Things I'm Torn About: Being Respectable

What should our relationship be to the social world into which we're thrown when we are born? My thoughts on this question are not entirely consistent, nor have they ever been, which no doubt bespeaks the wider culture's confusion about it. Is it more admirable to earn the honor and respect of the group or to follow one's own lights, even when it goes against what society deems respectable? Some messages from the culture reinforce the former and some the latter.

On one extreme, we worship the individual...the cowboy, the renegade, the loose cannon, the eccentric genius, the underdog, the unlikely hero. The baby boomers successfully spread the cult of the individual throughout society: Be Yourself; Do You; Me Time; Free to Be You and Me; Special Little Snowflake; I'm ok, You're Ok; Find Yourself; Personal Journey. The message is that everybody is different, and what is admirable is for individuals to be brave enough to "express themselves" and "be who they are."

On the other extreme, we worship the martyr. Literally! Our collective ethics are still very Christian. They elevate self-sacrifice, self-denial, and the common good over selfishness....self worship, self fulfillment, self aggrandizement, self promotion. We admire people who are humble and self-effacing and devoted to others. The saint. The team player. The impoverished sage. The work horse. The family man. The relief worker. The selfless mother. The 6th man. The unselfish pass. The anonymous donor. The rich man in the sensible car. The long-suffering scientist. The Christ. We admire grinding it out; battling in the trenches; doing our part; playing by the rules; waiting our turn. We admire the loyal servant; the right hand man; the noble savage; Sam Gamgee and Gunga Din.

Both of these little streams of thought regarding the relationship of the individual to the collective weave in and out of the culture, and consequently most of us possess both of these ideal types as models of what is admirable and worthy of emulation. What the culture has failed to mention, though, is the inconvenient little fact that these ideal types are in tension with one another.

It cannot be simultaneously true that one should ruggedly hold to one's own counsel and that one should live one's life with humility and great love for the all the other humans here on earth. These are both defensible and probably admirable ways of being in the world, but they are not easily reconciled. If I love the world and accept my own limitations, I can't dismiss off hand how the world thinks I should live my life. On the other hand, the world has a long history of pretty terrible mistakes in telling people what they should and shouldn't, can and can't do.

Should I care about money? Should I join community organizations? Should I aspire to a job with prestige? Should I devoted to paying all my debts? Should I get married and have a family? Should I buy a house? Should I lose weight? Should I save for retirement? Should I get a decent suit? Should I buy drugs? Should I get a dog? Should I follow the law?

Sometimes, what society and I want are the same thing, in which case, this conflict doesn't arise, but sometimes they aren't. What do I do? Who do I listen to? Could I possibly ask more rhetorical questions?