Scan barcode
rarudd1's review against another edition
4.0
Interesting ideas about how the current post modernism culture has come about. I enjoyed the book, but it's not a page turner. It took a little grit to get through. Recommended for 15 and up because of the difficulty of the concepts.
esther_wood's review against another edition
5.0
Highly recommend!!!
This book has been so helpful to me in connecting the dots of how we have ended up in our current society in the West.
The short conclusion is fantastic in how it opens the door to conversation and action within the church for how to navigate our present and our future.
I intend to reading more by Carl R. Trueman.
This book has been so helpful to me in connecting the dots of how we have ended up in our current society in the West.
The short conclusion is fantastic in how it opens the door to conversation and action within the church for how to navigate our present and our future.
I intend to reading more by Carl R. Trueman.
jryanlonas's review against another edition
3.0
This is a greatly hyped book at present, and others more qualified than me have done plenty of engagement already, so, though this is longer than my typical 1-liner goodreads summaries, it is by no means a full or academic review.
Where this book is good, it is very good. As an intellectual history of the rise of expressive individualism (Charles Taylor's phrase) from Rousseau to Obergefell, it traces of streams of thought through Romanticism, Marx, Darwin, Nietzsche, Freud, and the Frankfurt School. As a parallel history of the rise of "deathworks" and "anticulture" (Philip Rieff's terms), it does a good job of connecting the dots through those same streams to show how the destruction of social and sexual norms (rather than building toward a common good) came to be seen as the key to a liberated, flourishing society by many on the political left. In this, he provides a deep and wide context for the sexual revolution of the second half of the 20th century, helping us see quite clearly that it did not spring up de novo in the 1960s—as casual narratives about "the good old days" are wont to assume—but is a long, slow confluence of many cultural influences.
These threads of inquiry are familiar to me, thanks to a worldview-heavy curriculum in my undergraduate education, but might be new to many. On this score, Trueman offers a good synopsis, engaging well with his chosen interlocutors (though those better versed in Marx, Freud, et al. might take issue with his survey-level discussion and the conclusions he draws). He is also (as I've said in comments on other of his works) a very fine writer, with expert command of the language. He also has a teacher's spirit, desiring to make what is dense and obscure interesting and graspable for readers.
Where the book is bad, though it feels not so much incorrect as incomplete. Trueman is very forward with his own caveat that he sees this project as prolegomena to a larger discussion on the modern self and its implications for the life and ministry of the church. He could have easily made this 400 page book into an 800-1000 page treatise and still have left much more to say. Further, he is a historian, and so some of my critiques have more to do with his failure to bring in insights from other disciplines than any failing in his given task as a historian. I offer these grains of salt with which to take my disagreements below.
At times, it feels as though the intellectual history Trueman presents—rather one-sided in tracing the development of expressive individualism and sexual identity—is meant to be taken as a more sweeping review of post-Enlightenment moral philosophy. But the history of the last 300 years is not a steady stream, but a turbulent river of points and counterpoints that push the channel both left and right at varying points. For every Rousseau there is a Kant or Burke. For every Shelley or Wordsworth there may be a Dickens, Thackeray, or Trollope. For Marxes, Darwins, and Nietszches, there are also Kuypers, Bavincks, and Chestertons. For a Riech or Marcuse, there is a Lewis or Buckley. Yes, there is ample evidence that the leftward bow of the riverbed is ascendant, but it has not been a uniform journey, nor is it guaranteed to continue apace. The absence of such historical countermovements in Trueman's narrative may strengthen the force of his argument, but leaving them out neglects to provide nuance that could help readers see what tools might be available to stem the tide he is so concerned about.
Further, He seems to treat this intellectual history as a sufficient explanation of the sexual revolution and the understanding of selfhood that makes it necessary. This follows a fairly standard academic conceit of privileging the life of the mind over other contributing factors (a habit of which I am also frequently guilty). That contemporaneous developments such as the industrial revolution, scientific revolution, world wars, economic upheavals, and globalization barely register in his narrative is frustrating. Most people do not think first and then act, but rather the reverse. However frustrating or unwise this habit may be, it is the lay of the land. To assume that the rank and file of humanity have been moved to action by the musings of philosophers and academics does not speak to a deep understanding of human behavior—even granting his point that the influence of such thinkers on the creators of pop culture artifacts is a major means of their influence.
Trueman's focus (following Rieff) on the triumph of the therapeutic as a negative social development leads him to ignore many of the glaring social realities that led to the need for more therapeutic constructs in the first place. To be sure, assuming that no one should be required to feel unhappy or unfulfilled at any point is no realistic basis for cultivating healthy social contracts in a fallen world. To deny that human happiness is a good (among many) that ought to be taken into consideration is equally a fool's errand. Trueman at times seems too quick to dismiss real human suffering under this rubric, assuming that gracious accommodation of people's brokenness is a dangerous slippery slope. Engagement with findings of trauma-informed psychology and neurobiology might have tempered some of his stridency here.
