Psychological Man Vs. Ethical Man

It is now clear as the millenium approaches that American society is divided by advocates on either side of the culture war: Psychological Man (and woman) and Ethical Man. Each has a unique world view tied to trends in this century.

Psychological Man is a pleasure seeking animal whose ego has been sufficiently massaged to accept expansive libidinal urges. With wealth increasing at an unprecedented pace, Psychological Man sees himself released from the boundaries economic hardship and seeks sensual revelries in once restricted taboos. If it feels good or pleases, do it. The pleasure principle is the highest calling.

Social manifestations of this principle abound. Conflict avoidance is encouraged; an absence of real engagement is evident; seriousness is shunned and tolerance is superordinated to the highest value. "Don’t be judgmental" is the proclamation of Psychological Man.

Morality for Psychological Man is personal; if it feels right for you, it is right. After all, "I’m Okay, you’re okay." Marriage should end when it’s convenient. Religion is selected like hosiery at the local department store and sacrifice for any principle is abjured unless the principle is personal pleasure.

Duty is a concept increasingly unknown to Psychological Man since a military obligation doesn’t exist and civic responsibility is rapidly becoming an anachronistic idea. For Psychological Man all transactions should be at social equilibrium—I give only to the degree that I get.

Much of this behavior involves accounting. "I get so much from the arrangement" or "it feels good to be with her" or "I’m fulfilled through this liaison" are the claims of Psychological Man who employs a scale of acceptable relationships.

On the other side of the cultural divide is Ethical Man, a residual holdover from a pre-psychological era. For him rectitude is more important than pleasure; honor more useful than tolerance.

While Ethical Man is in the minority and bewildered by a national fascination with Psychological Man, as random television viewing would suggest, he is the crucial component of social action when sacrifice is needed. Those who try to explain the heroism of soldiers in battle or missionaries who give of themselves with nothing in return are baffled unless they can appreciate the sensibility of Ethical Man.

The fear of shame, the loss of nobility, the vision of eternal truth, loom very large in the calculus of Ethical Man. He is not an existentialist, nor can he accept the fashion of relativism. He appears intolerant because belief is more lasting than feeling and compromise is more degrading than kinship to abiding forms of good behavior.

Ethical Man believes deeply in his responsibility to his family and to a transcendent version of society. He assumes that his behavior will reflect on others who might learn from it, perhaps even adopt it.

He is a traditionalist who accepts the After Life as final reconciliation of the secular world. Hence religion inspires his action; virtue constrains his impulses.

By contrast, Psychological Man deems no spirit more powerful than the spirit of mankind. There can never be a final reconciliation for him, nor is there a desire for one. Psychological Man seeks comfort in pleasure derived from the moment. Just as the After Life must be rejected, so too must morality passed down from the ancestral past. Therefore there aren’t rights and wrongs, only pleasant and unpleasant reactions.

Is it any wonder Psychological Man and Ethical Man are on different sides of the cultural barricades? They speak to each other in a foreign tongue; their gestures are not comprehensible.

As the society loses interest in its past and popular programming fills the airwaves with a vision of secular salvation through feel-good propositions, Ethical Man appears to be overwhelmed. Alas, culture is like currency, there is a Gresham’s Law in which the bad drives the good out of circulation.

But suppose the nation requires sacrifice for its survival, suppose honor and courage are values that must be instilled to secure our liberty and order, what then? My suspicion is Ethical Man—to the extent he still exists—will be encouraged and admired.

My detractors contend that religious observance is increasing elevating Ethical Man and his principles. But I am dubious. Even churches have been psychologized; the existential belief system is ubiquitous. The lords of relativism are in the ascendancy and as long as life is rich, long, safe and healthy it is unlikely the arguments of Ethical Man will be seriously entertained.

receive the latest by email: subscribe to herbert i. london's free mailing list