First published in 1985, Habits of the Heart continues to be one of the most discussed interpretations of modern American society, a quest for a democratic community that draws on our diverse civic and religious traditions. In a new preface the authors relate the arguments of the book both to the current realities of American society and to the growing debate about the country's future. With this new edition one of the most influential books of recent times takes on a new immediacy.
| ||||||||||||
Book Description
Frequently Bought Together
Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com Review
Habits of the Heart is required reading for anyone who wants to understand how religion contributes to and detracts from America's common good. An instant classic upon publication in 1985, it was reissued in 1996 with a new introduction describing the book's continuing relevance for a time when the country's racial and class divisions are being continually healed and ripped open again by religious people. Habits of the Heart describes the social significance of faiths ranging from "Sheilaism" (practiced by a California nurse named Sheila) to conservative Christianity. It's thoroughly readable, theologically respectful, and academically irreproachable. --Michael Joseph Gross
--This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Review
""Habits of the Heart is, rare among works of scholarly origin, an outspoken and even emotional plea for attention to an argument, and a danger. Its power is in the passion of its analysis, the vision of us . . . narrowing the gap between the inordinate rewards of success and the not less inordinate punishments for failure, in economic terms, in the society."--"Los Angeles Times
--This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
Customer Reviews
Share your thoughts with other customers
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
13 of 14 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback|Amazon Verified Purchase
"Habits of the Heart" is not an easy read. There are five authors, none of whom seem to identify themselves. For example, in the edition I've read, there are three Prefaces, none of which ends with the name of an author.
Because of this, there may be less coherence in the flow of the book than there could be. But there is so much "meat" in the book that it is still a good read. But because there are so many quotable areas, and so many opinions expressed, I'm sure a variety of reviews could flow from the book. Here's mine:
The thesis of the book appears to be the argument that in a simpler America, we were tied by obvious economic and social interactions. We could be fiercely individualistic, e.g., as the Blacksmith of a small community, but we were linked because our livelihood was probably dependent on neighbors, and our social base, probably our church, was common to the community.
But, today, with our "utilitarian individualism" remaining, we have spread out and now are confused by our links to our neighbors and communities. We move more often. We are not as likely to be economically dependent on our immediate neighbors. We can easily be convinced that the "success" we have achieved has been via our own hard work and ambition and that we may not have much responsibility to contribute back to our immediate neighbors or communities.
The book mentions, but does not dwell on, the Biblical tradition/obligation to respect and acknowledge the dignity of all. It also talks about the "underclass," saying at one point that solving its plight is one of the greatest challenges of all and that this will take an enormous amount of money. But it also points out that in today's world, it is also easy for successful individuals to convince themselves that those in the underclass have only themselves to blame and/or to think that welfare reform efforts do more harm than good.
The authors seem to come from a personal therapy background and viewpoint that may have been gathered first-hand: "Many people feel empty and don't know \why they feel that way. They have been sold a bill of goods by our system: cash, convenience and consumerism....The reason you don't feel part of it is because nobody is a part of it."
But, at the same time, they appear to be more than willing to look at various sides of an issue, and not take a "hard," simplistic stand:
Values: There are skeptical references about how people form "values" and if they can be trusted to be anything more than based on self-interest.
Marriage and family: There is support for marriage and family responsibilities, but it is pointed out that "to imagine that society's problems can be traced to individuals with inadequate family values seems to us sadly mistaken." Next to religious commitment, kinship and family provides another basis of "social solidarity."
Being single: It is no longer disgraceful to remain unmarried. Further, no one HAS to have children. And one can leave a marriage one doesn't like even when young children are involved.
Government programs: "Neocapitalist ideology aims to convince us that all government social programs have been disastrous failures."
Religion: "Major religious can move people away from the preoccupation with self toward some larger identity." Religion is one of he most important ways that American's "get involved."
Television: "...it would be difficult to argue that there is any coherent ideology or overall message that it communicates."
Business Leadership: "Leaders are frequently power-hungry bullies without any moral restraints."
Childrearing: Children are trained to be independent self-sufficient individuals. Leaving home involves separation and renewed identity. "Leaving home" may include also leaving the parents' church.
Trend to liberalization: "Younger folks tend to be more liberal, less accepting of hypocrisy, e.g., rejecting the belief that only Christians get to heaven."
