Traditional values?
We here much of so-called 'traditional values'. What does that much-used phrase denote exactly? Is it of any use, or should we consign it to the 'ash-heap of history'? Is it of any relevance today, in a modern age, or is it only something connected to the 'golden age' phenomenon?
I have thought about this problem and suggest a possible conclusion. But firstly, it is important to explain what I understand 'tradition' to mean.
I understand traditional values to mean respect, but not deference. Respect for oneself and respect for others. Respect for human institutions that have stood the test of time and provide for a solid social foundation. God. The individual. The human family, both the nuclear and mankind generally.
And where did I get this answer from? In truth, I have just written my understanding of the meaning of traditional values. I have used no external sources.
But why are they important?
They are important because they provide the basis on which society is governed and give people a compass in an age of rapid technological change. But they don't in themselves provide this basis. They provide the basis on the grounds that they are rooted, in my understanding, on Christian logic, which of course all links up to God, the source of all comfort and home.
Having spent three years at a university relatively well known for its radical politics, I have encountered many people who have a passionate desire to heal the world. The motivation was pure and the heart unspotted from the world, but when based on the structural, rather than the individual and personal, the desire to implement change cannot ultimately yield fruit. But it is possibly a plug for seeing the good that is already in the world.
I feel that incorporating 'traditional values', as I understand them, is really a way of incorporating spiritual values. Advocating traditional values is never about harbouring a desire to return to a mythical golden age - I simply cannot answer the question of whether life and society were any more decent in the past nor would it be appropriate for me to do so - and that that argument essentially doesn't matter.
If the values are worthwhile and are commonly agreed upon as a progressive force, then are they not a model to follow, regardless of historical reality?
posted by Sam Swann @ 4:57 PM
3 Comments:
An eloquent post there, Sam, but you fail to make sufficient distinction between 'traditional values' and 'spritual values'.
You speak as the coloniser disinterested in the shore on which he has landed: "This is tradition. What else could there be?". There are as many "traditions" as there are people, and thus it should not be considered reasonable to understand any group of people as holding one set of values, whether they consider themselves to do so or not.
OK, so there are some things we can hold as being particularly appealing to a given group. Your "traditional values" would probably find a home best in the traditions of English (possibly British) people, and possibly even a smaller set of them.
Spiritual values, however, are absolute. They transcend cultural histories or politics, deducable (as they are) from the pursuit of a higher sense of reality. In this case, they happen to collude with your "traditional" values - and that's fine - but is not likely to be the case for every set of "traditional values".
A more eloquent reply, Joel.
The post was rather rushed, so it was inevitable that there are some glaring inconsistencies.
In response to your reply, my web log attempts to understand politics and society and their link to spirituality from a western point of view.
I appreciate there are indeed diversities of traditions, but in the west we have come to understand certain characteritics, the ones I describe, as being 'traditional' in the sense of being long-established and engrained within our culture.
Those interested in this topic may enjoy this article by Tristram Hunt from the Guardian - http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/comment/story/0,,2099697,00.html . I think what Hunt proposes is of the right order, and I feel it is relatively easy to implement practical measures from this principle, that could be negotiated to suit lefty and tory alike.
Post a Comment
<< Home