People don’t so much resist change; they resist “being changed.”
Suppose you are sitting next to someone on the plane who let it slip that he thinks blacks are mud people, or that whites are Satan’s pawns. Instead of raining down the fire and brimstone of your righteous indignation and summoning your superior world view for an assault on his obviously faulty belief system and a morality in shambles, why not just have a conversation with the person behind the beliefs? You may learn something interesting. You may enter a very different mind world for the duration of the flight. Is that such a bad thing, to learn what fellow humans really think? Do we always have to be on the lookout to stomp out wrong-headedness with the big ol’ boot?
So what if your next door neighbor believes that God created the world five thousand years ago. Will it make him more likely to pilfer your silver spoons or be rude to your elderly mother? “But wait a minute,” you say, “that same guy is trying to dilute the teaching of evolution at the school where our kids go!” When I was in school, they split us up for language class because some students wanted to learn German, and some French. Is it just too outrageous to create two types of classes, one for students who want evolution straight from the bottle, and one for those who want to learn about the controversy, discuss “intelligent design” and learn to evaluate its claims? Instead of trying to convince the neighbor – probably a futile undertaking anyway – why not set up a situation both sides can live with happily enough? It seems to me that the latter path is far, far easier than the former. And it fosters neighborly good will to boot.
That old hypothesis is on its last leg, isn’t? If only we turn everyone into rationalist skeptics, the human world will get right. If only we turn everybody into savvy doomers, or angry activists, or sophisticated progressives, or godly conservatives, all with a unified voice, everything will turn around. The religious folks from centuries past thought that if only everybody would be Catholic, the whole world could be at peace… no more wrangling, no more disharmony, no more error. It did not pan out. That hasn’t prevented scientists from trying the very same thing. They’ve had a good run of it, but when all is said and done… it just ain’t gonna happen. Humans are ornery critters, each unique as a snowflake, each wanting to think his or her own thoughts. The One-Right-View Age is over. It’s been a failure, leading neither to God’s city on a hill nor a rational utopia but to never-ending divisive strife.
For too long, I have been like a marionette, leaping into the fray, perennially arguing with people whose opinions are different (and incorrect, of course!), hoping to set them straight. Crafting exquisite arguments, and getting nowhere. For all the vehement “big” battles of words and logic I have had with people over the length of my life, how many did I convince through a clever or powerful argument? I remember one, but he was open and ready. If a person wants to change their mind, if they open their mind to evidence they have not so far considered, then change is possible. But that is up to them! Isn’t it their job to make up their own minds? And isn’t my job to be of use to them, on their own terms, if asked?
Arguments can be giant bracing fun, especially with worthy enemies. I love these jousts where memes can be fine-tuned and sometimes, the best idea steals the show. Nothing I am saying here is directed against argumentation itself. But while I have learned a great deal about crafting good and bad arguments, and how well my views hold up under scrutiny, I have missed out big time on learning about other people and their worlds. Nobody is likely to be open and forthcoming under the onslaught of ‘know-it-better-than-thou-ism.’ And now that I am thinking this through, it seems possible that the whole effort to “change other people” is part of the domination paradigm. Isn’t persuasion a form of manipulation? A power game? Trying to override their ideas with my ideas, to overcome them, to make a conquest for my memes, isn’t it domination in another guise? None of us likes it when others push us to change. When we perceive that someone is targeting us, prodding us, selling us this idea or that, trying to win us over, convert us, we balk. And rightly so. A natural resistance builds up; a push leads to a counterpush. In a world of freedom, respect, and autonomy, the only appropriate person to change me is myself.
I don’t think reasoned argument changes people’s minds, anyway. Just the other day I was trooping once again through the barren grounds of trying to convince someone that if drugs were regulated and cheap, nobody would burgle houses to feed their heroin addiction. It fell on deaf ears. The retort is always the same. Criminals will be criminals. Are people holding up 7/11s to stoke their tobacco habit? Meh… it makes no difference. Or, take my older yet otherwise sharp-witted neighbor. She got embroiled in a Jamaican con that promised huge sweepstakes winnings if only she first sent them money. And lots of it. We neighbors tried to talk sense to her, the cops came and described similar cases, her daughter flew in to yell at and plead with her. To no avail. Her estate eventually had to be placed under agency oversight…. And when I go visit her, the phones still keep ringing with golden promises. People believe what they want to believe for their own deep reasons and needs. Suddenly, I am done. My evangelizing years are over.
And so it came upon me to wonder: what would it be like to surrender the idea, the burden!, of having to persuade or convince other people to think or believe differently? There is so much moaning out there in the doomersphere regarding all the folks who cleave to mistaken beliefs, those who are asleep, ostrichlike, or zombified. Why? Apparently we think that these folks are somehow getting in the way, they are stopping us from doing what needs to be done. But are they really stopping us? Or are we projecting on them our own frustration regarding not having a viable alternative in place yet? What if they are simply doing what kids everywhere do when things get weird… they are waiting for a better game to start?
August 31, 2010 at 3:04 pm
(I have begun to work on my book again, please check out the chapter on So peculiar an institution, by clicking the Book tab above. Come peek and tweak! 🙂
August 31, 2010 at 3:15 pm
“You kids need a darn good listening to!”
