 |
| Illustration by Cat Troiano |
This
post is not a “how – to” aimed at advising folks how to conduct discussions. My
readers will no doubt have their own divergent opinions on this subject. There
really is no right or wrong way to engage in dialogue. This is just a
collection of some of my personal ruminations upon what I have found to be the
most satisfying and enlightening way to talk about things.
My family
and friends will tell you that I am a talker. I love to chat, and very
importantly, I do like to listen. After years and years of dialog with all kinds
of people I have some ideas that I want to share.
Today
I will confine myself to examining discussions about things that do not have a
direct and practical impact upon out lives. I am referring to discussions upon
art, literature, philosophy, religion, politics etc. I will save the practical everyday
stuff for another day.
It
is important to point out that I do not always engaged in the “perfect” discussions
of the type that I will outline. I must admit that I have from time to time I
have become involved in wildly undisciplined and/or heated exchanges. Instead, I
put this out as something of an ideal, but an ideal that sometimes, with the
right people, can be achieved. Thus I have
at times participated in such lofty conversations.
We
also read and hear lots exhortations directed at folks who are too quite, too
afraid to express their opinions. Such advice urging folks to come out of their
shells may indeed be worthy, but it has never been a problem for me or the
people who are generally around me. Thus my ruminations will not encompass
experiences of the too shy and the unexpressive.
What
many folks define as controversial subjects make for great conversations. When
I am with good conversationalists who I either know, or who I sense are game
for it, I love to engage in subjects such as religion and politics. There was a
time when I was just as enthusiastic for such talks in most public situations
and with anyone, especially if others opened the door and initiated the talk.
However in recent years I find that society has become so uncivil, and so many
people, at least in the United States, just parrot talking points, often aimed
at antagonizing others. These “canned” arguments, sentences and phrases are created
by various interests and permeate our airwaves.
These
days it seems that almost any group of random people includes those who are
intolerant and dismissive to those who harbor differing views. I find that such
people exhibit all forms of political and religious views. I firmly believe
that one needs to be intellectually honest, thus I recognize people that there
are lots of folks who mostly agree with me on issues such as religion and
politics, but who are among the worst of the intolerant and close minded. There
was a time that I enjoyed engaging and debating these people regardless of the
side that they were on. As I get older however, I find that there is too little
time or energy for wasted conversation where no one learns anything.
I do
love to chat with folks I disagree with, especially if they are calm and
thoughtful conversationalists. When it comes to people who I have never delved
into controversial waters with previously, I am never the first to initiate, as
I feel that it is a bit too provocative to be the first one to jump into such
pools. I welcome it when people initiate such talks with me however. I
particularly enjoy it when folks begin to talk religion with me. I must point
out that my gratification stemming from such an encounter is not that of some
of my fellow non- believers who take such encounters as an excuse to begin
bashing religion and mocking people. I know someone who claims that he
“intellectual destroys” people who attempt to preach religion to him.
Personally I do not posses such intellectual firepower to lay waste to folks
whose views differ from mine. If I did, I certainly would gain nothing by
carpet - bombing their viewpoints. Instead when someone begins to talk religion
with me I do take it as an open door for me to express my own beliefs. I strive
to do so respectfully and with reason. Just as importantly I also take pains to
listen and try to understand the other person’s beliefs. Of course this perfect
conversation that I am setting up does not always come to be. I do recall one
woman who, initially began to espouse the virtues of her religion to me. When I
calmly and respectfully (I really treat these situations with kid gloves and go
out of my way to listen, not to sound hostile, aggressive, dismissive or confrontational)
expressed my belief concerning the existence of God, she literally ran from me.
Many situations yield great results however. I have had insightful and
enlightening conversations with folks arising out of these encounters. I recall
a few years ago during a hospital stay having a roommate who was a lay minister
who began to talk religion with me. I sensed that he was a little taken aback
when I told him that I was a non - believer. However we proceeded to have a
fascinating conversation for hours, on multiple topics relating to religion. The
nature and tone of this talk actually led to very little debate.
I am
beginning to me more and more skeptical of debate for what I would describe as “debate’s sake. “ I do concede that when an
idea is too easily accepted by society or the powers that be, playing devil’s
advocate may be very useful. However, except for such fairly uncommon
situations, our society, from the mass media all the way down to individuals,
is teeming with people who have decided that argument is such a good thing that
it should be initiated whenever possible and in defense of any position. Sometimes
it is driven by the need to oppose certain politicians, public figures and
groups. Folks take on positions just to be in opposition to public figures. In
my opinion, this is a terrible way to reach truth or understanding.
Of
course I am not arguing against all debate. Such a contention would be sillier
then the ceaseless argument for the sake of argument that I am complaining
about. However, in my opinion the most fruitful debates spontaneously sprout
within thoughtful conversations that also involve a fair amount of agreement.
Furthermore they are not exercises in showing up one’s opponent through
superior verbal and debating skills. A good debate under the right conditions
will illustrate one’s reasoning and highlight a different way of looking at
things to one’s counterpart.
The
pure debate format seems to be such a flawed way to communicate. Rhetorical
skills take precedence over truth and wisdom. Parties are loath to admit that agree
or to see eye to eye on particular points even when they inwardly would have
come to a consensus. Once again, I must emphasize that I am not arguing against
spirited and even contentious dialogue. Instead I am arguing that disagreements
should arrive naturally and that discussions should not be contests where the
participants fear to agree on anything due to the danger of “losing” the
argument. Of course civility and respect are also key components.
So
what are the elements of my ideal conversation? It would involve two or three
people who were not afraid to express their views but who are very civil. Folks would delve into controversial areas
fearlessly. Such intellectual boldness actually is encouraged by such
politeness. People will carefully listen to one another. Areas that people
agree upon will be explored and delved into further. Areas that people disagree
on will spark debate and further discussion. If folks feel the need to parrot a
popular line that they heard in the media they should acknowledge that they are
doing so and explain why it particularly rings true to them.
The
above represents a perfect situation that can never really be achieved, at
least not consistently. I have not always, and will likely not always engage in
discussions that adhere to the above format. Furthermore many of my readers
will have different ideas as to what elements constitute great conversation.
This is not just an intellectual exercise however. If I understand what kind of
talk yields the most enlightening and fulfilling results, it can help me to
seek out people as well as create situations conducive to such communications.
The end result is a ultimately better way to intellectually explore the
Universe.
