Michael Oakeshott’s idea of conservatism as a disposition gives a unique angle on political and social philosophy. In evaluating the conventional view of conservatism as an inflexible ideology, Oakeshott’s approach emphasizes a careful approach to alternate and values balance, continuity and the information of past experiences. This tendency, characterized by a desire for the recognized over the unknown and the tried over the untested, offers insights into addressing complex societal challenges. This essay will compare Oakeshott’s philosophy of conservatism as a disposition and look at its strengths, weaknesses, and applicability to current issues, primarily through a biblical and Christian worldview.
Identification and outline of conservatism as a disposition.
Michael Oakeshott, the famous British truth seeker, conceptualized conservatism now not as a political ideology but as a disposition. This attitude differs from the traditional knowledge of conservatism and offers a unique perspective for viewing political and social phenomena. Oakeshott’s conservatism as a disposition is characterized by a preference for the acknowledged over the unknown and a gift of laughter over utopian happiness. He values the prevailing and procedures innovation with warning, advocating that modifications stay within the limits of expertise and probability. This disposition is heightened when the stakes are excessive and there is a good-sized chance of loss. Essentially, Oakeshott’s conservatism as a mindset implies a cautious approach to exchange, favouring the preservation of current structures and traditions over innovation or radical transformation (Abel, 2017). It is a mindset that values balance, continuity and the know-how of past stories. This understanding of conservatism transcends political affiliations and ideologies. Instead, it is a way of wondering or an attitude toward existence and society. It is approximately keeping stability and keeping off needless dangers.
Pros and Cons of Oakeshott’s Argument
Oakeshott’s conservatism comprises some good points. It tries to maintain stability and continuity, thereby preventing radical changes that can interrupt societal harmony. It also has a high historical sense, making it prioritize practical experience and knowledge in decision-making for informed choices. Also, its flexibility gives it the ability to conform to different societal contexts, hence becoming a versatile mindset. Nevertheless, critics have pointed out the opposing sides of Oakeshott’s conservatism. Its attachment to the familiar may discourage experimentation and novelty that would be beneficial for society at large. Critics also argue that by ignoring power relations, Oakeshott’s conservatism provides an incomplete picture of political and social dynamics, leaving out important issues on governance (Abel, 2017). In addition, this insistence on stability and continuity may lead to smugness, thus preventing necessary social changes.
Application of Oakeshott’s Conservatism to Climate Change
If applied in relation to climate change, these ideas may support a gradual and measured approach based on what science already knows and has proven successful. This falls in line with the ideology’s stress on stability and continuity, which is to avoid any extreme changes that could upset the balance of society (Hamilton, 2015). However, regarding climate change, this cautious method may be seen as a disadvantage as it may call for more immediate and innovative approaches given the exigency associated with the issue. Oakeshott’s conservatism may resist such radical changes because it prefers the known and the tested; Oakeshottian conservatism might resist radical innovations, making it difficult to launch new ways of addressing global warming. Although such a view can offer much in terms of formulating sustainable policies in the long run, it must be weighed against an imperative requirement for swift measures and steps towards fighting climate change. Striking this balance is vital to meeting effectively climate-related challenges while remaining true to Oakeshott’s conservatism.
Examination through a Biblical and Christian Worldview
Considered from a Christian and biblical standpoint, Oakeshott’s conservatism aligns with the intrinsic worth of tradition and historical continuity in Christian thinking. Oakeshott’s focus on what is familiar, tried, and in being actual is also consistent with the Christian perspective that venerates wisdom embedded in traditions as well as past experiences. Koyzis explores this parallelism in “Political Visions and Illusions”, where conservatism is portrayed as deriving norms from history, echoing Oakeshott’s thrust on the wisdom of past experiences (Hamilton, 2015). In such a case, one can see how Christianity cherishes continuity within generations’ transmission of traditions and teachings; likewise, Oakeshott values continuity within societies’ frameworks. However, the Christian belief regarding redemption through faith that can change human beings creates tensions. Here, conservatism diverges because it seeks to preserve stability instead of promoting revolution. These two perspectives share some similarities in their approaches to tradition and historical continuity but differ significantly in the dynamic quality of transformation or redemption found in the Christian worldview as opposed to a more static approach by Oakeshott.
In conclusion, Michael Oakeshott’s conservative philosophy provides a nuanced framework for understanding social dynamics and responding to political challenges. While it emphasizes the importance of stability, continuity and the wisdom of experience, it has also been criticized for its potential to stifle innovation and necessary social change. When viewed through the lens of the Bible and the Christian worldview, Oakeshott’s conservatism found resonance in the value of tradition and historical continuity. However, it conflicted with the Christian emphasis on transformation and redemption. Applying Oakeshott’s conservatism requires a delicate balance between preserving tradition and harnessing the potential for positive change, emphasizing the complexity of addressing social challenges within philosophical and religious contexts.
References
Abel, C. (2017). The meanings of Michael Oakeshott’s conservatism (Vol. 3). Andrews UK Limited.
Hamilton, A. (2015). Conservatism. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483345727.n152
write