May 22, 2002
-
My allergies have settled their obnoxious selves down and I'm back to myself again for better or worse.
I've been thinking lately about how it is that we exchange ideas and share thoughts. There is a metaphor for discussion "the marketplace of ideas" which speaks of different ideas "competing" among themselves. Presumably the idea which the most people "buy" is the idea with the most merit. So there is discussion of access to the "marketplace of ideas" and complaint by those who feel their position isn't granted an "even playing field."
But is it true that ideas must necessarily be in competition with one another? Very few of the ideas on the table claim to be the exhaustive truth of the situation. Would we not be better served to speak of a "melting pot" of ideas? Why could we not view it as the process of sifting and combining what works in each idea? Maybe a genetic metaphor. We could then speak of targeting the genegerm in the idea that we wanted to keep while avoiding the parts of an idea that have failed to persuade us.
Last night a friend of mine very graciously answered a lot of questions that I had about the process of debate. I had been thinking that a possible way to avoid messy and nasty emotionalism in the exchange of ideas was to stick to forms and structures by which each side would put forth a idea and then listen to the other side with intent to understand the opposing view and make modifications where the exchange demonstrated weaknesses in the original position.
One of the things that my friend pointed out, is that in an actual debate there is always a panel of judges. It isn't up to the competitors to modify their position. The forms of debate do not produce a "truth." They merely settle which side has presented a better case. Bummer. Well, that ends one line of thinking. Because the arena where it gets nastiest is one in which two friends have a different idea. And although on one level I think it would be kind of fun to wave a magic wand and produce a jury to vote a final decision, in real life we don't have that option. So what to do when two people have reached a point about which they cannot agree and they are sinking into nastiness?
Is it possible to agree to disagree?
Should we just say well, this is a topic we cannot discuss?
I'm thinking of an old Jewish story. (They poke a lot of fun at themselves for their tendency toward contentiousness throughout the Mishnah and Talmud.) In this story two rabbis are engaged in a bitter debate. Finally, they agree to ask God to settle it. They each pray and lo and behold God speaks and says "Rabbi A is correct." To which Rabbi B replies "Well, that's two against one."
I think it comes down to where you place your value. Is your primary value in being right? Or are you going for understanding? I believe that it's possible for a person to understand me without agreeing with me. I can love and affirm a person with whom I don't agree unilaterally. And really isn't that the bottom line in any relationship? I don't even agree with MYSELF all of the time! How should I expect to have a relationship with another person if I think that the test of friendship is agreement with my ideas?
Beyond agreement there is respect. I may not agree with what you say, but I can still place value on your perspective. I can affirm your integrity and experience even if I have reached a different conclusion than you have.
A relationship can survive disagreement. All relationships are an exercise in negotiating our way through our various disagreements. I don't know how to proceed with a relationship that lacks this quality of respect.
I've been deliberately vague about details of my various arguments and relationships where this essay might apply. Because I have concluded that this issue is broader than a particular disagreement I might have with one particular person. I'm re-evaluating myself today. I'm wondering whether I extend the respect that my relationships must be founded upon, or if I demand it without reciprocating in kind.
I've said for a long time that if I weren't a Christian, I'd be a Buddhist. Not only do I identify with a lot of Buddhist philosophy of life, but their holiest adherents get to wear comfortable robes and are almost expected to have a round belly. Then again there is a lot to be said for the Judaic emphasis on the home and family. I could go on. But I think I'll go and work on my relationship with my kids. I don't agree with the choice they are making at this moment. (They are punching each other.) But, perhaps I can admire their honesty and willingness to take action even as I hope to redirect these strengths into an alternative expression.
Peace be upon you.
Comments (20)
She's baaack!
Great blog!
I think we need to disagree in order to learn. How many times have you been thinking about something and someone disagrees with you on it but you see the potential in what they are saying? I LOVE a good argument. I say, bring them on!
Very well stated. I think there is value in striving to maintain respect for the individual even in disagreement. On the other hand, I think there is great value in strength of thought and will that is forged by friction. It's a difficult balance to maintain but I think there is benefit to the effort. My favorite verse on this balance:
Proverbs 27
17As iron sharpens iron, a friend sharpens a friend.
