A couple of weeks ago I finished reading this book. I am still ruminating. Keyes’ work is a creative, thoughtful and, at times, penetrating examination of an all too often unchecked, unhappy virtue of our post-modern, post-Truth age. Through a sustained, cogently argued thesis, Keyes addresses our modern cynicism philosophically, culturally, biblically, and most of all experientially.
More than once, I was brought to repentance and awe before our transcendent and terrestrial Christ as I was presented with the biblical alternative to cynicism–“redemptive suspicion, limited by humility and tempered by love and mercy.” Not all books affect all people the same way. For some Seeing Through Cyncism may not have this power. Yet, at the very least, Dick Keyes of L’Abri fame will pique your interest and equip you to redemptively engage cynicism in Seeing Through Cyncism:A Reconsideration of the Power of Suspicion.
Although the book simmers in the early chapters and quickly cools in the later ones, the center cut (parts II & III) is cooked to perfection. In the opening chapters Keyes briefly surveys philosophical cynicism, ala Diogenes the Cynic who walked the streets of Rome with a lantern by daylight. When asked what he was doing, Diogenes would respond “I am looking for a honest man.” Diogenes believed that philosophers, kings, businessmen, everyone should act as the animal that they are–don’t play dress-up, be your base self, dispense with the posing, eat, drink, have sex and be animal.
If this is the “used” cyncism, the new version is much different. It is less philosophically robust and more existentially pervasive. Keyes describes cyncism as “a voice of doubt in your ear, a predispositon for seeing through people and things, a negative idea about human nature, a mood or attitude of suspicion, or friends with a particular sense of humor.” It’s aim is to see through the facade and expose the ulterior. On various accounts, it is a commendable aim. We are cynical about everything–government, people, sex, truth, religion, beauty. Every picture is airbrushed, every motive subversive, every truth biased. “Everyone has their price.”
Perhaps you recall the Richard Dawkins vs. Stephen Colbert video I posted a couple of weeks ago, which addressed some of the implications of social darwinism, specifically regarding the existence of God? Social Darwinism or Evolutionary Psychology asserts that the reason for various social behaviors, e.g. monogamy, promiscuity, fear of snakes, belief in God, is simply biological. Certain genes that make us feel good or bad, right or wrong about a given subject have produced these social beliefs and behaviors because these genes are the best at replicating and surviving over the centuries, making morality and human dignity fiction.
Social Darwinism goes a step beyond cynicism, seeing through people and institutions, rendering everything meaningless, weightless, moral-less. Keyes writes: “When the evolutionary psychologist has seen through me, the conscious I with all its layers of motivations is irrelevant” (29). As a result, there is no hard and fast basis for moral action. If sexual promiscuity is part of survival of the fittest, why not be fit? If paying taxes and being honest about your work is just biological self-interest, why not fudge occasionally for economic gain? After all, the higest authority is you, your genes, so why not?
What then is the state of friendship, sincerity, and earnestness if the cynic or social darwinism has all the answers? What will become of our culture if cynical worldviews continue in influence? Have you been affected by this post-modern virtue? What are your thoughts on the role of cyncism? And what, if anything, is wrong with it?