Sociologist Robert Bellah in his landmark book, Habits of the Heart, exposes the myth of radical freedom. Bellah’s team of researchers interviewed hundreds of Americans in various careers on the topic; the results revealed a struggle with a number of contradictions consequent to the philosophy of radical individualism. These contradictions were both emotional and cognitive. It seems that there is something deeply problematic with radical individualism. Bellah writes:
It is a powerful cultural fiction that we not only can, but must make up our deepest beliefs in the isolation of our private selves … There are truths we do not see when we adopt the language of radical individualism…. The major problem in individualism is its disregard for the social dimension of life, and the importance of that dimension in shaping the self. According to German sociologist Emile Durkheim the group (i.e. social solidarity) is a prerequisite for the identity of the individual. George Herbert Mead, another turn of the century sociologist, notes that meaning is a relational or interpersonal matter, not a mere individual phenomenon. The self is socially produced. (R. Bellah, Habits of the Heart. 1985, pp. 65, 85 & 123)
One can often imagine that the best growth occurs on one’s own, even during one’s greatest rebellion, but in fact one can only grow as a person while in direct and significant relationships, complementary partnerships with others. A person finds one’s true and soulful being in mutual love and communion. Some intellectuals believe that love is more basic to our identity than reason, although not against reason. One can attempt to be an individual alone but will fail to become a person on one’s own.
ubcgcu 