A very nice column by David Brooks this morning on the relationship of religious and other traditions, individualism, and change.  The suggestion is that people who are interested in abandoning their traditions ought to think about choosing others.  A bit:

The paradox of reform movements is that, if you want to defy authority, you probably shouldn’t think entirely for yourself. You should attach yourself to a counter-tradition and school of thought that has been developed over the centuries and that seems true.

The old leftists had dialectical materialism and the Marxist view of history. Libertarians have Hayek and von Mises. Various spiritual movements have drawn from Transcendentalism, Stoicism, Gnosticism, Thomism, Augustine, Tolstoy, or the Catholic social teaching that inspired Dorothy Day.

These belief systems helped people envision alternate realities. They helped people explain why the things society values are not the things that should be valued. They gave movements a set of organizing principles. Joining a tradition doesn’t mean suppressing your individuality. Applying an ancient tradition to a new situation is a creative, stimulating and empowering act. Without a tradition, everything is impermanence and flux.

One thought on “Religion, Tradition, and Change

  1. The antithesis deplored in the final sentence – everything is impermanence and flux – is an accurate statement of the central tenet of Buddhism, a tradition that’s lasted 2600 years.

Leave a Reply