The Family

There are a variety of options or theories about the basic component of a society. What is the fundamental building block that makes a society? I see three primary choices. The first, most obvious, is the individual. Society, in this scenario, is constructed of individuals for individuals. The second, as has been suggested in recent times, is "the village." The basic component of society is your community.

These two both have merit. It would seem obvious, for instance, that in any case society is comprised of individuals. Therefore, the most basic part of a social structure is the individual. The overall purpose, in this view, of any given society is the fulfillment of the individual. I would think when I state it that way you would immediately see the problem. You see, societies do not primarily aim at individual fulfillment. Instead, they aim at what is best for the group. Perhaps the most obvious isn't the best choice. So, if societies primarily aim for what's best for the group, perhaps it is most logical to think of the group as the primary component. But if that's the case, what is real factor for the individual? The standard question would be, "What's in it for me?" And while I think the question is flawed, it still points to the problem.

Both views have merits, but both, I believe, are wrong, and holding to them leads you down faulty paths. If the primary component of society is the individual, then it would seem that the best method of government would be anarchy -- everyone out for themselves. Classical good like "share and share alike" or "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" become mere pragmatic views that work if you like or don't if you don't. The only ultimate good is ... me. That's a problem. However, the group as the core leads to a diminishing of the individual. Communism as a government and socialism as an economic system would be the order of the day. There would be no room at all for taking care of yourself, it would seem. Instead, everything would be a function of sacrifice for the whole. History suggests that no society can actually function long under that view.

I'd like, then, to suggest a third possibility. I believe that this third option avoids the traps of the other two while retaining the strengths. In my view, the primary building block of any given society is, ideally, the family. This family is constructed of a marriage with children. It is built of both a father and mother with an eye to produce offspring and raise them to perpetuate the process.

In this process, the individual remains absolutely important. No one functions for the father as well as the father. No one fills the role of the mother as well as the mother. Other possibilities may work, but it is this combination that is ideal, and it is these individuals that function the best. In this structure, the children become the primary focus (as opposed to "self"), but the children must be taught not to make themselves the primary focus. Parents must demonstrate love for the sake of the children, which is beneficial to the parents. Children are taught respect for their parents which carries out to respect for authority which makes for a much better life. In fact, while the invidual is of absolute importance in this structure, the individual is also taught not to make itself of absolute importance.

A society built around the concept of family rather than "individual" or "group" is the most stable society. It perpetuates itself. It provides for more than itself. It carries with it values and rules that make society orderly and prosperous. It retains and values the importance of the individual without making the individual the center of the question, and, in linking small groups of families with other families, the roles, functions, and values are strengthened. It seems to be the perfect mode.

You can imagine, then, what happens when a society shifts focus from "family" to either "individual" or "group." You can imagine what happens when a society chips away at that basic societal unit of "family." You can imagine what happens when essential elements of "family" such as marriage, fidelity, integrity, and producing offspring are diminished or redefined in a society. But, in my opinion, you don't need to imagine what happens. You can look around.