Arising about the same time as our educational renewal movement have been seismic shifts in a host of technologies that dramatically changed the landscape for most individuals, whether they realize it or not. Today individuals have access to more levers of wealth creation than have ever been available before in history. Many call this the “New Economy.” Just like classical education harkens back to ancient wisdom previously deemed outdated and inconsequential to industrial educationists, the new economy champions such “outdated” concepts as artisanal craftsmanship, decentralized ownership of capital, and shared resources. The statement, “it’s more complicated than that,” holds true for both classical education and the new economy. To that end, this article will explore some of what we mean by the new economy, particularly as it relates to the economic world graduates from our school will be facing in the marketplace. But we will also reflect on how classical education seems to be well positioned to be a leading force in the new economy.

What is the New Economy?

In the new economy, the structures of the industrial age are being reshaped by innovation and technology. You can see the irony that the industrial age with its penchant for innovation and technology have created the new economy. In many regards, the new economy is situated within the industrial age, even though it has challenged many of the assumptions of the industrial age. For instance, industrialism promotes compliance and automaticity. To work in a factory, one must adhere to the procedures of the job at hand. The factory model does not require an individual to become a creative genius. Quite the opposite. Check your creativity at the door, just do the job as you are told. This is not to say that there is no room for creative genius, but that is reserved for the few that get to engineer the products and the way the factory is set up. The many work robotically, the few get to make the robots work.

The new economy, however, is defined by adaptability and creativity. We are witnessing a shift towards innovative business models and technological advancements that have transformed various sectors of the economy. Some have called this the gig economy, where individuals can leverage platforms to offer their skills and services on a freelance basis. Seth Godin is a proponent of this freelance approach to business today. In his book Linchpin, he repackages “gig” economy as “gift” economy. He writes:

“At first, gifts you can give live in a tiny realm. You do something for yourself, or for a friend or two. Soon, though, the circle of the gift gets bigger. The Internet gives you leverage. A hundred people read your blog, or fifty subscribe to your podcast. There’s no economy here, but there is an audience, a chance to share your gift.”

Seth Godin, Linchpin, 134.

What he is saying is that in the new economy, there is value in the unique voice an individual has. Finding the gift that you can give to the world means that you can utilize a host of tools to reach an audience in ways that were never possible in the old economy. There were too many gatekeepers that closed the doors to new voices. Now those gates are thrown wide open.

We could call this the sharing economy. Many traditional sectors have been disrupted by people who are willing to share personal resources through the connectivity available through the internet. Consider transportation and accommodation. Companies like Uber and Airbnb have revolutionized how people commute and find lodging. When we think about education, the internet has enabled organizations like Khan Academy to revolutionize who has access to quality education.

The emergence of e-commerce platforms has enabled businesses to reach a global audience without physical storefronts. This has leveled the playing field for small entrepreneurs and opened up new possibilities for growth and expansion. Consider a middle school student who has already started her own business by selling hand-made knitted objects through Etsy. This is a student who might be making a modest amount of spending money, but learning huge lessons in marketing, sales, production, and a host of other business skills.

These examples illustrate how the new economy has reshaped the industrial paradigm and has created opportunities for innovation, creativity, and collaboration. Embracing these changes can lead to exciting possibilities for both businesses and individuals alike. Understanding the new economy ought to influence how we approach educating the next generation. We are sending graduates into something that conventional education is not well equipped to serve. In order to grapple with this idea, let’s delve further into the kinds of skills that are important in the new economy.

What Skills are Required for the New Economy?

The new economy values skills like problem-solving, critical thinking, and collaboration. It rewards those who are willing to embrace change and continuously learn in order to stay relevant in a rapidly evolving landscape. The factory model of education produced students who could be workers with the factory system, compliant and productive. As Godin points out, this had wide-reaching implications even for non-factory jobs, such as the traditional professions like law, medicine and engineering. He lists a number of skills taught in the factory system:

“Fit in

Follow instructions

Use #2 pencils

Take good notes

Show up every day

Cram for tests and don’t miss deadlines

Have good handwriting

Punctuate

Buy the things the other kids are buying

Don’t ask questions

Don’t challenge authority

Do the minimum amount required so you’ll have time to work on another subject

Get into college

Have a good resume

Don’t fail

Don’t say anything that might embarrass you

Be passably good at sports, or perhaps extremely good at being a quarterback

Participate in a large number of extracurricular activities

Be a generalist

Try not to have the other kids talk about you

Once you learn a topic, move on.”

