Q&A: On the Value of Autonomy
On the Value of Autonomy
Question
I heard a lecture today by the Rabbi (about Torah and morality), and there the Rabbi spoke about the value of “autonomy,” and about the fact that its source is in “Protestantism” and it does not seem to come from the Jewish “corpus.” But in any case, the Rabbi accepts the value regardless of its source.
From the Rabbi’s words it seems that if we had grown up in a different culture, our conception would probably be different.
And I reflected on this: if so, how can one give meaning to such thinking, since I know the reason it exists? It is like if I were to convince a schizophrenic that his thoughts are delusions and he were to accept that—then it would not make sense to say that he should act in accordance with his own opinion, since there is no value to that kind of opinion.
Now, regarding a person himself, I have no problem with his acting in accordance with what he identifies with in matters that are his alone, for whatever reason he wants, since his actions are not compelled by anything. But in matters that concern God’s will, what value is there to the point of identification? In the end, the question is: what is God’s will?
And I thought of three possible ways to understand why one should follow this conception even though it is culture-dependent:
A. It may be that even though it arose in a certain culture, it can nevertheless also be proven to a person from a different cultural outlook. (If so, then that proof needs to be presented.)
B. Or we approach the matter from a faith-based perspective: values and culture develop according to God’s will, and along with them the form of Torah changes from generation to generation.
C. There is a Torah value that Torah be observed from a place of identification with its observance, and therefore in every generation the form of that identification will be according to the outlook of that generation. And if so, someone who lives in a culture that sanctifies “autonomy” will be obligated to observe from a place of independent thought.
I would be glad to receive the Rabbi’s response to this discussion.
Answer
Hello Rafi.
I no longer remember the lecture or exactly what I said, but it seems to me that there really is some Protestant dimension to the value of autonomy. In any case, I think I do accept this value, and it is well rooted in our sources too. It may be that Protestantism was needed in order for us to discover it and understand that it is correct. That is how our outlook and culture develop. Therefore, the fact that something is drawn from outside does not disqualify it. As long as you think it is correct, then from your perspective it is correct. The fact that you were influenced is a fact you cannot escape, and you also do not need to escape it. A person is the total sum, including all the influences on him, and that is how the Holy One, blessed be He, created him (even if He is not the source of those influences, as you wrote in suggestion B, He is certainly the One who created us as we are—as influenced beings). Is it even possible to think detached from the influences that have been and still are upon us? Therefore, when “you” think one way or another, what that means is: the you of birth plus all the influences.
In any case, it seems to me that all three of your suggestions are correct and plausible (except for B, where I tend to think that the Holy One, blessed be He, is no longer involved in the world in our generations).
I will just say that my remarks were written too generally, because the value of autonomy requires clarification. It can be a heading for many things. But it is completely clear that a person is supposed to make his decisions himself and act accordingly. We also have no other option. Even if we decide to subordinate ourselves completely to some person or to some book, that too is our decision.