I frequently get involved in conversations that feel more like contention than conversation. I ask questions, people take it personally, get emotional, and then attack me. I have questioned the argument; they question my virtue, my values, and my very being. I look for truth; they look to find fault.
Back while serving as a missionary, I learned to recognize this. We were meeting with a man and discussing the Book of Mormon with him, and he came prepared to our meeting that night with a long laundry list of questions. After I answered a few, I suddenly stopped and asked him if he had read the Book of Mormon intending to prove that it was not true. When he admitted that was his intent, I packed up my stuff and left the room, and I never went back. My companion was upset that we had 'lost an investigator', but this man wasn't really investigating. As I have been saying for some time now, most people are not interested in the truth as much as they secretly hope the truth will happen to corroborate what they already happen to believe. When you challenge their preconceived notions, often they will lash out at you.
That's exactly what happened to me over the weekend. I pointed out an incongruity in the logic of their analysis, and they looked at my questions only with the intent to find fault. I was not questioning them. I asked them to question their methods. I guess I identified a sacred cow, a pillar of her belief system, and so she lashed out at me. In the mind of this type of person, they believe themselves, their reasoning, and their logic, to be absolutely perfect. Contrast that to one of my atheist friends with whom I have had lively debates. He told me once that he tries to keep in mind four words at all times: "I might be wrong". In his case, there is point to having a discussion, but when people are absolutely convinced they are correct, they will reject whatever you say, or at least they always have. My friend Thom has said that he only worries about the people who are absolutely convinced that they are correct.
Technology has helped to create these misguided impressions. It reminds me of the words of TS Eliot: "Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?" As we turn to the internet for instant answers, without regard to the accuracy of those things, we show ourselves to be easily misguided. We are given over to the notion that the internet is infallible, and that since we have access to it we are by extension unable to make mistakes. Every tiny thing is magnified and 'goes viral' on the internet, and people swallow the premise without looking into it themselves at all. Too few people draw attention to the errors.
I think I can understand why. When you point out errors others have made, unless they are mature enough to seek correction and direction and humble enough to admit they are human, they frequently lash out at you as the villain. Even if you do so with the best of human intentions, the person takes it personally and behaves as if you have criticized them. They have not learned to separate the behavior from the being because growing up that bad pattern was started by other people who called them good or bad, smart or stupid, cute or ugly. We are far too complicated for that. We manufacture labels to avoid having to be more specific, more accurate, and more personal. As such, our attempts at courageous conversations frequently devolve into contention when that was furthest from our minds.
Back while serving as a missionary, I learned to recognize this. We were meeting with a man and discussing the Book of Mormon with him, and he came prepared to our meeting that night with a long laundry list of questions. After I answered a few, I suddenly stopped and asked him if he had read the Book of Mormon intending to prove that it was not true. When he admitted that was his intent, I packed up my stuff and left the room, and I never went back. My companion was upset that we had 'lost an investigator', but this man wasn't really investigating. As I have been saying for some time now, most people are not interested in the truth as much as they secretly hope the truth will happen to corroborate what they already happen to believe. When you challenge their preconceived notions, often they will lash out at you.
That's exactly what happened to me over the weekend. I pointed out an incongruity in the logic of their analysis, and they looked at my questions only with the intent to find fault. I was not questioning them. I asked them to question their methods. I guess I identified a sacred cow, a pillar of her belief system, and so she lashed out at me. In the mind of this type of person, they believe themselves, their reasoning, and their logic, to be absolutely perfect. Contrast that to one of my atheist friends with whom I have had lively debates. He told me once that he tries to keep in mind four words at all times: "I might be wrong". In his case, there is point to having a discussion, but when people are absolutely convinced they are correct, they will reject whatever you say, or at least they always have. My friend Thom has said that he only worries about the people who are absolutely convinced that they are correct.
Technology has helped to create these misguided impressions. It reminds me of the words of TS Eliot: "Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?" As we turn to the internet for instant answers, without regard to the accuracy of those things, we show ourselves to be easily misguided. We are given over to the notion that the internet is infallible, and that since we have access to it we are by extension unable to make mistakes. Every tiny thing is magnified and 'goes viral' on the internet, and people swallow the premise without looking into it themselves at all. Too few people draw attention to the errors.
I think I can understand why. When you point out errors others have made, unless they are mature enough to seek correction and direction and humble enough to admit they are human, they frequently lash out at you as the villain. Even if you do so with the best of human intentions, the person takes it personally and behaves as if you have criticized them. They have not learned to separate the behavior from the being because growing up that bad pattern was started by other people who called them good or bad, smart or stupid, cute or ugly. We are far too complicated for that. We manufacture labels to avoid having to be more specific, more accurate, and more personal. As such, our attempts at courageous conversations frequently devolve into contention when that was furthest from our minds.
No comments:
Post a Comment