“Pick a side in a debate—then argue the opposite”
I just stumbled upon an article, https://open.substack.com/pub/plumpits/p/unrot-your-brain?r=ll0oi&utm_medium=ios, because I’m always on the edge of the battle in my own mind between reality and living in the moment, and the mind numbing effects of doom-scrolling (Facebook has always been my weakness in this regard).
The article as a whole is good, but the quote above lept off the screen to me. In short, I see way too much division and dismissal of opposing viewpoints. My algorithm shows me a lot of “good vs. evil” types of arguments. Strangely enough, both left-wing and right-wing use that same foundation to build their cases upon. I don’t fit neatly into either camp (nor do I fit neatly in the middle ground, either. I’m an anomaly like that 😉 ).
I posit that we, as human beings, are made for relationship. We are made for conflict in the sense that we are at our best when we work together to coexist even in the midst of differing opinions.
I do not for a moment suggest that in seeking to understand someone’s opposing views that you must change your mind or agree with them. Actually, by understanding an opposing opinion, the history and motivation behind it, you may discover even more reason to keep your own opinion. But that’s beside the point.
You will likely, however, discover that a living, breathing, God made individual with their own unique past, present and future, and hopes and dreams, and strengths, failures, bravery and fear is who sits across from you in whatever the debate of the day happens to be.
I personally find it a lot harder to patently dismiss someone whom I have invested in. I choose to believe many are like me in that regard. The person behind it becomes more important than the issue at hand.
And perhaps that’s why keyboard warriors do what they do. Zero investment, zero risk, but a seething desire to “win” and argument at all costs drives them to cut down others who disagree with them. I catch myself more often than I care to admit taking the easy route of judging a book by its cover, with only is single partial side of the story.
…A rude homeless person? “They made a series of choices that led them here. They don’t want help, they want a hand out. Probably for drugs…”
Except, I sat down with a homeless man a couple of years ago and (rare for me, iykyk) I just listened. His only child, a daughter, had passed away due to health issues. He and his wife tried to work through it together, but they each struggled with the loss in their own ways. They ended up divorcing. So having lost his only child, his wife, and his home, he sank into depression, lost his job, and one day found himself on the street. He didn’t want drugs. He wasn’t looking to party, or to even escape. Life had hit him hard. He wanted to work, but without a permanent address, prospective employers weren’t interested.
…Someone driving in a way that I don’t approve? They are a moron and think this is their world, I’m just living in it.
Except, I’ve been that maniac. Once when my wife was having trouble breathing and my toddler son was in the vehicle with her, she pulled over and they ended up taking an ambulance ride to a hospital several towns away. She was ultimately okay, but in that space between the call telling me she was at an ER 20 miles away, and my arriving there, you can bet I was primarily concerned with getting there as soon as possible. I probably offended a few fellow drivers and certainly broke a few ordinances along the way.
In both cases, the extenuating circumstances may not “excuse” the behaviors, but they go a long way in explaining them. And certainly in each case, if given more desirable options, after the fact, the behaviors may have been different.
The point is, we are not individual beings impervious to others’ trials, triumphs, and all the other experiences that make us who we are. We are not fully independent; rather we are interdependent. “Living my truth” has a ripple effect on my family, friends, and community. There’s nothing I can do about that. That’s just the way it is.
From a social media perspective (and to borrow from Lady Gaga of all people, “social media is the toilette of the internet’s), when you “win” an argument online, but haven’t changed the opposing parties’ opinions and in the process burned bridges and led to the opposition doubling down, what, pray tell, have you actually won?
Ask yourself the next time you take the path of least resistance and rely upon a regurgitated opinion or ideal that only works in a vacuum, “where is this coming from? Is this a hill worth dying on? Is this really how I feel or what I believe? Do I have any skin in the game? Do I even understand what I’m taking a stance on? Am I better than this? Do I want to be and do better than this?”
“Most importantly, is my opinion, or my chosen delivery of my opinion going to cause unintended harm and pain to people I [should] care about, and am I prepared for the consequences?”
I don’t have a universally applicable answer here. I’m as guilty as anyone of taking the easy way out simply to stroke my ego or act like a spoiled brat as if my opinion has earned any sort of audience. But I’m learning and trying to be a little better every day.