Public Service: "Most people involve themselves in social institutions to achieve self-interests or because they feel an affinity with certain others."
Today's metropolitan world: "...a wold of diverse, often hostile groups, interdependent in ways too complex for an individual to comprehend." "...we spend most of our time navigating through immense bureaucratic structures - multiversities, corporations, government agencies." And, don't forget those megachurches!
Get the drift? A ton of subject areas are covered and tons of ideas and opinions expressed.
Plus, throughout the book there are references to Tocqueville's studies of America. He found Americans to be "restless in the midst of prosperity." He also found the "new individualism" strangely compatible with conformism. Reference to Tocqueville weaves in and out in the book.
There is also a sense of limits to what can be done: "The individual's need to be successful in work becomes the enemy of the need to find meaning of one's work in service to others." And "Americans know that society is rigged, as is the marketplace."
And an occasional dose of reality: "Midlife, especially for middle-class American men often marks the end of the dream of being able to move forward without compromise, to achieve `perfection.' Unemployment can be particularly painful." (Or, how about a kid or two with "problems?")
But let's end by getting back to what appears to be the book's thesis, by stringing some quotes from the book together:
"What has failed at every level...is integration...we have failed to remember our community as members of the same body."
In an ideal world "it would become part of the ethos of work to be aware of our intricate connectness and interdependence."
"...traditions help us to know that it does make a difference who we are and how we treat one another."
And, "...in our desperate effort to free ourselves from the constrictions of the past, we have jettisoned too much, forgetting a history that we cannot abandon."
"In a healthy society, the private and public life are not mutually exclusive...they are two halves of a whole, two poles of a paradox." "Taking cared of one's own is an admirable motive. But when it combines with suspicion of and withdrawal from the public world, it is one of the conditions of despotism Tocqueville feared."
Another suggestion is that "only effective institutions - economic, political and social - make complex, modern societies livable." Another: "We are facing trends that threaten our basic sense of solidarity with others." And: "The erosion of meaning and coherence in our lives is not something Americans desire."
But a coherent, confident plan to get us "back" to some state of integration is not really convincing in the book. Instead, we get: "it is not clear that many Americans are prepared to consider a significant change in the way we have been living. The allure of the packaged good life is still strong"...even though..."our material belongs have not brought us happiness." And, there is "no question that many Americans find their contribution of work and private lifestyle satisfying."
Today's politicians of all stripes can score points by saying that "America is not headed in the right direction." The statement is broad and open to interpretation. The statement assumes that government leaders are not to be trusted to make the "right" decisions. But the statement is also shallow and meaningless without specific suggestions/recommendations.
For the most part, this is the problem with "Habits of the Heart." I don't think it is ever very convincing in telling us how to turn the ship of state back in the "right direction." Or even if it truly IS in the wrong direction.
But, as I said earlier, there is so much information and so many interesting ideas included, it is a good read. And, maybe, it becomes the basis for individuals to begin to make decisions within their own lives as to where they fit in their "commitments in American life" and the world.
End of Book Review by George Fulmore.
Because of this, there may be less coherence in the flow of the book than there could be. But there is so much "meat" in the book that it is still a good read. But because there are so many quotable areas, and so many opinions expressed, I'm sure a variety of reviews could flow from the book. Here's mine:
The thesis of the book appears to be the argument that in a simpler America, we were tied by obvious economic and social interactions. We could be fiercely individualistic, e.g., as the Blacksmith of a small community, but we were linked because our livelihood was probably dependent on neighbors, and our social base, probably our church, was common to the community.
But, today, with our "utilitarian individualism" remaining, we have spread out and now are confused by our links to our neighbors and communities. We move more often. We are not as likely to be economically dependent on our immediate neighbors. We can easily be convinced that the "success" we have achieved has been via our own hard work and ambition and that we may not have much responsibility to contribute back to our immediate neighbors or communities.
The book mentions, but does not dwell on, the Biblical tradition/obligation to respect and acknowledge the dignity of all. It also talks about the "underclass," saying at one point that solving its plight is one of the greatest challenges of all and that this will take an enormous amount of money. But it also points out that in today's world, it is also easy for successful individuals to convince themselves that those in the underclass have only themselves to blame and/or to think that welfare reform efforts do more harm than good.