Seth Godin, Linchpin, 39-40.

Very few of these skills properly equip someone for the new economy. Contrast this with the talents needed in the new economy. The skills that stand out in the new economy are open-mindedness, creativity, proactivity, independence, ability to learn new skills, problem-solving, and making meaning out of raw information. Suffice it to say that the cram-test-forget process associated with the factory-model of education does not tend to cultivate these skills. When businesses can be run at the kitchen table, the factory model becomes insufficient to support creative, new enterprises.

It is interesting to note the extent to which new economy skills have taken over the job market. While technical expertise remains relevant to various industries, it is fascinating to find that places such as Microsoft and Apple are looking to hire individuals who show problem-solving, leadership and communication skills. Warren Buffet, CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, highlighted integrity as the key skill he values for his employees. JP Morgan looks for employees who can forge good relationships with clients and business partners. Across traditional business sectors, numerous “soft” skills are highly sought after in the market place, showing the extent to which factory-model skills such as compliance and rule-following simply are not relevant any longer.

The new economy is driven by new technologies that continue to disrupt the ways we do things. One of the downsides of the new economy is that it promotes distraction and overconsumption of digital entertainment. Thus, the insight provided by Cal Newport helps us to further elaborate the skills that are highly sought after in the new economy. The winners in the new economy are not simply those who can use the new technology proficiently, even though that is an important skill. Really, the winners will be those who can overcome distraction, accomplish work without digital tools, and can focus their attention adeptly. Newport articulates a stunning thesis:

“The ability to perform deep work is becoming increasingly rare at exactly the same time it is becoming increasingly valuable in our economy. As a consequence, the few who cultivate this skill, and then make it the core of their working life, will thrive.”

Cal Newport, Deep Work, 14.

This idea of deep work, then, becomes the single-most important skill that drives all other valuable skills in the new economy. Central to Newport’s argument is the concept of deliberate practice. Having written about deliberate practice elsewhere, I found his summary a really helpful encapsulation:

“Its components are usually identified as follows: (1) your attention is focused tightly on a specific skill you’re trying to improve or an idea you’re trying to master; (2) you receive feedback so you can correct your approach to keep your attention exactly where it’s most productive.”

Cal Newport, Deep Work, 35.

Deliberate practice, then, becomes a master tool that unlocks an individual’s potential in the new economy. Tight focus and continuous improvement enable someone to achieve rapid improvements in specific areas. It also allows someone to produce something meaningful and then deliver that to others who care utilizing the technologies underpinning the new economy.

How does Classical Christian Education Equip Students for the New Economy?

It is striking that the new economy and classical Christian education emerged almost simultaneously. The question, then, is whether there is anything inherent in classical education that is uniquely associated with the new economy. My contention is that classical education, by championing a vision that education is for moral formation and lifelong learning, the disposition of classical schools matches in many respects the values of the new economy. What I mean by this is that in a world where we are glutted with information, people are hungry for meaning. Yet it is difficult for people to cut through the noise and distraction to make meaning of the raw informational materials. I think that’s where classical education truly serves the new economy most adeptly. Let’s explore a few of the ways this occurs.

Before diving in, I think it is also important to recognize some of the incongruencies between classical education and the new economy. For one, the new economy is driven by new technologies. By and large, the classical school movement has tended to be a low-tech schooling environment. That being said, it is interesting to see how there are new models of schooling that utilizing the platforms of the new economy. For instance, the Classic Learning Test (CLT) has provided a new type of college entrance testing by using an online testing platform. There are numerous classical schools that use online courses where remove video platforms enable rich discussion despite physically being in diverse locations. A second incongruity is that the new economy as an economy is not have at its core a moral value. So it is not as though this new economy is in some way morally superior to the previous economy. There are likely ways where workers and consumers are taken advantage of or manipulated. In addition, there are new dangers that have emerged in the new economy associated with internet security, disinformation, and lack of regulation. It behooves us to be aware of the risks of entering into the new and emerging marketplace.