I'll concede that I've majored on criticisms out of a degree of fear. I do hope that the book finds a wide readership, as its strengths are real and disagreements with its premises that rise to its same level of erudition and eloquence would go far to raise discourse about complex and difficult topics out of our present mire of sound bites and hot takes. As Trueman's desired prolegomenon for deeper discussion on the issues he addresses and a healthy response to them, it is a fine effort. I fear, though, that many in the church will use the book instead as an open-and-shut case to prove that anyone who seeks to extend hospitality and grace to those with whom they disagree, advocate for political reform in favor of marginalized groups, seek justice for the oppressed, or ameliorate suffering in the world is guilty of privileging the therapeutic or oversimplifying the world's complexity through the lens of some critical theory or other—no matter how much they lean on Scripture and a robust biblical anthropology to make their case. Indeed, Trueman himself falls into this trap in an article on evangelicals and critical race theory in First Things.
In the spirit in which the book is offered, I too would welcome engagement on my critique.
Where this book is good, it is very good. As an intellectual history of the rise of expressive individualism (Charles Taylor's phrase) from Rousseau to Obergefell, it traces of streams of thought through Romanticism, Marx, Darwin, Nietzsche, Freud, and the Frankfurt School. As a parallel history of the rise of "deathworks" and "anticulture" (Philip Rieff's terms), it does a good job of connecting the dots through those same streams to show how the destruction of social and sexual norms (rather than building toward a common good) came to be seen as the key to a liberated, flourishing society by many on the political left. In this, he provides a deep and wide context for the sexual revolution of the second half of the 20th century, helping us see quite clearly that it did not spring up de novo in the 1960s—as casual narratives about "the good old days" are wont to assume—but is a long, slow confluence of many cultural influences.
These threads of inquiry are familiar to me, thanks to a worldview-heavy curriculum in my undergraduate education, but might be new to many. On this score, Trueman offers a good synopsis, engaging well with his chosen interlocutors (though those better versed in Marx, Freud, et al. might take issue with his survey-level discussion and the conclusions he draws). He is also (as I've said in comments on other of his works) a very fine writer, with expert command of the language. He also has a teacher's spirit, desiring to make what is dense and obscure interesting and graspable for readers.
Where the book is bad, though it feels not so much incorrect as incomplete. Trueman is very forward with his own caveat that he sees this project as prolegomena to a larger discussion on the modern self and its implications for the life and ministry of the church. He could have easily made this 400 page book into an 800-1000 page treatise and still have left much more to say. Further, he is a historian, and so some of my critiques have more to do with his failure to bring in insights from other disciplines than any failing in his given task as a historian. I offer these grains of salt with which to take my disagreements below.
At times, it feels as though the intellectual history Trueman presents—rather one-sided in tracing the development of expressive individualism and sexual identity—is meant to be taken as a more sweeping review of post-Enlightenment moral philosophy. But the history of the last 300 years is not a steady stream, but a turbulent river of points and counterpoints that push the channel both left and right at varying points. For every Rousseau there is a Kant or Burke. For every Shelley or Wordsworth there may be a Dickens, Thackeray, or Trollope. For Marxes, Darwins, and Nietszches, there are also Kuypers, Bavincks, and Chestertons. For a Riech or Marcuse, there is a Lewis or Buckley. Yes, there is ample evidence that the leftward bow of the riverbed is ascendant, but it has not been a uniform journey, nor is it guaranteed to continue apace. The absence of such historical countermovements in Trueman's narrative may strengthen the force of his argument, but leaving them out neglects to provide nuance that could help readers see what tools might be available to stem the tide he is so concerned about.
Further, He seems to treat this intellectual history as a sufficient explanation of the sexual revolution and the understanding of selfhood that makes it necessary. This follows a fairly standard academic conceit of privileging the life of the mind over other contributing factors (a habit of which I am also frequently guilty). That contemporaneous developments such as the industrial revolution, scientific revolution, world wars, economic upheavals, and globalization barely register in his narrative is frustrating. Most people do not think first and then act, but rather the reverse. However frustrating or unwise this habit may be, it is the lay of the land. To assume that the rank and file of humanity have been moved to action by the musings of philosophers and academics does not speak to a deep understanding of human behavior—even granting his point that the influence of such thinkers on the creators of pop culture artifacts is a major means of their influence.