The authors seem to come from a personal therapy background and viewpoint that may have been gathered first-hand: "Many people feel empty and don't know \why they feel that way. They have been sold a bill of goods by our system: cash, convenience and consumerism....The reason you don't feel part of it is because nobody is a part of it."
But, at the same time, they appear to be more than willing to look at various sides of an issue, and not take a "hard," simplistic stand:
Values: There are skeptical references about how people form "values" and if they can be trusted to be anything more than based on self-interest.
Marriage and family: There is support for marriage and family responsibilities, but it is pointed out that "to imagine that society's problems can be traced to individuals with inadequate family values seems to us sadly mistaken." Next to religious commitment, kinship and family provides another basis of "social solidarity."
Being single: It is no longer disgraceful to remain unmarried. Further, no one HAS to have children. And one can leave a marriage one doesn't like even when young children are involved.
Government programs: "Neocapitalist ideology aims to convince us that all government social programs have been disastrous failures."
Religion: "Major religious can move people away from the preoccupation with self toward some larger identity." Religion is one of he most important ways that American's "get involved."
Television: "...it would be difficult to argue that there is any coherent ideology or overall message that it communicates."
Business Leadership: "Leaders are frequently power-hungry bullies without any moral restraints."
Childrearing: Children are trained to be independent self-sufficient individuals. Leaving home involves separation and renewed identity. "Leaving home" may include also leaving the parents' church.
Trend to liberalization: "Younger folks tend to be more liberal, less accepting of hypocrisy, e.g., rejecting the belief that only Christians get to heaven."
Public Service: "Most people involve themselves in social institutions to achieve self-interests or because they feel an affinity with certain others."
Today's metropolitan world: "...a wold of diverse, often hostile groups, interdependent in ways too complex for an individual to comprehend." "...we spend most of our time navigating through immense bureaucratic structures - multiversities, corporations, government agencies." And, don't forget those megachurches!
Get the drift? A ton of subject areas are covered and tons of ideas and opinions expressed.
Plus, throughout the book there are references to Tocqueville's studies of America. He found Americans to be "restless in the midst of prosperity." He also found the "new individualism" strangely compatible with conformism. Reference to Tocqueville weaves in and out in the book.
There is also a sense of limits to what can be done: "The individual's need to be successful in work becomes the enemy of the need to find meaning of one's work in service to others." And "Americans know that society is rigged, as is the marketplace."
And an occasional dose of reality: "Midlife, especially for middle-class American men often marks the end of the dream of being able to move forward without compromise, to achieve `perfection.' Unemployment can be particularly painful." (Or, how about a kid or two with "problems?")
But let's end by getting back to what appears to be the book's thesis, by stringing some quotes from the book together:
"What has failed at every level...is integration...we have failed to remember our community as members of the same body."
In an ideal world "it would become part of the ethos of work to be aware of our intricate connectness and interdependence."
"...traditions help us to know that it does make a difference who we are and how we treat one another."
And, "...in our desperate effort to free ourselves from the constrictions of the past, we have jettisoned too much, forgetting a history that we cannot abandon."
"In a healthy society, the private and public life are not mutually exclusive...they are two halves of a whole, two poles of a paradox." "Taking cared of one's own is an admirable motive. But when it combines with suspicion of and withdrawal from the public world, it is one of the conditions of despotism Tocqueville feared."
Another suggestion is that "only effective institutions - economic, political and social - make complex, modern societies livable." Another: "We are facing trends that threaten our basic sense of solidarity with others." And: "The erosion of meaning and coherence in our lives is not something Americans desire."
But a coherent, confident plan to get us "back" to some state of integration is not really convincing in the book. Instead, we get: "it is not clear that many Americans are prepared to consider a significant change in the way we have been living. The allure of the packaged good life is still strong"...even though..."our material belongs have not brought us happiness." And, there is "no question that many Americans find their contribution of work and private lifestyle satisfying."
Today's politicians of all stripes can score points by saying that "America is not headed in the right direction." The statement is broad and open to interpretation. The statement assumes that government leaders are not to be trusted to make the "right" decisions. But the statement is also shallow and meaningless without specific suggestions/recommendations.