The great books tradition was the first and most pervasive loss in the industrialization of education. Sure, some of the greats remained on, say, the AP English Lit reading list. However, reading the greats with a view of being formed by the great tradition has been lost in conventional education. They are largely read with a view to the salient information needed to pass tests. The classical renewal movement has celebrated the timeless wisdom and intellectual challenge contained within the great books. They represent a journey through the greatest works of literature, philosophy, poetry, drama and history that have shaped our understanding of the world. The great books tradition allows us to connect with the thoughts and ideas of brilliant minds from different eras. They inspire students to think critically, question assumptions, and expand our perspectives. Students embark on a transformative quest for knowledge and insight. In some ways, the greats books are a renewable resource, as we can continuously turn to them for second and third readings to glean deeper insights. The demonstrate that learning is a lifelong pursuit filled with endless possibilities for growth. When we think about the skills needed in the new economy, the great books tradition cultivates the hearts and minds of students to have a wellspring of wisdom to provide value in the marketplace.

Logic is yet another hallmark of classical education, being one of the three liberal arts or the trivium. Aristotle stands as a giant having tremendous influence over philosophical thought down through the ages. His logical system is founded on propositional truth. In many respects, the type of logic taught in classical schools stems from Aristotelian principles and serves as a way to train students in the art of reasoning. By learning syllogisms, fallacies, inductive and deductive approaches to reasoning, students are able to investigate complex problems and form evaluations of what is true and what is good. Logic is the backbone of critical thinking and reasoning. It allows us to make sense of the world around us, solve problems, and make informed decisions. The classical art of logic guides us in constructing sound arguments, identifying fallacies, and honing our analytical skills. The classical art of logic opens doors to a world of clarity and understanding. It empowers students to think with precision and confidence. In the new economy, logical skills enable thinkers to cut through memes and social media posts that have little substance in order to consider problems and issues in depth. Students trained in logic have the ability to find nuance and consider new avenues that are constructive alternatives to much of the social discourse of our era.

Finally, rhetoric is another hallmark of classical education, moving students beyond simply learning how to write or speak effectively. It champions the transformative power of words, enabling students to convey their convictions with clarity and winsomeness. The classical art of rhetoric is rooted in ancient Greek and Roman philosophy. It is the art of using language effectively and persuasively. At its core, rhetoric empowers individuals to craft compelling arguments, sway opinions, and evoke emotions through the principles of ethos, pathos, and logos. As one of the liberal arts, it works with logic to enable the student to understand a problem and then raise one’s voice to help solve that problem. In the Christian tradition, there is an understanding of how the power of words – particularly God’s divine Word – can transform lives. The good news is conveyed through speech, connecting people to God’s grace and uplifting the soul. At other times, Christian rhetoric exhorts and challenges people to repent of sins and reform their ways. Quintilian considered that to be a good orator, one must be a good man (Institutio oratoria, book 12, chapter 1). So, what we have in view here is not some bombastic blowhard who captures people’s attention through sophistry. Instead, we are graduating students who can genuinely tackle the toughest problems of our day with reasonable speech and well-considered words.

The new economy is a market made for students like ours. Through our educational renewal, they are becoming equipped to provide meaning to a growing population that needs guidance and wisdom. It may merely be coincidence that has seen the classical educational renewal emerge at the same time as the new economy. Yet, it seems to me that the skills required at this time are exactly what we are providing.

The post Ancient Wisdom for the New Economy appeared first on .

To answer this question we must return to Aristotle’s definition of prudence itself, borrow from Charlotte Mason’s “way of the will,” and consider educational activities that align appropriately with the nature of practical wisdom. These three pieces will enable us to develop a pedagogy of prudence, through which, with God’s help and the student’s voluntary learning, we can pass on prudence to the young. 

