NYT columnist David Brooks thinks that the social pressures
governing life on American college campuses are overwhelming:
·
"When a moral crusade spreads across campus, many
students feel compelled to post in support of it on Facebook within minutes. If
they do not post, they will be noticed and condemned." (NYT, 3/15/16)
Brooks is convinced that the social pressures are greater
when the standards are always shifting:
·
"Everybody is perpetually insecure in a moral
system based on inclusion and exclusion. There are no permanent standards, just
the shifting judgment of the crowd. It is a culture of oversensitivity,
overreaction and frequent moral panics, during which everybody feels compelled
to go along."
Brooks believes that the college student can find a greater
measure of stability by basing their identity on values that are “more permanent”:
·
"If we’re going to avoid a constant state of
anxiety, people’s identities have to be based on standards of justice and
virtue that are deeper and more permanent than the shifting fancy of the crowd.
In an era of omnipresent social media, it’s probably doubly important to
discover and name your own personal True North, vision of an ultimate good,
which is worth defending even at the cost of unpopularity and exclusion."
However, on today’s college campus, imbued with moral
relativism (MR), this has become difficult. For one thing, MR is attractive for
the very reason that it is dangerous. It tells the students that they are in
charge – the captain of their own ships. They can decide what is right for themselves.
If it feels right to them, no one can objectively tell them that it is wrong.
Consequently, the college campus celebrates any and all forms of sexual
expression.
Brooks understandably ennobles that idea of finding “standards
of justice and virtue that are deeper and more permanent than the shifting
fancy of the crowd.” However, he wrongly associates these “more permanent”
values with finding “your own personal True North.”
He is sending out contradictory signals – double messages. While
on the one hand, he seems to recommend basing our values on what is objective
and unchanging, but Brooks then suggests that we have to find our own
personal subjective values. If our values are subjective, they will be
as flimsy and impermanent as the university values that he derides. Also, they
will be no less vulnerable to social pressure than the values they already
possess.
Instead, in order to stand against the social pressures, we
need to know that our values are objective, coming from above, and therefore
are unchanging. It is only when we know this that we can stand against the
tsunami of peer pressure and public opinion.
If we are going to resist persecution, it is not enough to
know that we are standing upon our own “True North.” Jesus had recently
suffered the worst imaginable death and His disciples were brought before the
governing body – the Sanhedrin - that had earlier turned Him over to the Romans
and demanded His death. Besides, these Apostles were also uneducated men, but
when they were commanded to no longer speak of Jesus, they surprised the
Sanhedrin with their courage:
·
But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must
obey God rather than men. The God of our fathers raised Jesus, whom you killed
by hanging him on a tree. God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and
Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. And we are witnesses to these things, and so
is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey him.” (Acts 5:29-32; ESV)
The Apostles were able to withstand the threats and pressures because they were convinced that they were standing upon God’s own “True North,” not on their own values or fleeting sense of dignity.
No comments:
Post a Comment