For the most part, this is the problem with "Habits of the Heart." I don't think it is ever very convincing in telling us how to turn the ship of state back in the "right direction." Or even if it truly IS in the wrong direction.
But, as I said earlier, there is so much information and so many interesting ideas included, it is a good read. And, maybe, it becomes the basis for individuals to begin to make decisions within their own lives as to where they fit in their "commitments in American life" and the world.
End of Book Review by George Fulmore.
11 of 12 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars
Citizenship -- Individual, Community, Religion, and the Authors' Political Slant
March 20, 2011
By Judah
Format:Paperback
This book has five different authors. One of the them was brilliant, the others far from that.
p26: "Our available moral traditions do not give us nearly as many resources for thinking about distributive justice as about procedural justice, and even fewer for thinking about substantive justice."
The first section of the book, entitled 'Private Life' is not useful. It attempts to classify American life into categories using (in vogue when this book was written) psychological jargon. On page 107, this is best said as "The only real social bonds are based on the free choices of our authentic selves." I'd recommend skipping chapters 3-5 and only reading 6, entitled 'Individualism' for context. Author(s) in charge of the private life section weave a narrative that is not likely to intersect much with the private life of the reader, and they are judgmental, hurting the objectivity of this work. Their pop psych equates humans to social herd animals. I found these chapters stupid.
The second section of the book, 'Public Life', largely redeems the book. Chapter 9, 'Religion' is the best analysis of modern American social life I've read, up there with De Tocqueville himself. Eloquent and amazing, whichever author wrote Chapter Nine is an insightful genius. Chapter 8 on citizenship is relevant yet distant, with the best part being p200-1 which examines the three conceptions of politics and how they relate to citizenship. Citizenship chapter was written by a member of the ruling class who has closely studied populism.
Then comes disappointment again, with Chapter 10 on 'The National Society'. It attempts to equate Reagan's neoclassical liberalism (which wasn't really his, but thought up his campaign donors) with FDR's welfare liberalism. These schools of thought do not share fundamental premises, with Reagan's being a 'make the rich richer and give the poor crumbs' and FDR's being 'put the poor to work and you'll make more rich men'. The author here falls into their own jargon and essentially thinks that both these 'liberalisms' are equally beneficial to the American people. This is not true, and I found the author understood politics well, but not the how the economic derivative of politics drives populism and prosperity. He states both views share how they look at public and private life; Reagan was for crushing unions and denying free speech and wrecking the environment; FDR was all about stewardship and the voice of the American people. This chapter failed.
Page 264, chapter 10, hero-worships this quote from Reagan (footnoted as Feb 6, 1982 Los Angeles Times interview): "I have never looked for a business that is going to render a service to mankind. I figure if it employs a lot of people and makes a lot of money, it is rendering a service to mankind. Greed is involved in everything we do. I find no fault in that."
Overall I recommend the buy if you are trying to integrate how religion relates to citizenship in America in a modern (late 1990's) context for your thesis. This is excellently done. Though I thought most of the book not useful, it has an extremely well-written explanation of why America on the community level is not working in chapters 8-9. Three stars just for that.
p26: "Our available moral traditions do not give us nearly as many resources for thinking about distributive justice as about procedural justice, and even fewer for thinking about substantive justice."
The first section of the book, entitled 'Private Life' is not useful. It attempts to classify American life into categories using (in vogue when this book was written) psychological jargon. On page 107, this is best said as "The only real social bonds are based on the free choices of our authentic selves." I'd recommend skipping chapters 3-5 and only reading 6, entitled 'Individualism' for context. Author(s) in charge of the private life section weave a narrative that is not likely to intersect much with the private life of the reader, and they are judgmental, hurting the objectivity of this work. Their pop psych equates humans to social herd animals. I found these chapters stupid.
The second section of the book, 'Public Life', largely redeems the book. Chapter 9, 'Religion' is the best analysis of modern American social life I've read, up there with De Tocqueville himself. Eloquent and amazing, whichever author wrote Chapter Nine is an insightful genius. Chapter 8 on citizenship is relevant yet distant, with the best part being p200-1 which examines the three conceptions of politics and how they relate to citizenship. Citizenship chapter was written by a member of the ruling class who has closely studied populism.