The Defining Traits of Prudence

In his Nicomachean Ethics book VI Aristotle’s main goal is to illuminate the nature of phronesis or practical wisdom. In fact, he addresses the other four intellectual virtues (artistry, intuition, scientific knowledge, and philosophic wisdom) mainly in order to define more precisely what prudence is by comparison with other species of the overarching category or genus, intellectual virtue. This makes sense given the fact that it is a treatise on ethics, and so intended to clarify how we are to live in the world. Prudence itself involves the deliberate choices that would lead to a good life.

In one place, Aristotle defines practical wisdom as “a state involving true reason, a practical one, concerned with what is good or bad for a human being” (Reeve, Aristotle on Practical Wisdom, 56; VI.5 translation). It is not simply having good habits but involves the reasoning faculty of a human being, directed particularly at things that are good or bad for us as human beings. Practical wisdom is therefore not concerned, strictly speaking, with what objectively happened in the past or with what might happen in the future or elsewhere, but which has no immediate relevance to us. “Nothing that happened in the past, however, is deliberately chosen–for example, nobody deliberately chooses to have sacked Troy” (Reeve, 50; VI.2). It is concerned with those things that might benefit or harm us as human beings.

In this way, practical wisdom differs from scientific or theoretical knowledge, which makes truth claims about the world regardless of their relationship to us. Nevertheless, there is an analogy between them. As Aristotle explains, “What assertion and denial are in the case of thought–that, in the case of desire, is precisely what pursuit and avoidance are” (Reeve, 48; VI.2). Prudence causes us to pursue or avoid things, whereas knowledge simply asserts or denies. This is precisely what makes practical reasoning practical in Aristotle’s thinking; it is the type of thinking that we engage in as doers, actors in the world. Therefore, our desires and our deliberate choices are involved in the experience of practical wisdom. 

The Way of the Will

These two companions (desire and deliberate choice) might be said to make practical wisdom what it is. But they are uneasy companions even in the best of times. And that is because our desires are often in conflict with one another and with reason. As the apostle James says, “What causes quarrels and what causes fights among you? Is it not this, that your passions are at war within you? You desire and do not have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel” (4:1-2a ESV). This is why, for Aristotle, the moral virtues are a necessary precursor to practical wisdom, because if a person’s desires are entirely corrupt, he is not able to reason correctly about what is good for himself. His vision is so blurry, so obscured we might say by the log in his own eye, that he cannot see with any clarity what would in fact be good, either for himself or anyone else. 

Charlotte Mason, a British Christian educator from the turn of the last century, offers the “way of the will” as a guide to moral “self-management.” Being aware of our conflicting desires and able to manage them through deliberate choice is part and parcel of what prudence consists of. She explains this explicit instruction that children should be given in order to fortify their wills in vol. 6 Towards a Philosophy of Education:

Children should be taught (a) to distinguish between ‘I want’ and ‘I will.’ (b) That the way to will effectively is to turn our thoughts away from that which we desire but do not will. (c) That the best way to turn our thoughts is to think of, or do some quite different thing, entertaining or interesting. (d) That after a little rest in this way, the will returns to its work with new vigour. (ch. 8)

We might add on to Mason’s categories here by helping our students understand that they often want not one thing but many different things, and that part of becoming wise is not listening to only one of those voices, those competing desires, at any one time. We are prudent if we hear them each out in turn, think through the options rationally to discern what is best for us, and then choose with our will. And at the same time, as we will to follow one particular desire, we stop our ears to the others through tactics like diversion. (I have discussed this tactic and another like it, pre-committment) at some length in a two-part series entitled “Educating for Self-Control”: 1) A Lost Christian Virtue, 2) The Link Between Attention and Willpower.)

