Weekly Top Five Articles
Abandonment, Ayn Rand, body posture, and why rewards are better than habits
Here’s what stood out this week…
(1) “The Age of Abandonment: We simply don’t believe anyone will stay,” by Freya India, October 8, 2024.
This one of most compelling things you’ll read this week. Wow!
We need to dispel the myth that kids are fine after a divorce simply because they go to college and secure a good job.
India explores the deep-rooted fear of abandonment that plagues Gen Z. She argues that growing up in broken homes and a disconnected society has left young people with no stable foundation to rely on, contributing to a pervasive fear of love, commitment, and trust. While previous generations at least had communities to fall back on, Gen Z is left to navigate life in isolation, often with only online spaces as a poor substitute for real human connection.
Freya contends that the normalization of divorce and family breakdown has trivialized the pain young people feel from abandonment. Society's focus on self-love and independence as antidotes to this pain only exacerbates the problem, as it dismisses the natural human need for belonging and dependency. This fear of abandonment manifests in distrust, hypersensitivity, and a reluctance to invest in relationships—whether romantic or familial.
She also points out that this fear drives cultural trends, like the rejection of marriage and traditional family structures, and an attraction to therapy culture that tries to teach young people to self-soothe instead of acknowledging their deep need for stable love. The author believes that addressing this fear requires a fundamental shift: rather than retreating from relationships, we need to embrace commitment and teach the value of loyalty and trust.
Ultimately, Freya calls on her generation to confront this fear head-on, acknowledging the pain but also finding the courage to build meaningful relationships and communities that offer the safety and belonging they so desperately need.
(2) "Atlas Schlepped," Gary Saul Morton, Jewish Review of Books (Fall 2024)
Morson critically examines Ayn Rand's work and legacy, tracing her intellectual roots to the Russian radical tradition rather than American thought. Morson points out that, although Rand is often celebrated as a champion of capitalism and individualism, her ideas share deep similarities with the rigid, dogmatic thinking of prerevolutionary Russian radicals and Soviet socialist realists, who also saw the world in stark, absolute terms.
Morson highlights Rand’s “capitalist realism,” which mirrors Soviet-style socialist realism in its use of didactic fiction to promote unwavering ideologies. He draws parallels between Rand and Russian figures like Nikolay Chernyshevsky, whose simplistic utopian vision influenced both Russian radicals and Rand’s own uncompromising vision of individualism. Both traditions embraced certainty and rejected ambiguity, compromise, and moral complexity.
Rand's philosophical certainty, Morson argues, was not grounded in genuine reason or market economics but in tautological logic that failed to account for the nuances of reality. Despite Rand’s obsession with “reason” and “objectivity,” her ideas were simplistic and lacked the intellectual rigor found in true philosophy or science. Rand’s rejection of altruism and her glorification of selfishness left no room for familial or communal obligations, leading her to create heroes and heroines who seemed detached from basic human experiences, such as childhood dependency.
Morson also critiques Rand’s writing style, describing her prose as heavy-handed and devoid of the artistic subtlety seen in Russian literary greats like Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, and Chekhov. Ultimately, Morson assigns Rand to the Russian intellectual tradition, which includes its share of repellent thinkers, and dismisses her work as puerile and damaging to serious discourse on individualism and freedom.
While some attempt to connect Rand’s work to her Jewish background, Morson finds little merit in this argument and concludes that her influence is best understood in the context of Russian thought, not Jewish intellectualism. He concludes with a biting remark, quoting Dorothy Parker’s view of Atlas Shrugged: "It is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force."
(3) “Natural body posture correlates with dominance and antisocial behavior, study shows,” by Eric W. Dolan, PsyPost, October 9, 2024
This is one of those studies where the correlations likely do not control for enough variables.
In a recent study published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, researchers found a striking link between natural body posture and personality traits. The study, led by Soren Wainio-Theberge and Jorge L. Armony from McGill University, demonstrates that habitual, everyday posture—how people stand when they aren't consciously adjusting their stance—can indicate personality traits, particularly those related to dominance, competitiveness, and even antisocial behavior. The findings reveal that individuals who naturally stand upright with an open body stance, characterized by a straight neck and forward posture, are more likely to exhibit traits associated with social dominance, primary psychopathy, and lower empathy.
In contrast to prior studies focused on posture as a temporary reflection of mood or social situation, this research emphasizes the stability of natural posture over time. The five-study series used a combination of machine learning and electromyography to measure body angles and muscle activity, discovering a consistent correlation between dominant posture and personality traits across weeks, further establishing posture as a stable indicator of deeper social tendencies.
This is crucial for understanding behavior, particularly in boys and young men, where early signals of social dominance or antisocial tendencies may be evident through body language. If dominant postures are linked to traits like low empathy and manipulative behavior, paying attention to these signs in childhood could help guide interventions for fostering more positive social behaviors. Raising boys with an emphasis on humility, empathy, and teamwork might counterbalance the societal pressures to assert dominance, helping develop men who lead through service because they care about the well-being on someone else.
However, the researchers noted that “it is important to emphasize that our study is observational; that is, we observed a correlation between body posture and personality and therefore cannot make inferences about causality. In other words, people should NOT take away that standing upright will change your personality (for better or for worse).”
