Brooks - The Second Mountain

David Brooks writes for the New York Times and works with the Aspen Institute’s Weave: The Social Fabric Project. The second mountain: The quest for a moral life (Brooks, 2019) reads more like a personal memoir and recounts his struggle with finding meaning after a period of awakening brought on by divorce.

The second mountain metaphor is based on the idea that in the early years of adult life, many of us climb a first mountain of achievement. In the ascent to the top of the first mountain or once it is conquered, we are either awakened to the reality that the pinnacle is unfulfilling or we are crushed by not achieving what we thought was so important. The result of this awakening or failure can be the same – we return to the valley where our motivations for the second mountain shift from being self-centered to other-centered. The essential difference is that the first mountain is about acquisition and the second is about contribution.

The first mountain, which Brooks asserts is hyper-individualistic, “has led to a society where people live further and further apart from one another – socially, emotionally, even physically” (Kindle Locator 876). This hyper-individualism has spawned several critical problems; a loneliness crisis, distrust, a crisis of meaning, tribalism, and suffering. Rather than shrink from the tragedy of the first mountain, Brooks proposes that, in this moment of suffering, we should pick ourselves up by turning to others for help. The valley after the first mountain offers a wilderness in which we are able to discover our heart and soul by connecting with and serving others.

Brooks proposes that those exploring the second mountain have made a commitment to one or all of: a vocation, a spouse and family, a philosophy of faith, and/or a community. According to Brooks, character is formed from emerging commitments – “If you want to inculcate character in someone else, teach them how to form commitments – temporary ones in childhood, provisional ones in youth, permanent ones in adulthood” (Loc 1316).

He describes the “summons to vocation” as a “very holy thing… like a call from deep to deep” (Loc 1795). In relation to life partners, Brooks suggests that “Passion peaks among the young, but marriage is the thing that peaks in old age” (Loc 2479) and involves deriving true joy from each other’s accomplishments. After a chapter calling out the shortcomings of higher education in preparing students to face the ultimate existential questions of living, he cited Victor Frankl’s argument that “human beings’ primary motive is not for money or even happiness, but for meaning” (Loc 3488). The search for meaning for Brooks was navigated through his search for faith. The faith that came to him, Christianity, included a loss of inhibition, or unshackling, and giving of himself to mercy and perfect love (he notes these as similar to C.S. Lewis’ ideas). Brooks describes community as focused on the collective, the neighborhood together that replaces distance with intimacy and connection. Utilizing the four dimensions of framing, narrative, identity, and behavior, community can be woven by the mutual commitment of its members.

Brooks provides considerable detail on the four commitments, including examples from his life and others. The shift in perspective from the individual to the relational is central to all four. And he also says that abandoning expectations of reward is key in an era where capitalism and presumed meritocracy so heavily dominate the self-interested pursuit of money, status, and power. 

In his conclusion, Brooks proposed “The Relationalist Manifesto” that among numerous other points rejects hyper-individualism, embraces the web of connections among us all, moves self to service, embraces humanity as both broken and whole, and assumes personal and social transformation happen simultaneously.

Brooks’ book raised a number of questions for me. First off, he assumes that everyone is motivated by the climb of the first mountain of acquisition, self-interest, and individualistic achievement. There is lots of evidence that Brooks is telling the story of the stereotypical western white male. Many men and certainly women and people from other cultures may never have embraced this type of individualism. Second, he attributes today’s expressive individualism to the lifestyle advocated in the 1960s when so many norms of previous eras were challenged by the youth of the day. Brooks says that the right-wing version of this advocates unregulated economic competition and the left-wing expression of it advocates unregulated social and personal lifestyle. I’m not sure that either the economic realists or social idealists of the 1960s would embrace Brooks’ descriptions.

Summatively, reading Brooks’ ideas triggered some reflection on purpose and the transformation to deeper commitments in life. However, his lack of embracing world perspectives outside his own and the platitudes that were so often posed as substance left me yearning for greater depth. Perhaps seeking greater depth is just the work each of us has to do through our own lenses, experiences, and striving.