Among the moral virtues that are a necessary prerequisite to Aristotle’s course on prudence he names specifically temperance (sophrosune in Greek), noting that it is called this because it saves or preserves (sozousan) the person’s practical wisdom (ten phronesin; see Reeve, 58; VI.5). The temperate and wise man has a strong will, in Mason’s terminology, to be able to resist the suggestions of wayward desires. Of course, our ultimate goal is that a person would desire the right things in the right way and to the right degree. The moral virtues help set the desires straight on things that are actually good for you as a human being and at a degree that is appropriate. But in this life, we know as Christians, we will still struggle against the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and the pride of life. And so, we must strive for temperance and prudence, baptized by charity, at one and the same time.

But what is the central work of prudence itself? What does it take to will correctly with regard to human good? For Aristotle, the mental act of deliberation is highlighted as the key activity of a prudent person:

Practical wisdom, however, is concerned with human affairs and what can be deliberated about; for of a practically wise man we say that this most of all is the function, to deliberate well, and nobody deliberates about what cannot be otherwise or about the sorts of things that do not lead to some specific end, where this is something good, doable in action. The unconditionally good deliberator, however, is the one capable of aiming, in accord with calculation, at the best, for a human being, of things doable in action. (Reeve, 64; VI.7)

Deliberation then is the golden key that unlocks the door of a prudent life. A wise person must be able to think through options, calculate the respective values of different human goods, and accurately choose the best course of action. 

Training the Powers of Deliberative Reasoning

For Aristotle this deliberation or consultation will take the form of what we might call deliberative or practical syllogisms. They will know fundamental or categorical principles of what is good for human beings (the universal or major premise), and then they will also know the particular facts of this or that situation (particular or minor premise), leading them to reason: 

• Heavy water is bad to drink.
• This water is heavy.
• Therefore, I should not drink it. (see VI.8)

The practically wise person will be able to reason quickly and correctly about the new situations he faces in order to decide optimally about how to act in any doubtful situation (see the end of VI.9). 

From this follows the primary method of our pedagogy of prudence: students should be trained in logic, rhetoric, and ethics. It may seem at first glance that this is a curricular, rather than a pedagogical claim, until we recognize the role of logic and rhetoric as productive arts. When understood correctly, dialectic or logic, as well as rhetoric, are tools for the process of inquiry or deliberation. The process of inquiry and deliberation involves the student in seeking the truth through discovering arguments and reasons. It follows that a student who has a practiced ability to perceive reasons for and against a course of action will be able to deliberate well. If the student has studied ethics, he should have the major premises necessary for his practical syllogisms. Of course, he must also have enough experience of the world, so that he is not at a loss for discerning the particulars of his situation. 

Training in dialectic, rhetoric, and ethics, then, are not merely courses that must be added on in the high school or college years, but are instead a set of pedagogical practices that should be embedded in a student’s study from their earliest encounters with the “humanities,” those subjects that are concerned with instructing the conscience with the hard-won wisdom of mankind. This is why the Narration-Trivium lesson capitalizes on and expands Charlotte Mason’s narration-based lesson structure to explicitly name dialectic and rhetoric as proper responses to a rich text. To be clear, dialectic and rhetoric can face in two directions, as it were. They can be turned toward theoretical knowledge, on the one hand, establishing through reasoning some truth that has no direct bearing on my life or choices. Or else, they can face ethics and practical affairs and engage in the practical thinking of deliberation, where options are weighed about what is best for a human being. 

For this reason, and not simply for their own rhetorical training, should students be asked to deliberate about the best course of action for a character in a novel or a figure from history. By living vicariously through the decision-points of many people who have come before them, students gain facility with externalizing the thought-process of deliberation. While this is not the same thing as their own deliberate choices, it is an incredibly effective way to engage the faculty students will use in their own lives. This process of deliberation can be put on display in the classroom in any number of ways, whether it be through set speeches or essays, where a student endeavors to persuade others of the right course of action in a fictional or historical situation, or through harkness table discussions and socratic seminars, where the teacher poses some ethical dilemma. The important thing is that teachers regularly discuss, and get the students to discuss, human values and choices, using biblical moral categories. How else are students to grow in prudence if they never deliberate? 