Trueman's focus (following Rieff) on the triumph of the therapeutic as a negative social development leads him to ignore many of the glaring social realities that led to the need for more therapeutic constructs in the first place. To be sure, assuming that no one should be required to feel unhappy or unfulfilled at any point is no realistic basis for cultivating healthy social contracts in a fallen world. To deny that human happiness is a good (among many) that ought to be taken into consideration is equally a fool's errand. Trueman at times seems too quick to dismiss real human suffering under this rubric, assuming that gracious accommodation of people's brokenness is a dangerous slippery slope. Engagement with findings of trauma-informed psychology and neurobiology might have tempered some of his stridency here.
I'll concede that I've majored on criticisms out of a degree of fear. I do hope that the book finds a wide readership, as its strengths are real and disagreements with its premises that rise to its same level of erudition and eloquence would go far to raise discourse about complex and difficult topics out of our present mire of sound bites and hot takes. As Trueman's desired prolegomenon for deeper discussion on the issues he addresses and a healthy response to them, it is a fine effort. I fear, though, that many in the church will use the book instead as an open-and-shut case to prove that anyone who seeks to extend hospitality and grace to those with whom they disagree, advocate for political reform in favor of marginalized groups, seek justice for the oppressed, or ameliorate suffering in the world is guilty of privileging the therapeutic or oversimplifying the world's complexity through the lens of some critical theory or other—no matter how much they lean on Scripture and a robust biblical anthropology to make their case. Indeed, Trueman himself falls into this trap in an article on evangelicals and critical race theory in First Things.
In the spirit in which the book is offered, I too would welcome engagement on my critique.
dlwaugh's review against another edition
5.0
While this is one of the more challenging reads of the year, it is highly profitable. Trueman does an excellent job of tracing the historical/philosophical developments over the past two and half centuries that bring us to the cultural moment. The sexual revolution, often pointed to by conservative evangelicals as a watershed moment in culture, is more symptom than cause. The philosophical underpinnings of our current understanding of self go much further back. Hence, the path forward isn't as simple as restoring sexual ethics, it means restoring a proper understanding of selfhood. Again, it is a difficult read, but worth the investment (I believe there is a shorter, more popular version of this same work slated for release late 2021).
benjaminygoff's review against another edition
3.0
The first part of this book (Reiff, Taylor, MacIntyre) seems to be the most important part of the book. The other parts, while important, sometimes feel overly pedantic. Perhaps Trueman should find a Goldilocks solution and write in between Strange New World and this.
vicachua's review against another edition
5.0
What a book. What insights into reality. Thank You Lord for this masterful brushstroke of the various undercurrents of the past few centuries that have led to the expressive individualism of today’s modern society where meaning and identity is found inwards rather than outwards.
Tracing the influences of many thinkers like Rousseau, the Romantics, Marx, Freud, and Marcuse, Trueman lays the groundwork for a deeper and more holistic understanding of today’s “strawberry/snowflake generation” and LGBTQ+ movement.
Inspired to further read into history and improve my reading diet in terms of the ratio of old books to new, since the ethics of authenticity and emotivism has become the water in which we’ve swim.
Tracing the influences of many thinkers like Rousseau, the Romantics, Marx, Freud, and Marcuse, Trueman lays the groundwork for a deeper and more holistic understanding of today’s “strawberry/snowflake generation” and LGBTQ+ movement.
Inspired to further read into history and improve my reading diet in terms of the ratio of old books to new, since the ethics of authenticity and emotivism has become the water in which we’ve swim.
scientist_hannah's review against another edition
5.0
Fascinating. Looking to read more on the topic
emilyversteeg's review against another edition
3.0
Mainly it was just really long and too smart for me. But if I was smart enough, I’d probably give it 4-5 stars.
bakoind's review against another edition
5.0
History of the centering of the self
Dire, yet clear-eyed look at how the Western world has become so focused on the self as authority. Trueman masterfully lays out the steps between Rousseau, Darwin, Freud, and Marx forming today’s moral framework.
While it paints a fairly bleak picture for Christians, he does point the church to some areas to think about.
Dire, yet clear-eyed look at how the Western world has become so focused on the self as authority. Trueman masterfully lays out the steps between Rousseau, Darwin, Freud, and Marx forming today’s moral framework.
While it paints a fairly bleak picture for Christians, he does point the church to some areas to think about.
sgkramar's review against another edition
4.0
Weighty, thought-provoking tome. I learned a tremendous amount about the progression of thought of how we define human identity. The change from the physical or social self to the psychological self is well documented and persuasive.
The book is academic, uses philosophy jargon, and drones on a bit. I think I saw that a more accessible, probably abridged version of this work is now available, and unless you are really inspired by this topic I would recommend the shorter version of the book.
The book is academic, uses philosophy jargon, and drones on a bit. I think I saw that a more accessible, probably abridged version of this work is now available, and unless you are really inspired by this topic I would recommend the shorter version of the book.