Man as a political person

A human being is a desiring being. But contrary to Hobbes’ assessment his desires are not always rooted in a kind of animal instinct. His higher desires are not always physiological in nature. He asks questions of meaning and significance. “Who am I?” “Why am I here?” “Did someone or something make me and everything around me?” “If so, why?” “How can I know?” “What should I do now?” He identifies goals and objectives and pursues them—some objectives and goals that don’t even contribute to his physical survival. He climbs mountains just to see if he can or to see what things look like from another perspective. He considers possibilities, discerns what is good for himself, and pursues it.
However, he is not an isolated or autonomous desiring being. He is a social being. His social nature is not limited to utility. He is not merely social because he needs his mother’s milk or an extra hand when constructing the walls of his new home or the cooperation of others to earn his daily bread. Yes, he is social as a means to self-preservation. However, he is also social as an end in itself. He plays games with others—essentially meaningless activities of social interaction. He shares stories. He feels and expresses affection.
He is familial. He identifies with—or at least is identified with—other family members. He has one biological father and one biological mother. He has two biological grandfathers and two biological grandmothers. He is, in the majority of cases, cared for until adulthood by family members. He knows himself and develops a sense of identity in the context of family relationships—or sometimes in opposition to them. “I am like my father in this and like my mother in this.” “I’m nothing like my father and mother.” “I wish I had known my mother.” “My brother and I never got along.” “My father left us.” “My father taught me to ride a bike.”
He is communicative. He learns and uses language to express his thoughts, to articulate his desires, to pursue his goals, to be known and to know others. He receives language from others and discerns its meaning. He writes, types, reads, listens, and speaks.
He is an individual. He does not live under the constant compulsion of others. It is not possible for others to determine his thoughts, his beliefs, his actions—though they may significantly influence him. His thoughts are only known to him, unless he chooses to share them with others. He holds convictions. He makes his own conclusions and choices. His body is his own—not shared with others. His lungs bring oxygen only to his muscles. He works with his body. He creates, builds, orders, destroys, rebuilds.
Though an individual, he is incomplete. He is insufficient. He receives extensive nurturing as an infant. He is given a name, taught a language, trained in useful skills, given a role. He needs to belong. He needs meaning. He needs physical sustenance. He needs to matter—to someone, for some purpose.
He is political. He makes judgments. He is judged by others. He rules. He is ruled. He gives orders and obeys them. Rules and regulations—written or unwritten—define his liberty. Rules are imposed upon him by his parents, teachers, coaches, clergy, bosses, legislators. He imposes rules upon others—children, students, congregation, subordinates, citizens.
Human life is complex. One must balance individual desires and needs with family, social, and political obligations and expectations. One must engage in ordering and prioritizing various goals and objectives—whether they be personal, family, or other group goals and objectives. One must work, but also rest. One must talk, but also listen. One must contemplate, but also act—and react.
Any political theory must take into account the complex nature of a human being. Any attempts at political theory which absolutizes any aspect of a human being will inevitably miss the mark. If man is viewed with too strong an emphasis on his economic needs, the resulting political order may neglect his spiritual, emotional, or social desires and needs. If man is viewed as absolutely competitive, his cooperate inclinations will be neglected. The reality of this is evident in the recent acknowledgements that a just society can be achieved neither by resorting to a atomistic libertarianism nor by resorting to a totalitarian socialism. In Europe this is fleshed out in the compromises that are constantly being sought between the modern liberals and the social democrats. The just society cannot be achieved by imposing strict, old-fashioned moral standards upon millions of people nor by eliminating all moral standards. Some US conservatives’ primary goal is forcing a nation of millions to conform to their moral sensibilities, while some US liberals primary goal is to eliminate any moral restrictions on private behavior. Aristotle defined political life as a condition in which one rules and is ruled in turn. If our modern democratic experiments are to achieve anything close to that vision of political life, a massive reversal of power must be sought and achieved—a reversal of the centralization of power to the devolution of power. And, it must not be a reform project that is haphazard. Absolutizing the principle of devolving power is not the answer. Just because a great deal of power and authority needs to be moved to the local and state/regional level, does not mean all power ought to be. Certain powers—even strong powers—belong at the federal or national level. However, a politically healthy citizenry cannot now be cultivated without substantial devolution of powers.

Life as Ascetics vs. Aesthetics

I used to think of my life as a Christian more in terms of ascetics—self discipline and restraint. Now I tend to see it in terms of aesthetics—an association with beauty and the creative arts. The former is what we can primarily get caught up with. But, the Christian life, it seems to me is all about a certain kind of aesthetic. It is a preoccupation with the beauty of God and the beauty or art of loving others. It's a life that participates in God's creative work of redemption, not primarily self-discipline and restraint for its own sake. An artist is disciplined in order to create art. World class musicians can spend hours and hours a day doing basic exercises on their instruments in order to keep up their skill. But these musicians do not have self-discipline for its own sake. They have it in order that they might play—create beautiful music. We believers must have self-discipline and restraint, but it is all for the sake of making music with our lives. We are only doing what we were created to do. The Father breathed His life into us and that life is centered in relationship.