Identity and Freedom

We are living in a time in which there is a crisis of identity. It is an identity crisis caused by a distorted understanding of freedom. When playing a video game, you can decide if you want to live the life of a rock star, a mountain biker, a superstar quarterback, or the leader of a country. You can dress like them, act like them, think like them, and even live their virtual lives if you have the right games on the technological device of your choice. The individual freedom that we have come to cherish, which we think gives us the chance to be truly original, often leaves us stuck with paralyzingly infinite possibilities and the constant pull from advertising, consumerism, fandom (i.e., obsession with being the fan of a team, musician, etc.), pop culture, etc. to follow one of the many crowds available to you. Just jump on that band wagon of your choice and you are swept away in a mindless journey of entertainment.
It has been suggested by an eminent 20th century political thinker that it is characteristic of free people that they hold dear the ability to judge what is good for themselves and that this freedom is perhaps most evident when a person periodically changes what she conceives as being good for herself. The assumption is that more than anything, people cherish their freedom to choose what they believe is good for themselves. Therefore, one of the most important factors for sustaining a free society, in this thinker's conception, is that people must view themselves as judges of their own good—creators of that which is their own best interest.
We can think of this in terms of a young man who has graduated from university in 2004. After getting a job in the summer of 2004, he spends his fall considering what constitutes the best life for himself. On New Years day 2005, he concludes that the most fulfilling life involves traveling the world and exploring new cultures—and this he does in 2005 with all the available time and resources he has. However, on January 1st, 2006, he re-evaluates his self interest, changes his mind and, leaving the life of travel behind, decides that the best life for him is found in marriage. So, he begins to date regularly and finds an attractive woman and they get married that summer. Over the holiday season of late 2006, he decides that having a child and becoming a father is surely the supreme good that he has been seeking. Therefore, after his wife gets pregnant in January, he becomes a father in October 2007. After several months as a new father, he realizes that he has discovered that he has a deeply unsatisfied longing to be in nature, so starting in 2008, he becomes an avid mountain climber. Through all these experiences, he views himself as an autonomous individual who is the creator of his best self-interest. He has deep appreciation of the free society in which he lives that tolerates him and his choices to pursue whatever he perceives as constituting the good life at any point in time.
This is the story of the "American dream" for many people. Do what you want to do. Be who you want to be. Be involved with whatever activities or people that give you a sense of fulfillment or satisfaction. Imagine, however, that the rest of the story fills in the darkside of the quest for personal satisfaction and fulfillment of individual freedom. What if, in 2004 our young man was helping his disabled mom do her shopping, get to doctor's appointments and help with other various needs of hers, in addition to covering whatever costs she had not covered by her disability payments? What if when he left to travel in 2005, his mom was left to fend for herself with her disability check and a hauntingly quiet apartment? What if when having a child becomes his obsession in 2007, it is because he has become increasingly dissatisfied with his wife and has emotionally disconnected from her? What if when the child comes along and the relentless demands of fatherhood beat down upon him, he decides to leave and pursue his love of nature?
Self-interest can be a brutal guide for our lives. In the recent issue of my alma mater's alumni magazine, the commencement address was printed. The speaker very honestly explained that his life was filled with many gods. He had made a god out of success at work for much of his career, to the detriment of his marriage. As a captive of the Taliban while on assignment as a journalist, he had made a god out of escaping. As he explained, his allegiance to things or goals or people or experiences is constantly in flux. He explained that he had come to realize that he needed to prioritize the gods of his marriage, his kids and fighting against prejudices in the world. All very admirable endeavors to be sure. In the end, he encouraged the graduates to take for themselves a kind of life motto which involved a twisting of the university's original motto In Deo Speramus. Rather than the original "In God we hope", he told the graduates to let Hope be their god. This adaptation (or one might say, perversion) of the university motto is telling.
I'm sure his wife is glad to be one of his gods in this season of his life. I'm sure that he finds in her a hope for his future sense of meaning and fulfillment. However, what happens when he changes his mind and begins to have feelings of frustration and emptiness with respect to her. What happens when he wants to create a new self image that includes a beautiful young woman (rather than the older, less beautiful woman he married 22 years ago)? With hope as his god, he will leave the woman and his teenage kids. He will not consider that with God has his hope, as a sustainer through hard but good and meaningful service to others, his marriage could enter a later season of joy and meaning. A season of deep fulfillment that can never be attained by having his self interest or his personal sense of hope guide his steps.