Lewis brought up many philosophical points regarding the development and inspiration of human values, including the following;
“Perhaps we are not driven by immutable instincts. But we might still be controlled by the influence of genes on our underlying personality or, alternatively, by peer pressure, by the relentless demands of the society in which we happen to live.”
(Lewis, Pg. 8)
More than anything I want to believe that humans can fashion their own non-biased values, but I think it is incredibly difficult if not impossible to eliminate the social, political, and genetic influences encountered during life. From the second a person enters this world they become victims of normalization in which they are influenced by the discourse and perspectives of human values presented by society.
Take religion for example. In many cases, people who were raised within a religious community end up becoming religious because they were conditioned to be. This is not to say people are only religious because they grew up in a religious household, it’s just incredibly unlikely that they would grow up inherently knowing the Ten Commandments. Before globalization, when distinct populations were isolated from one another, different forms of religion or spirituality were practiced. Not one of the religions were identical, but they all entertain the notion of a greater power. This suggests that it is inherent human nature to value something bigger than itself. In my eyes, religion is a good example of the crossing of individual and society values. In numerous cases individuals value spirituality and religion, but society influences the ways in which they can practice these values.
Additionally, Lewis addresses the influence of peer pressure in his quote. Many people think of peer pressure as coaxing someone into doing something against their will, but in this case I view peer pressure as all the micro-pressures we experience from friends, parents, teachers, coaches, etc,. The people that surround us are constantly expressing their values, whether consciously or not, and I believe these pressures undoubtedly play a role in shaping our own values. Although it may be impossible to generate bias-free values, it is possible to become aware of these biases so you can take them into account when choosing values important to you.
References
Thanks for those examples. They are good ones. You state a different point in Lewis’s article (actually also differ from mine): people’s values are mostly influenced by social context and peer pressure. Specifically, you give us two examples to illustrate your point. First one is religion and you talk about the influence of a religious family on a growing child. And then you indeed give an adequate explanation of individual spirit construction under the influence of religion. The next example centers on the peer pressure. Interestingly, you bring out a idea that “micro-pressure” from people around us constantly give us stimulus even if it is micro. This is a smart point.
The argument is quite convincing because the examples are very solid proofs. However, when we talk about the construction of human values, we should expand our views and see the big picture. The construction of human values ought to be a process. Admittedly, parents of a Christian family and big community a child touches could easily influence him or her on the belief. But the construction of their values is far beyond this effect. Even though they might end up believing in the same religion, but the process of this formation should be different. Every individual is unique, and when they receive information they have their own way to interpret and practice. It seems they are doing the same thing, or believing in the same thing, but as a matter of fact, they may have different process to take in and practice out. Therefore, outside influence may be somewhat provide an approach, but the truth is they are hardly construct the complete human values. In some sense, it is not even a step of the process of construction of human values.
Plus, it is difficult to define that influence, since we don’t know whether or not the influence is key. In other words, “it all depends on how one defines words like control and freedom” (Lewis, 8). This means, the influence we talk about here may neither be proven nor refuted. As Lewis explained, “because this debate is irresolvable, and because most people feel ‘free’ to form and express their personal evaluations and beliefs, even if they do not always feel free to act on those beliefs, it seems reasonable to make a simplifying assumption in favor of individual human choice and freedom” (Lewis, 8). He actually makes a very good point on this issue. And this objectively helps us re-think about this “influence” problem.
Thanks for writing such a thorough counter-perspective to my post. There are multiple points you brought up that I completely agree with and perhaps didn’t do a good job illustrating in my first post. Yes, I agree that human values are important and should be an ongoing process. The process of formation is absolutely different within each individual, but I still believe that the life experiences greatly influence the direction a person chooses to go when constructing his or her values. Every individual is indeed unique and is able to interpret and process external information differently. My argument is that people are only able to work with the bank of knowledge that they have been exposed to, and therefore the evaluation of these external influences is a major part of the value construction process.
We definitely have different perspectives on this arguable point. Midway through Lewis’ piece he addressed a similar controversy, “human beings cannot separate the way they arrive at values from the values themselves. Sense, experience, emotion, logic, intuition, authority, and ‘science’ are mental modes or techniques through which we form our values.” (Lewis, pg 13) I agree it is incredibly difficult to separate the way we arrive at values from the values themselves.