A helpful tool in this regard is the pro and con chart, where students list out the positives and negatives of a possible choice in terms of its effects on self and others. The discipline of pausing long enough to think through all the ramifications not only develops a student’s analytical thinking, it also improves their invention, or ability to think of reasons or arguments. Traditionally, listed as one of the canons of rhetoric, invention will benefit from a student’s frequent use of common topics, like the more and the less, the better and the worse, the greater and the lesser, etc. (see Aristotle’s Topics).

In addition to vicarious exercises in deliberation, parents, teachers and mentors should utilize every opportunity that arises to assist a young person in their own deliberation process. We will be able to do this by acting as counselor rather than decision-maker. The college and career guidance counselling process is perhaps the prime example, because often in our culture this is a decision that parents hand over to their teenage children, even if some constraints are imposed. Parents and mentors should be asking questions, providing students with an awareness of the experiences of other students, and raising categories of what might be valuable or desirable in a college or career choice. It is not a matter of doing the thinking and deciding for these older students, but of helping them engage in a genuine process of decision-making that is not short-circuited by one or two considerations. These big decisions of early life will make a deep impression on students and act as guides for their process of making all the other important decisions of their life.

In the next article, we will see how this training in deliberative reasoning not only prepares our students for a wise personal life, but also enables them to lead in their homes, communities and churches.

The post The Counsels of the Wise, Part 6: A Pedagogy of Prudence appeared first on .

The key to raising strong, independent young people, the authors argue, is not to shield boys and girls from these challenges, but instead to allow for situations in which these experiences occur. This strategic approach, of course, takes courage and discretion. When a child you love is facing a hardship that causes them emotional discomfort, the temptation to swoop in and save the day is hard to resist. But parents and teachers need to see the bigger picture: When challenges are embraced as opportunities for growth, they refine, sharpen, and mold young people to be strong and resilient.

In this blog, I want to reflect on how teachers can go about providing an education in resilience for their students. If you’re familiar with our writings here at EdRen you know that by “education” I don’t mean the mere transfer of information. I mean passing on a way of life. In this way, an education in resilience has intellectual implications, to be sure, but also moral, social, and spiritual. The result of such an education is not a person who has detached herself from the sorrows of the world, on the one hand, or become a victim of such hardships on the other. Instead, it is someone who acknowledges all the challenges and difficulty that life throws at her for what they are, while staying faithful to God’s call.

The Great Untruths

To begin my investigation into an education for resilience, I want to explore what the authors of The Coddling of the American Mind have to say about the contemporary problem of coddling America’s youth. Lukianoff, an attorney, and Haidt, a sociologist, introduce the topic of their book by identifying three “untruths” that are plaguing college campuses, and in turn, American culture today. While these untruths are most obvious in higher education, they invade the life of a student far before college, and live on long after. The authors write,

“The three Great Untruths have flowered on many college campuses today, but they have their roots in earlier education and childhood experiences, and they now extend from the campus into the corporate world and the public square, including national politics” (5).

Indeed, the coddling of a person through the perpetuation of these untruths occurs over a lifetime, even, and perhaps especially, in schools and classrooms across the country.

Untruth #1: What Doesn’t Kill You Makes You Weaker

The first is the untruth of fragility. This is the idea that what doesn’t kill you makes you weaker. In other words, the challenges and difficulties one faces are slowly chipping away at one’s shot at a happy, comfortable life. Parents who imbibe this truth are, to put it ironically, relentless in their efforts to shield their children from all setbacks and experiences of disappointment.

The resulting home culture of such parenting is “safetyism,” which the authors denounce:

“When children are raised in a culture of safetyism, which teaches them to stay ‘emotionally safe’ while protecting them from every imaginable danger, it may set up a feedback loop: kids become more fragile and less resilient, which signals to adults that they need more protection, which then makes them even more fragile and less resilient” (30).