“One take-home message from our study is that body posture is not only important for physical health, but it also reflects (as mentioned, whether it plays a causal role or not remains to be determined) relevant aspects of our personality, particularly those related to social interactions. Thus, together with findings from studies on the psychological effects of transient body poses, it highlights the importance, and benefits, of paying attention to our bodies in our daily life.”
Given the role of physicality in boyhood and adolescence, from sports to social hierarchies in schools, these findings highlight the importance of guiding not only what boys do but also how they physically carry themselves. Teaching boys to be aware of body language can be a step toward emotional intelligence and healthy masculinity, fostering balanced, socially constructive personalities.
Personally, I’m quite ok with men being dominant when that dominance is used to push back evil and make other people’s lives better.
(4) “Conservatives close the boycott gap: New study highlights shift toward “cancel culture” by Eric W. Dolan, PsyPost (October 10, 2024)
A recent study published in American Politics Research sheds light on a growing trend in political consumerism—specifically, how conservatives have embraced boycott behavior, closing the gap with liberals. In 2016, strong liberals were far more likely than strong conservatives to engage in boycotts to protest companies based on political or social values. By 2020, however, conservatives had significantly increased their participation in boycotts, bringing them nearly on par with their liberal counterparts. This shift suggests that both sides of the political spectrum are now actively using economic choices as a form of political expression.
The study, conducted using data from the American National Election Study (ANES), found that conservatives’ increase in boycott behavior coincided with broader social movements, particularly corporate responses to Black Lives Matter and anti-racism initiatives. Many conservatives opposed these corporate stances and engaged in boycotts as a form of political pushback. Meanwhile, attitudes toward marginalized groups, such as racial minorities and perceptions of discrimination, were strongly linked to increased boycott activity across both political spectrums.
This evolution in boycott participation reflects a broader trend toward cancel culture, where individuals and organizations face economic consequences for their social or political positions. Political consumerism has become a powerful tool for people to express their beliefs outside traditional avenues like voting or protest, giving rise to what some might call “cancel culture” from both ends of the political spectrum.
Understanding this shift is essential for those raising boys in today’s polarized environment. It’s important to teach them how to critically engage with issues without defaulting to economic warfare as the primary method of expressing dissent. While teaching political engagement is crucial, fostering constructive dialogue and critical thinking about differing views can help boys grow into thoughtful, open-minded adults who can engage meaningfully without resorting to the extremes of cancel culture. This is vital for fostering healthier civic participation in future generations.
(5) “Why Our Brains Prefer Rewards Over Habits,” Neuroscience News, October 11, 2024
I wonder what implications this has for parenting. What should parents do differently than their parents with information like this?
New research from the University of Copenhagen suggests that our brains are wired to prioritize rewards over habits, challenging the common belief that technology merely "steals" our attention. The study, published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology, found that when participants were presented with multiple tasks, they consistently chose the option offering the highest reward, even if it conflicted with trained habits. This discovery reveals how reward-driven attention influences our behavior, helping explain the addictive nature of digital technology, which effectively taps into our innate preference for immediate rewards.
In the study, participants were asked to quickly choose between several boxes on a computer screen, each associated with different points. Despite training to respond habitually, participants consistently selected the box offering the highest reward. This highlights how deeply reward-seeking behaviors are embedded in our decision-making processes, often overriding habits.
Interestingly, the research reframes how we should view the "attention economy." Rather than blaming technology for hijacking our focus, it’s our brains’ reward-seeking nature that drives these attention shifts. Tech companies simply leverage this aspect of human behavior by presenting stimuli that we perceive as valuable or rewarding.
This finding has broader implications, particularly for understanding how we can develop better long-term planning strategies and how our values compete with ingrained habits. As the researchers noted, long-term goals may lose out to more immediately rewarding actions, but understanding this dynamic can help in developing healthier attention habits and resisting the constant pull of digital distractions.
For parents, especially those raising children, this research highlights the importance of teaching kids how to delay gratification and focus on long-term values. In an age of instant gratification, fostering discipline and an understanding of deeper rewards will be crucial for developing well-rounded, resilient individuals.
The study highlights how our natural inclinations toward reward can undermine long-term values or habits. Therefore, an essential part of character formation is teaching young people to recognize and resist this tendency. Parents and pastors can emphasize the spiritual value of delayed gratification, helping children see that deep spiritual growth and character formation often come from sustained effort and discipline, even when the reward isn’t immediate. Connecting spiritual practices to lasting rewards—such as inner peace, joy, or fulfillment—can help make long-term goals more appealing.
Given that the research shows how our surroundings impact our choices, pastors and parents should create environments that naturally encourage spiritual focus and character development. This could mean designing church or home environments that prioritize calmness, reflection, and spiritual practices. For example, providing visual or experiential reminders of spiritual values (such as scripture, symbols, or family rituals) can act as cues that activate spiritual attention, much like the supermarket sign triggers the plan to buy flour in the study.
The findings suggest that our brains are always seeking the action with the highest perceived value. In a spiritual community, this value can be reinforced by the actions and affirmations of others. Encouraging young people to engage in group activities where spiritual and character growth is celebrated (e.g., service projects, communal worship) can provide a strong sense of immediate reward through social belonging, peer affirmation, and communal success.
Love #5! This is, in part, what has me asking youth pastors to put bans on phone use during youth group & Sunday school. The habits we build matter in the long term and it's okay to tell teenagers no to immediate gratification in favor of something better. https://dearchristianparent.substack.com/p/dear-youth-leader