he is
unclear as to his idea of social justice. While it might seem great to know that
individuals all have equal rights, it becomes increasingly complicated in
complex societies, like those of the United States and other developed
nations. Again, how do you divide a limited good into a society that seemingly
has an equal right to it? Is it want or need? I guess an argument could be
made for either, but the “best” way, is not described by him. The only thing he
wants is a “better” society. Feeling good about what you do, and knowing you
have grown is always an area of success, but many people may lack that
freedom. I think that’s why he says everyone has a right, but I don’t think he
identifies the fundamental differences that make it an idealistic viewpoint
enough to make his ideology clear.
What are the problems with the way each defines these concepts?
Obviously, there is an overarching theme of individualism, and I think each viewpoint or
opinion falls victim to this. Even the existence of such diverging opinions of happiness,
success, freedom, or justice reveals that values are arbitrarily chosen and there is no
concise morality. Instead, self-reliance and self-fulfillment become the standards for
choosing the preferences of values.
Chapter 2
List the main features of the biblical and republican strands and utilitarian and
expressive individualism.
Some of the main features of biblical and republican strands include:
(1) “natural liberty”, which is “the freedom to do whatever one wants, evil as well as
good” (Bellah et al. 29),
(2) True freedom/ “moral freedom”, which is “in reference to the covenant between God
and man” - is liberty “to that only which is good, just, and honest” (Bellah et al. 30),
(3) “the ideal of a self-governing society of relative equals in which all participate”, and
(4) “small republics” in which every citizen could become “an acting member of the
Common government, transacting in person a great portion of its rights and duties,
subordinate indeed, yet important, and entirely within his own competence” (Bellah et al.
31).
Some of the main features of biblical utilitarian and expressive individualism include:
(1) Chastity, rarely use Venery but for Health or Offspring, Never to Dulness, Weakness,
or the Injury of your own or another’s Peace or Reputation” (Bellah et al. 32),
(2) a society that is likely “to give such scope to ordinary citizens, to protect their rights,
and to secure their equal treatment before the law” (Bellah et al. 33), and
(3) “A life rich in experience, open to all kinds of people, luxuriating in the sensual as
well as the intellectual, above all a life of stone feeling, was what was perceived as a
successful life “ (Bellah et al. 34).
What are Crevecoeur’s and Tocqueville’s interpretations of American culture?
Tocqueville is quoted as saying, “I think I can see the whole destiny of America
contained in the first Puritan who landed on those shores” when asked to comment on
American culture (Bellah et al. 28). It is evident that he believes (like many historians) in
the importance of biblical religion in American culture from the earliest colonization to
the present. But, he added to “Crevecoeur's earlier sketch a more penetrating and
complex understanding of the new society, informed by republican convictions and a
deep sensitivity to the place of religion in human life” (Bellah et al. 36).
“Schooled by the philosophies of the eighteenth-century French Enlightenment,
Crevecoeur had no difficulty appraising the typical American as a kind of "new man," an
emancipated, enlightened individual confidently directing his energies toward the
environment, both natural and social, aiming to wring from it a comfortable happiness
(Bellah et al. 35). The types of personalities Crevecoeur sketches approximated the
rational individual concerned about his own welfare that has been the model character
of Enlightenment thought and that was, at that time, receiving renewed emphasis in the
writings of political economists. He wrote that the American, “Here the rewards of his
industry follow with equal steps the progress of his labor; his labor is founded on the
basis of nature, self-interest; can it want a stronger allurement? (Bellah et al. 35).
What are the representative characters in the American culture? Under what historical
conditions did they emerge?
Representative characteristics in the American culture include:
(1) Individualism/ The independent citizen, which is “ a calm and considered feeling
which disposes each citizen to isolate himself from the mass of his fellows and withdraw
into the circle of family and friends; with this little society formed to his taste, he gladly
leaves the greater society to look after itself” (Bellah et al. 37),
(2) The manager, a “self-sufficient entrepreneur, competitive, tough, and freed by wealth
from external constraints, was one new American character” (Bellah et al. 44),
(3) The entrepreneur was a “considerably less isolated and self-regarding figure than
the entrepreneurs of the Gilded Age of the late nineteenth century or the bureaucratic
managers and therapists of the twentieth” (Bellah et al. 41), and
(4) The therapist, who like the manager, is a “specialist in mobilizing resources for
effective action, only here the resources are largely internal to the individual and the
measure of effectiveness is the elusive criterion of personal satisfaction (Bellah et al.
47).
These ideas of American identity mainly stem from the European Enlightenment which
inspired Protestants and Pilgrims to move to a land, they believed, promised to them by
God in order to form a perfect society that fit their ideologies. While this was the basis,
and starting point for the “American Identity”, it began to stem into two unique identities
from free-thinkers like Franklin and Winthrop and has only continued to unravel with the
continuation of history. For example, Abraham Lincoln “was perhaps the noblest
example of the mid-nineteenth-century American independent citizen” (Bellah et al. 40).
Industrialization and the Gilded Age, saw a vast separation of class, and more
separation of the American Identity.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help