The authors are apt to point out that what makes this untruth particularly insidious is that it perpetuates a vicious cycle. When a parent overprotects her child, the child grows more and more fragile, leading the parent to increasingly overprotect. To prevent such a home culture from developing, parents need to cultivate an atmosphere of support in their home that simultaneously permits the challenges of everyday life to impact their children as they normally would. British educator Charlotte Mason, whom we love to read here at EdRen, deems this ‘a natural home atmosphere.’ 

To illustrate her point, Mason cites the discoveries of a biologist making observations about a plant stored under glass. This plant may appear healthy and strong, but due to the insulating protection of the glass, its immune system atrophies over time. The biologist concludes his research, asking, “Is it not the shocks of adversity and not cotton wool protection that evolve true manhood?” (vol 6, p. 53).

We are doing no good for our students by shielding them from the challenges of everyday life. It is precisely these challenges that will make them stronger. Connecting this insight to education, Mason writes,

“But teaching may be so watered down and sweetened, teachers may be so suave and condescending, as to bring about a condition of intellectual feebleness and moral softness which it is not easy for a child to overcome” (53).

Teachers ‘condescend’ their students in a number of ways. For example, they might break up an argument prematurely if they sense it is getting heated for the sake of keeping the peace. Or they may feel the need to bathe a child in false praise if he is not doing well in a particular subject. As one final example, they may over-monitor recess time, eliminating the possibility for children to work out their conflicts themselves.

While it is tempting to intervene as the adult in order to protect the child from hardship, in reality, these are all great opportunities for educating in resilience. Through permitting with ‘masterly inactivity’ (as Charlotte Mason would put it) moments of temporary discomfort and conflict, teachers can stoke the embers of resilience in their students.

Untruth #2: Always Trust Your Feelings

The second great untruth of our age, suggest Lukianoff and Haidt, is emotional reasoning. This form of reasoning elevates our feelings to the role of ultimate guide of our interpretation of reality (38). In other words, if I am experiencing negative emotions about a particular situation, then the situation must necessarily be bad. I have no cognitive choice in the matter.

In American culture today, we are bombarded with the so-called wisdom to trust our feelings. No doubt, the core of this message is rooted in expressive individualism, the reigning cultural paradigm, which conceives of human identity in terms of the quest for personal happiness. If human identity and purpose finds its fulfillment in an emotional state, then our feelings are necessarily the ultimate litmus test.

The problem with purely emotional reasoning, of course, is that our feelings do not give us the full picture of reality. Nor they do provide infallible guidance for how to act or what to think. This isn’t their purpose. Emotions are intended to accompany people through the highs and lows of life, helping us experience reality in an appropriate and psychologically healthy way. But they aren’t intended to serve as the arbiters for the truth of a matter.

On this point, the stoic philosopher Epictetus writes, “What really frightens and dismays us is not external events themselves, but the way in which we think about them. It is not things that disturb us, but our interpretation of their significance” (Enchiridion, Epictetus & Lebell, p. 7). What Epictetus is pointing out here is that it is our frame of mind, not the actual situation, that triggers our emotions. Two people can respond very differently to the exact same situation because of how they approach it.

There are a couple ways we can help our students not fall into the trap of overtrusting their feelings. First, we should encourage them to believe the best in a given situation. This another way of saying we should train our students to positively interpret situations around them. While this may be difficult for some students (“I’m a natural pessimist”), like most behaviors, mindset is largely a matter of habit (download Patrick’s eBook on habit training here). Through training one’s students to respond positively in difficult situations, you are educating them in resilience. You are subtly teaching them that life, though challenging, is manageable. It won’t destroy them even if it feels in the moment like it will.

Second, we should train our students to always seek the truth of the matter. This is why courses in logic are so important in secondary school education. Students need to be equipped with the skills to discern truth from falsehood and logical from emotional appeals. They need to be able to interpret situations in context and consider all the different perspectives on complex issues. Through logical analysis and critical thinking, students can avoid the untruth of “Always trust your feelings.”

