Excellent article. We can all benefit from more humility. Decades from now, people will no doubt look back at something considered acceptable or even righteous today, and they'll shake their heads and say, "They actually did *that*? What were they thinking???" It's so much easier to pass judgment on other people than ourselves.
You make good points and i know you have used examples that most of us can relate to. I think there is one more important consideration. Rosa Parks *trained* in non-violence. The group had not decided exactly when they would indicate their opposition to segregation. Parks is on record as saying, that day she felt tired and did not want to walk to the back of the bus.
Colin Kapernak talked to trusted people about taking a knee before he ever took a knee.
Or conside the Birkenhead drill. it was practised so when the time comes one remembered "women and children first".
If we do something more than just feel our ideals, if we consult and train for the time when we need to live up to our ideals, we have a better chance of being able to do the right thing when the time comes.
Isn't some of this complicated by the fact that yes, most of us would have been the oppressor and a very very few of us would have been the resister, but a not insignificant percentage of us would have been (or still are) the oppressed?
Absolutely some of the outrage or objection to figures of the past acting in accordance with their times and context is driven by folks who imagine themselves as the defiant hero, but there are also folks who know, or are related to, or would have been the victims of these figures.
What if you weren't the person joining the mob, or the person who shrugged and walked away, but instead the person being lynched?
Is it only those people who have the standing to object?
Your mind is so cool. My own thought experiment after reading this is how many of us who self-identify with a political ‘tribe’ are willing to challenge our tribe members into better appreciating and behaviour toward the others. Call it out.
Great insights. I agree about the non-existent self--even outside of science, this insight is at the heart of some Buddhist teaching. But it's hard to get away from in our thinking, because the fiction of the self gets us through life. The only thing I wonder about is the role of courage in a person--I do wonder what makes that man in the crowd different. Why do some rare people have courage, but most don't? Why do some people make the pursuit of truth more important than anything, including career and physical safety? That's such an interesting question. Throughout my life, I have asked myself what I would truly have done in some of the situations of your thought experiment. I think the first time I asked myself this was as a child in Sunday school, wondering why Peter betrayed Jesus three times. How could he have done that? I wondered if I would have done that, given the circumstances--and realized that probably I would have. Maybe I had a good Sunday School teacher who went to the heart of the matter. Being someone who has taken a heretical stand against gender ideology at some cost, I have often asked myself why I am doing this when my friends shrug and turn away. The only reason I can come up with is that I have certain values that override the costs. Would "me" in these other circumstances have been courageous? Given that the costs were even greater in those scenarios, the answer is still probably not. But someone with my current moral compass might have at least done some level of resistance. Those are the stories that have encouraged me to be courageous and to seek truth.
This is a very interesting and thought-provoking article. As a Biological Psychologist, I agree with you. What we perceive as the self is a dynamic, emergent property and, although not infinitely malleable, it is shaped by the context in which it develops and operates over time. As true as this is, over the decades I found it a near impossible concept to teach. People are steeped in the belief that their perspective at the moment is not only static but is the correct perspective.
Excellent article. We can all benefit from more humility. Decades from now, people will no doubt look back at something considered acceptable or even righteous today, and they'll shake their heads and say, "They actually did *that*? What were they thinking???" It's so much easier to pass judgment on other people than ourselves.
You make good points and i know you have used examples that most of us can relate to. I think there is one more important consideration. Rosa Parks *trained* in non-violence. The group had not decided exactly when they would indicate their opposition to segregation. Parks is on record as saying, that day she felt tired and did not want to walk to the back of the bus.
Colin Kapernak talked to trusted people about taking a knee before he ever took a knee.
Or conside the Birkenhead drill. it was practised so when the time comes one remembered "women and children first".
If we do something more than just feel our ideals, if we consult and train for the time when we need to live up to our ideals, we have a better chance of being able to do the right thing when the time comes.
Isn't some of this complicated by the fact that yes, most of us would have been the oppressor and a very very few of us would have been the resister, but a not insignificant percentage of us would have been (or still are) the oppressed?
Absolutely some of the outrage or objection to figures of the past acting in accordance with their times and context is driven by folks who imagine themselves as the defiant hero, but there are also folks who know, or are related to, or would have been the victims of these figures.
What if you weren't the person joining the mob, or the person who shrugged and walked away, but instead the person being lynched?
Is it only those people who have the standing to object?
Your mind is so cool. My own thought experiment after reading this is how many of us who self-identify with a political ‘tribe’ are willing to challenge our tribe members into better appreciating and behaviour toward the others. Call it out.
As a history student thank you. :)
Great insights. I agree about the non-existent self--even outside of science, this insight is at the heart of some Buddhist teaching. But it's hard to get away from in our thinking, because the fiction of the self gets us through life. The only thing I wonder about is the role of courage in a person--I do wonder what makes that man in the crowd different. Why do some rare people have courage, but most don't? Why do some people make the pursuit of truth more important than anything, including career and physical safety? That's such an interesting question. Throughout my life, I have asked myself what I would truly have done in some of the situations of your thought experiment. I think the first time I asked myself this was as a child in Sunday school, wondering why Peter betrayed Jesus three times. How could he have done that? I wondered if I would have done that, given the circumstances--and realized that probably I would have. Maybe I had a good Sunday School teacher who went to the heart of the matter. Being someone who has taken a heretical stand against gender ideology at some cost, I have often asked myself why I am doing this when my friends shrug and turn away. The only reason I can come up with is that I have certain values that override the costs. Would "me" in these other circumstances have been courageous? Given that the costs were even greater in those scenarios, the answer is still probably not. But someone with my current moral compass might have at least done some level of resistance. Those are the stories that have encouraged me to be courageous and to seek truth.
This is a very interesting and thought-provoking article. As a Biological Psychologist, I agree with you. What we perceive as the self is a dynamic, emergent property and, although not infinitely malleable, it is shaped by the context in which it develops and operates over time. As true as this is, over the decades I found it a near impossible concept to teach. People are steeped in the belief that their perspective at the moment is not only static but is the correct perspective.