This post is gonna get a little sociological, but bear with me... there's a point.
In the past century or so, sociologists have started to borrow a theory from economics, entitled "Rational Choice Theory." This theory assumes that social behavior can be explained in terms of individuals who have fixed sets of preferences who act in a rational way in order to achieve (or "maximize", as they say) these preferences. It's become a very popular theory in American social science today (we do cherish our "locus of control", after all).
Is anyone else as skeptical of this idea as I am?
I look at my own life and I see, um, a shocking lack of rationality. Quite simply, I know that I have made a lot of choices either using the wrong reasons or from incorrect information or just not "reasoning" about the choice at all. And even more numerous are the actions I never choose at all--automatic, immediate, instinctive, norm-driven actions (ex. I don't "choose" to respond when I run into a friend and they start talking to me--I just do it, no questions asked). And that's not even counting constrained actions, when the actions of others or the larger system leave me with no ideal options. I don't have a choice to be hurt or depressed or happy in response to some events--those emotions just happen.
Yet reason and rationalizing are realities as well. In my point of view, 9 times out of 10 my reason is a tool for, well, making up reasons why I did or will act a certain way. The reason is rarely the driving force of action--but it is a useful tool in creating viable explanations for our actions. A lot of psychological research (for example, split brain studies where the link between the "instinctive" right brain and the "rationalizing" left brain has been severed) supports this idea.
As I was thinking about this tension, though, it suddenly hit me: it's the whole predestination vs. free will debate all over again, just in different skin! Do we have any control over our own lives, or don't we? Whether the alternate option is God or social forces (in my mind, it's both), we know that there is a bigger reality outside of us that exercises considerable control over what our options are. Yet, we DO certainly make choices, and (from a biblical point of view) God judges us according to those choices. Neither of these two realities can be disproven--yet they have seemed impossible to reconcile. We hold them in tension, with extensive butting-of-heads. Obviously, since generations have strugged with this question, I'm not gonna solve it in a blog (though perhaps someone could leave the answer in a comment??).
But now, the point: appreciate with me this synthesis of life, that the same themes are played over and over again in different variations in this world, and that our common humanity connects ideas, groups, and philosophies--though we may often miss or obstruct these connections. If ivory tower sociologists and baptist theologians are essentially wrestling with the same questions....
well, then. It must all be connected.
1 comment:
There is nothing new under the sun. The appearance of the same themes in a multitude of cultures and timepoints isn't so surprising obviously.
Rational choice theory is interesting. I've looked into it a bit in the context of philosophy and game theory. The idea that people act in order to achieve a specified end is interesting. Defining rationality as consistently acting on one's set of preferences is one particular way of answering the question. Do you happen to read any of the work by the philosopher Daniel Dennett?
Post a Comment