From a biblical perspective, when I think of a resilient mindset in difficult situations, I cannot help but recall the words of the apostle Paul. In Philippians 4, he writes “…I have learned the secret to being content in every situation.” And in 2 Corinthians 4, he writes, “We are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair, persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed.” For a person like Paul, who is locked up in a Roman prison, to make these confessions is nothing short of astounding. He displayed resilience because he trusts in the strength of the Lord inside him. He is able to faithfully interpret his challenging circumstances with hope because he knew that God’s plan in Christ will not be stopped. His outlook is grounded in faith and guided by reason, not his feelings.

Untruth #3: Life is a Battle of Us vs Them

The third great untruth is the “Us versus Them” mentality. The authors explain this false idea to be that life is ultimately a battle between good people and evil people. We find the people who are like us or believe the same things we do–our tribe–and band together against other tribes.

Now, on the one hand, it is completely natural and perfectly harmless for people to bond together over shared interests and even identities. As an alumnus of Harry D. Jacobs High School (located in the golden city of Algonquin, Illinois), I feel an affinity for the school’s constituents by virtue of our shared identity. Moreover, I wish no harm upon on the poor souls who can’t claim this superior heritage as their own. This tribe, I would argue, is a good one, promoting tangible goods of friendship, service, and gratitude.

But on the hand, history is full of examples in which communities devolve into tribes who are then mobilized to attack other tribes and vilify the individuals that make them up. The most infamous example is Adolph Hitler’s vilification of Jews to achieve his plans for a German empire. Today the most common and infamous manifestation of this is identity politics. Identity politics has become a contentious term that refers to “political mobilization organized around group characteristics such as race, gender, and sexuality, as opposed to party, ideology, or pecuniary interest” (59).

The authors suggest that not all identity politics are bad. Positive examples of identity-driven political causes include women’s suffrage and the civil rights movement. The world is a better place because brave leaders like Martin Luther King, Jr., mobilized historically marginalized African-Americans to stand up for their civil and political rights.

But all too often identity politics is actually common-enemy politics. They write:

“Identity can be mobilized…in ways that amplify our ancient tribalism and bind people together in shared hatred of a group that serves as the unifying common enemy” (60).

Common-enemy identity politics is bad for students because they create what the authors call a “call-out culture.” A call-out culture is one which people are always on the look out to publicly shame people who offend or aggravate their tribe. The net result is a culture in which people are afraid to speak their mind or try out new ideas lest they be publicly scrutinized.

The solution, the authors suggest, is “an appeal to common humanity, rather than common enemy, for the sake of facilitating real conversation geared toward free inquiry, dissent, evidence-based argument, and intellectual honesty” (77).

For open and honest conversation to happen in classrooms, teachers must resist the temptation of promoting tribalist thinking. As Christians, it can be be tempting to think of life as us against the world and to a certain extent we are correct. St. Augustine himself drew a line in the sand between the City of God and the City of Man. But at the same time, as Christians, God has not called us to make enemies of all those who do not claim to be Christians. Nor does God call us to raise our swords against those who disagree with us theologically, morally, or politically. Instead, we are called to live peaceable in the city and seek its well being (Jeremiah 29, 1 Timothy 2).

In our classrooms, then, we can cultivate a culture of common humanity through sincere inquiry to understand alternative viewpoints. We can train students in the intellectual virtues of charity, humility, and mutual respect. This isn’t to suggest we should downplay the truth or avoid argumentation. On the contrary, when the right ground rules are set, the best debates occur.

Conclusion

Educating for resilience requires a rejection of the three great untruths: Fragility, Emotional Reasoning, and Us Versus Them. If we can train our students in the opposite of these untruths, they will emerge as independent, reasonable, and unifying young men and women. This sort of education takes significant patience and wisdom. It is not easy to know in a given situation when a student needs grace and support or when they need to be challenged. But through careful study, deliberate practice, and the grace of God, we can train our students to face a challenging world with courage, prudence, and resilience. I would take this approach over coddling any day.

For more insights on how teachers can hone the craft of teaching from a classical perspective, while preparing their students for the modern world, you can download my free eBook “The Craft of Teaching.”

The post Educating for Resilience in a Coddling Culture appeared first on .