The value is established in that the iron becomes tempered and is useful. The integrity of the relationship is maintained in that the contention is between friends.
So really, viewed from a certain perspective your kids may just be fulfilling a Biblical mandate
well spoken and I hope people really read it, not just scan and prop, but read! There are so many perspectives and views and I read many that I don't agree with and that is ok, I move on, because that is my right to go and their right to believe...Keeping that open mind and the ability to walk away without causing friction is a great virture to have.
oh and I am having killer allergy problems right now... tissue?
Discussions are also very much about the people who are having them. Individual relationships can make disagreeing a given because sometimes people just take the opposite opinion to be oppositional. You know the type. My daughter is one! Also, there are certain areas that I believe are absolute truths that I will never be open for disagreement about. I can try to convince someone to agree with me, but they should never even attempt to try and change my opinion. I think it is important to monitor discussions we have and pick up the cues that are sometimes their. When a discussion gets nasty, that means it's time to bail out!
If it means I get to wear my housecoat all day and be fat I want to be a Buddhist too!!!!!
(no offense intended toward any practicing Buddhists who might be reading this site)
What a nice way to put things.
Heheh, I don't even think I have a version of Church... I like parts from many religions... I figure if I keep God in my heart and do what I feel is right and don't get the backhand from Him then I must be doing ok.
- and thank you for the "bless you" it is bad sneezes day today!!
Very insightful words, and as I read them I am forced to ask myself the same question--do I give my "opponent" the same respect I demand? A nasty thing about me is that I am competitive by nature. Sometimes in the midst of discussions I have found myself defending my own point beyond reason, simply because I did not want to lose. Hey, we're human beings and part of the package is emotions. If I were hotly presenting my argument to someone whom was able to present theirs in a cold, unemotional way, it might make me furious! lol The means we use must be as pure as the ends we seek--identifying the end is always a great idea before setting out on some type of "idea exchange" journery. Do we want our opponent to say that we are right and they are wrong, or do we want them to open their minds and accept our ideas for that very thing--our ideas? Very good points, Terri.
It seems the idea that wins is the one that came from the best salesman.
And of course you can agree to disagree but there are times when even that won't do. Some opinions are simply ugly and when they are expressed it leads to a loss of respect between the two parties. I personally don't want to come to an understanding with the person who beats a dog for pleasure because, "after all, it's just a dog." Yes, that is an extreme example but not at all the most extreme. So, as with all things, different situations and different people call for different actions and reactions.
I think you're wrong. In fact I despise you for holding such a pathetic opinion. Die Die Die.
Steppenwolf, you're scaring me. Isn't there a requisite for death wish comments, if they're of the joking sort, to include a winky or smilie?
A Buddist? Huh. I've often thought if I were a member of another church it might be the Society of Friends. Or Southern Baptist. Yeah. That would work. But not Buddist. Nothing eastern. I like the belly part though.
Very nice!
I consider it a gift when someone has come to a perfectly logical conclusion, based on their experiences, that differs from my own. That way I get the benefit of seeing their point of view, without actually having to live through the same things that they did.
Arguments can be simply a way to get different points of view on the table. After all, the quickest way to an insoluable problem is for one party not to speak her true feelings/point of view! Best to get everything on the table that may be relevant.
The ultimate aim of "debate" is airing the various facts and priorities of a set of problems, not coming to agreement. Coming to agreement is another process, more akin to dealmaking than debate.
Quick, what's the best way to make a deal?
Well, you can't do that if you don't have all parties' points of view in hand.
So I'm so not internet savvy that I can neither wink nor smile.
I enjoy debate as a way of expanding my own perspective, but I hate it when it turns personal! As you so clearly stated, respect is the key! And yes, I think two people on opposite sides of the fence CAN agree to disagree...Thanks for the think this afternoon!
Spot
number ONE thing that a Buddhist does, Terri, is let GO.
Comments are closed.