You cite Christian Smith's work on what you call the "core faith commitments of today’s social sciences:" the "unencumbered individual." I'm having a difficult time imagining truly unencumbered individuals, even in the most liberal societies. We are all "encumbered" by living in and among others - among loved ones and friends, in our communities, in our nation, in the world. We are "encumbered" by the mores, ethos, and law of the society we live in. Isn't any society organized by less, or more, "encumbrance?" You seem clearly to favor more, with the greater encumbrance levied by the Catholic church. For non-Catholic Christians and non-Christians alike that seems clearly to imply an imposition of a faith they do not believe in and do not want imposed upon them. Catholic "encumbrance" would severely reduce, and potentially eliminate, the freedom of non-Catholics. Am I wrong? If I am, how so?
Fanatic piece, Professor Deneen. One of your central points has great explanatory power, namely that “institutional relativism” doesn’t mean all points of view in our society are equally respected or that the State and cultural and academic institutions honor a plurality of political and religious commitments.
This notion of neutrality was always a mystification of the liberal order. Some beliefs or someone or some institutions laden with discreet ideological commitments will always order our lives as individuals and order our society.
Thanks for great read. Look forward to Part 3 for a grand synthesis.
In the meantime, I am somewhat confused. I read Dewey as eminently on the side of Nature and Natural Science (as in physics, chemistry, biology) and therefore Natural Law and Common Good. In that light, 100% Thomistic and Catholic, with emphasis on capital "C". Please do not mistake Timothy Leary, a pothead, for John Dewey whose concern was education in accordance with Natual Law.
Very Insightful, thanks. I’d love to talk to you about my invention ideas I’m working on. Perhaps in twitter DM’s or through email first so I can show you pictures of the ideas. It’s highly relevant to your work.
You cite Christian Smith's work on what you call the "core faith commitments of today’s social sciences:" the "unencumbered individual." I'm having a difficult time imagining truly unencumbered individuals, even in the most liberal societies. We are all "encumbered" by living in and among others - among loved ones and friends, in our communities, in our nation, in the world. We are "encumbered" by the mores, ethos, and law of the society we live in. Isn't any society organized by less, or more, "encumbrance?" You seem clearly to favor more, with the greater encumbrance levied by the Catholic church. For non-Catholic Christians and non-Christians alike that seems clearly to imply an imposition of a faith they do not believe in and do not want imposed upon them. Catholic "encumbrance" would severely reduce, and potentially eliminate, the freedom of non-Catholics. Am I wrong? If I am, how so?
Extraordinary insight. Thanks. Downloaded The Sacred Project of American Sociology.
Fanatic piece, Professor Deneen. One of your central points has great explanatory power, namely that “institutional relativism” doesn’t mean all points of view in our society are equally respected or that the State and cultural and academic institutions honor a plurality of political and religious commitments.
This notion of neutrality was always a mystification of the liberal order. Some beliefs or someone or some institutions laden with discreet ideological commitments will always order our lives as individuals and order our society.
Thanks for great read. Look forward to Part 3 for a grand synthesis.
In the meantime, I am somewhat confused. I read Dewey as eminently on the side of Nature and Natural Science (as in physics, chemistry, biology) and therefore Natural Law and Common Good. In that light, 100% Thomistic and Catholic, with emphasis on capital "C". Please do not mistake Timothy Leary, a pothead, for John Dewey whose concern was education in accordance with Natual Law.
Very Insightful, thanks. I’d love to talk to you about my invention ideas I’m working on. Perhaps in twitter DM’s or through email first so I can show you pictures of the ideas. It’s highly relevant to your work.