Inside Out- Internal Control

Yesterday we talked about the external influences that society puts on us, molding us into decent and productive citizens. We talked about how there is great good in this, and that we ought not to do away with it. However, we also discussed the limitations of external influence. How it can allow for a society of moral behavior, but inwardly immoral people. How it can be eroded, and when that happens, horrors follow.

Internal Control)

True stability in society requires internal control. It requires people to be inwardly converted to the principles of morality and civility, who will self-govern themselves, no matter what the laws or social norms say. Thus, laws of the land may be important, but laws of the heart even more so.

Consider how Jesus’s words align with this. “Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him; That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man,” (Mark 7:18, 20). We can infer that the opposite of this statement is also true, it is not that which goes into a man, but comes out of him, that justifies him and proves him good. It is the choices from the inner place, not the outer, that truly matter.

Notice, then, how sensible the work of missionaries and proselytizers is. They do not go to change public policy, to lobby for laws, to influence the external controls. They go to the individual, convict them of moral sin, reintroduce God to heal what is broken in the heart, and leave a soul that is personally committed to doing what is good. It is hard work and is only effective on those who are open to it, but it is the most important work to maintain the fabric of our societies, let alone the saving of souls.

A Warped Priority)

You would think that we as a people would have learned the importance of this work. That we would trust that as we focused on the individual soul, that the collective society would improve. That as we fixed what is inside, all of the outer peripheries would correct themselves on their own.

As one who gave two years of my life to missionary efforts, I can tell you that that is not the case at all. Opposition to proselyting efforts, and a desire to banish them is everywhere. Both from governments and individuals. Not only this, but we live in a time where people who do have a strong moral compass are often ridiculed or considered suspect. Instead, people crave more legislation, more external control, more outer force, particularly on those they disagree with.

As discussed yesterday, this is a very dangerous attitude to take. The more society discourages and tears down internal control, the more its people will be uprooted from true morality, the more wildly they will start to swing, and eventually they will surely fall to debauchery, perversion, and destruction.

In summary, this question of inner or outer moral convictions may seem a small and simple thing, but its long-term implications are far-reaching. All of us should be sharply aware of our own reliance upon internal or external controls, and also our society’s. And for both ourselves and others, the most important work is to heal the heart within, connect God to the inner man, and establish internal moral control.

Inside Out- External Control

When we try to modify a person’s behavior by external influence, we are trying to change them from the outside-in. When a person changes their behavior by a transformation of their personal values, they are being changed from the inside-out. You perhaps have heard of this concept in psychology as having an “external locus of control,” which is when behavior is controlled by outside influence, or an “internal locus of control,” which is when behavior is controlled by personal conviction. Today we will consider the benefits and shortcomings of the first of these and then examine the second one tomorrow.

Social Order)

An external locus of control is often presented as inferior to the internal, and it is, but that doesn’t mean that it is necessarily a bad thing. Punishments for crime serve as a deterrent for serious wrongs, and social pressure keeps us civil and fair in our everyday interaction. It’s impossible to say how much our conduct would deteriorate without these external influences, but most of our worst behavior comes out when we think we’re alone. Thus, external pressure helps us behave better, even if it doesn’t make us be better.

An external locus of control is part of the glue that holds a society together. It is first introduced to us when we are very small children, where we are made to follow rules like not hitting others, and sharing our toys, and saying polite things. It provides us a template for how to interact with the rest of the world to our mutual benefit, such as by maintaining positive relationships, remaining employed, and contributing to public safety.

As you can see, this external influence is not only about discouraging bad actions but also encouraging positive patterns that benefit everyone. As such, I think there will always be a place for it, and we can be grateful for the good that it does. That being said, it’s limitations must be acknowledged as well.

Morality Without Morals)

If each person had only an external locus of control, then it would be possible to have a society that was perfectly moral in its behavior, but where no one was actually moral. People would behave only because it was the most beneficial thing to do but would likely abandon all morals once there was an advantage to do so.

Now I do not believe in a society where everyone fits that description, but some of the people do. And I fear the percentage of people who are only moral because of social pressure is increasing. Jesus described such individuals when he said, “for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness,” (Matthew 23:27). Thus, we live in somewhat of an illusion of civility, and every now and again the mask slips, and we are terrified to realize that we live in a society dotted with psychopaths and monsters.

There are two great fears for the society that is primarily dependent on external controls for its morality. First, that those external controls will erode, and will be discarded one after another, until all pretenses of civility are gone. The second is that the people will simply become numb to the external controls. One fateful day, they just won’t care about them anymore, and once a significant percentage of people throw off common decency, even if they are a minority, it will become a snowball effect, a race to the bottom to maintain personal advantage at the expense of all others.

In short, there is real value in external influences for good, and I believe it is worth defending and strengthening them. But it is not the ultimate answer. For that, we must look to tomorrow’s post.