Then comes disappointment again, with Chapter 10 on 'The National Society'. It attempts to equate Reagan's neoclassical liberalism (which wasn't really his, but thought up his campaign donors) with FDR's welfare liberalism. These schools of thought do not share fundamental premises, with Reagan's being a 'make the rich richer and give the poor crumbs' and FDR's being 'put the poor to work and you'll make more rich men'. The author here falls into their own jargon and essentially thinks that both these 'liberalisms' are equally beneficial to the American people. This is not true, and I found the author understood politics well, but not the how the economic derivative of politics drives populism and prosperity. He states both views share how they look at public and private life; Reagan was for crushing unions and denying free speech and wrecking the environment; FDR was all about stewardship and the voice of the American people. This chapter failed.
Page 264, chapter 10, hero-worships this quote from Reagan (footnoted as Feb 6, 1982 Los Angeles Times interview): "I have never looked for a business that is going to render a service to mankind. I figure if it employs a lot of people and makes a lot of money, it is rendering a service to mankind. Greed is involved in everything we do. I find no fault in that."
Overall I recommend the buy if you are trying to integrate how religion relates to citizenship in America in a modern (late 1990's) context for your thesis. This is excellently done. Though I thought most of the book not useful, it has an extremely well-written explanation of why America on the community level is not working in chapters 8-9. Three stars just for that.
7 of 8 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback
I've published a number of modest empirical pieces purporting to explain differences among school districts with regard to things like dropping out, teen pregnancy, early teen pregnancy, crime on school property, and reckless behavior among adolescents. Without exception, a composite variable constructed to measure modernity, meaning departures from traditional ways of living, learning, and working, has been the most powerful predictor of these unwanted outcomes.
Given that much of this research was done using data from West Virginia, these findings seem paradoxical indeed. Within its borders and without, West Virginia has a reputation for being a hopelessly retrograde state. How could departures from conventions which are widely held to be outmoded and limiting have the pernicious effects I tentatively identified.
The answer is presented in compelling fashion in Habits of the Heart. Modernity, at least as I measured it, meant exaggerated individuation and increased diversity of experience from one person to another. It included factors such as population density, percent minority, percent working in service sector occupations, percent college graduates, and percent of high school students planning to matriculate out of state. High values on any or all of these variables indicated departures from traditional West Virginia patterns and practices, with increased experiential diversity diminishing the content and efficacy of cultural commonality, and diminishing a shared sense of belonging.
Ideas such as this are not new, going back at least as far as Durkheim's Division of Labor in Society. Habits of the Heart, however, brings them to life in a wide variety of ways, making a concrete and compelling argument that individualism, commonly fostered by developments we regard as modern, is far from being an unmixed blessing.
Given that much of this research was done using data from West Virginia, these findings seem paradoxical indeed. Within its borders and without, West Virginia has a reputation for being a hopelessly retrograde state. How could departures from conventions which are widely held to be outmoded and limiting have the pernicious effects I tentatively identified.
The answer is presented in compelling fashion in Habits of the Heart. Modernity, at least as I measured it, meant exaggerated individuation and increased diversity of experience from one person to another. It included factors such as population density, percent minority, percent working in service sector occupations, percent college graduates, and percent of high school students planning to matriculate out of state. High values on any or all of these variables indicated departures from traditional West Virginia patterns and practices, with increased experiential diversity diminishing the content and efficacy of cultural commonality, and diminishing a shared sense of belonging.
Ideas such as this are not new, going back at least as far as Durkheim's Division of Labor in Society. Habits of the Heart, however, brings them to life in a wide variety of ways, making a concrete and compelling argument that individualism, commonly fostered by developments we regard as modern, is far from being an unmixed blessing.
Most Recent Customer Reviews
4.0 out of 5 stars
our bad habits persist
This is the finger finger.
As a rule, it is common for people in Saint Paul, Minnesota, to know how to make a filthy bird sign with their hand. Read more
As a rule, it is common for people in Saint Paul, Minnesota, to know how to make a filthy bird sign with their hand. Read more
Published 16 months ago by Bruce P. Barten
4.0 out of 5 stars
HABITS OF THE HEART
We daily wonder where are we going as individuals, as family, as a society and as an american citilization. Read more
Published on April 27, 2009 by L. J. Silva
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
Listmania!
|
|