Views of a Building

Some might look at the foundation of the building and say:

“Look, it’s forced to sit there beneath everything else, subservient and in the dirt! That’s a fact that it is under everything else, you can’t deny it! That’s wrong, and we have to change it. We have to pull the foundation above the level of the ground, even put it at the top of the building!”

Of course, doing that would make the entire thing topple.

Some look at the foundation of the building and say:

“No, it is supporting the entire building! It’s really the most important part of it all! Better than all the rest. We should all aspire to be steady foundations like that.”

Both views have a claim to some fact, and by that each assumes that they are in the right and are incredulous at anyone with a different perspective. “I see a fact,” they say, “and that means that I am right.” But narrow-minded facts lacking context can lead us astray, just as surely as total ignorance.

There is also a third group of people, who are able to back up and take in a fuller perspective. They might say:

“Foundation, top floor, elevator shafts, facade…they are all building. They all serve an essential and beautiful purpose. The foundation is good, the first floor is good, and the top floor is good. They are different, but that is by design. No part is better, no part is worse, they’re just different. A foundation without a top is useless. A top without a foundation is ruinous. So, appreciate them for what they are and embrace them all.”

A Shared Premise

Nothing can be accomplished by arguing for moral imperatives from a premise that the other side does not agree with. People spend so much time pushing for what we need to change in a society, and what a moral future looks like; only to become increasingly frustrated that the other side can’t agree on any of these plans. People feel that their solutions are obvious, and that anyone with common sense would have to agree. But these solutions are only obvious if you assume all of premises that they came from. And in an increasingly divided world, that is not an assumption that should ever be made.

Many times, I find myself in conversations where someone asks me a yes-or-no question on a moral matter, but I find myself unable to speak, because either answer first assumes things that I don’t agree with. For example, trying to identify whether men or women have been historically more oppressed and which side needs special treatment to achieve equality first assumes that men and women should be viewed as two opposed entities, something that I don’t agree with.

The inability to speak due to drastically different premises is a concerning phenomenon. In such cases it is better to take the disagreement down to a deeper level, to try and find an even more fundamental premise that is agreed on, and then work forward from there. But what happens when we cannot find that fundamental shared premise? We will lose all ability to reason with one another. And where reason fails, people fall back on force.

Fix the World

Each side wants to fix the world by overcoming the other
To make the other side surrender to their side
And by so doing, they only make the world worse

There is only one way that the world could be fixed
And that is by each side surrendering to Christ

Force Follows

Without a shared moral core
We have nothing from which to reason together
And when reasoning fails
Force follows

Look Higher

All too often we limit our perspective when trying to remedy’s society’s ills. We see what appears to be immediately wrong around us and we try to implement what we see as the immediate solution to that problem. But this is like staring down at our feet while hiking on a trail. We may find the path of least resistance, but it may very well lead us off the edge of a cliff!

To navigate uncertain terrain, you must raise your view and fix it upon your ultimate destination. Only by focusing on our highest ideals, even the standard of heaven, can we make the right societal changes, both in the short and long term.

Faulty Premises- The Trend

A Recipe for Success)

Whenever people decide to push a social, political, or spiritual movement, they justify the changes that they seek by making certain truth claims. They try to get the world to accept that their core premises are true, or better yet get people to realize that they already agree with those premises. And then, if the premises are true, then the logical response must be to make the proposed social changes.

Every movement, whether its premises are true or not, depends on convincing people of them. Thus, the successful movements are the ones that identify what core premises most immediately lead to their desired outcomes and communicate them in a concise, memorable, and convincing way. When a movement is successful, the premise that was taught then becomes part of the societal fabric. It is now an assumed truth, an axiom for ethical and correct behavior, and future generations will be raised to trust it implicitly.

Unintended Consequences)

But that’s where these movements can start to unravel. The original evangelists of the movement may have only wanted to effect one, specific change, but the rising generations will always take things to their full logical conclusion. They will look at the premise and say, “well if this is true, and it justifies this first step, then surely it justifies the second and the third as well.” And so, they push the matter further than the original evangelists ever intended. Indeed, it is not uncommon for earlier-wave members of a movement to express shock and dismay at what their cause has become in the hands of the later generations. Some of them even express regret for having started the movement at all.

This is a pattern that should give us all pause as we consider the changes that we would wish to see in the world and the methods by which we would achieve them. Every one of us ought to give special consideration to the premises that precede those changes, and what their full potential effect could be, and whether they are even true to begin with.

Tomorrow we’ll look at a specific example of one movement that has gone off the rails, the premise that was indoctrinated in society to make it a success, and why that premise logically led to the unintended consequences we see today.

A Society Without a Future

A society that prioritizes the interests of its adults over its children
Is a society that has a present, but no future

A Society Without a Past

A society that promotes its own ideals by disowning its ancestors’
Is a society that has a present, but no past