“Wow, that’s interesting – thanks. Now, I’m going to the garden to plant some beans.”
August 31, 2010 at 4:20 pm
leavergirl — You have such a nice way of persuading me not to be persuasive!
August 31, 2010 at 6:57 pm
Heh. Maybe persuasion works better without it. 😉
Hey, seriously, since this harks to some extent to our complaints on Orion, I would love to know if it resonates with you, or if I am missing something.
September 1, 2010 at 11:09 am
You go, Leavergirl! Methinks/hopes this modest blog is taking us through a chronicle of true transformation on the part of its creator. Nothing could be more valuable and helpful to this world than such real-world-human-models, in my opinion. Crucially, she’s right on with her discoveries, and in taking us through this process with her, a door opens for those bound by intellect, yet whose hearts and souls are still reachable. May they join us more and more and soon!, and may we in so doing, together, get out of the aforementioned Toilet before we drown in the drama…
I remember well my own journey through argumentation with the ‘stupid people’ who can’t see the sense of thinking things through as if they were an open vessel such as this post speaks to…a process stunningly without success, only leaving me with empty feelings of counter-productivity on almost every level of life. Which led naturally to the implemented realization that “You can’t talk people into a paradigm shift”, which has been among my most useful mantras whenever in doubt as to whether to enter a fray on such terms. I’ve pretty much given up with my-view-vs-yours “persuasion”, beyond mostly-friendly debate of course, ever since, and me and our world are the better for it.
But dang, now there’s this ‘another new breakthrough’ on the blog, and a new book chapter to read, right when i was diving back in to finish reading and maybe replying to the previous post’s comments! In due time, my friends…at least so i intend.
September 3, 2010 at 10:15 am
Well, maybe the following is the sort of story will have the credibility to persuade; for sure the “peak oil blogosphere” should be buzzing about it. I’d be interested in reading any pearls besides “we told you so” that any of you might come across:
“Peak oil has happened or will happen some time around this year, and its consequences could threaten the continued survival of democratic governments, says a secret Germany military report that was leaked online.”–From The Raw Story, 9/2
Some good think-tanking there. Meanwhile, another oil rig explosion in the Gulf, but then, with 4000 of ’em there, i guess that’s to be “expected”?!
As for the deeper core of this blog, yesterday i became even more convinced that, sure enough, we MUST start (and stay) with ourselves, really “be the change” inside first, foremost, and ongoingly, if we want to get anywhere from here. It seems we’ve gone about as far as we can without truly “turning” within ourselves. We’ve picked just about all of the easy fruit already; time to delve deeper into the tree and stay there as we move on outwardly.
Back to work on that…
September 3, 2010 at 11:11 am
Yeah, I have seen the story going around… nothing much new in that, though? You think it will capture the attention of some people who so far haven’t been paying it?
Been following the tiny tiff between JMG and Rob Hopkins… but nothing much new there either… two bullfrogs in a tiny pond. 🙂 Sharon Astyk in her latest post dissects it admirably.
Getting ready to post another chapter of Book.
September 4, 2010 at 3:02 pm
For some reason, I was not notified of new material on this blog, so I just checked it to see. Let me repost what I just put on Orion, first. Then, having read Astyk’s article, I’ll think, then say some more.
What am I learning in this forum? An important understanding for me is that there are people genuinely concerned about the state of our world, and they have a wide variety of responses to and perceptions of the situation, and how to deal with it. So, my pet ideas are not the only valid ones in this vast and problematic area.
I am learning to comment on other folk’s ideas without being dismissive or disrespectful — a tendency this discussion has helped me see in myself, and begin to correct. The urge to show how “right” or intelligent I am has also become apparent, and needs work also.
The point is, I am beginning to see that everyone has a lot of the needed truth in what they share, but no one has THE Answer. So be it! Maybe the big solution is not the answer, but sharing and implementing all of our little pieces of an answer is how our problems will get solved. We should affirm ourselves for however much of clarity and action we can muster, and affirm each other likewise for our highly individual contributions.
Sharing as we have is not about coming up with the big solution that eclipses all others — there may be no such answer. But we can gain from each others support, new ideas, new friends, and hope that every small grass root effort bears fruit, whether we can easily see its impact on the ocean of our difficulties or not. “Everything furthers.” (I Ching)
September 4, 2010 at 5:17 pm
Once we begin to see that the whole course of civilization from the earliest beginnings of mammalian intelligence has accumulated enormous problems that now threaten to destroy all of us, the next thing to look into is: how much have I and others been infected deeply with these basic inherited dysfunctions, and what can I do to get rid of them in myself, and then in others?
Does anyone imagine they can do this work alone? Then how do I find others to work with in the name of our mutual healing? This de-civilizing is a new kind of therapy, and needs to be developed. There are no basic manuals or researched methods for this. Small groups dedicated to this practice will be inevitably experimental.
At the same time folks find ways to uncover and dismantle their basic inherited dysfunctions, they will need to replace the ideas, behaviors, and structures of the old paradigm with new and better models. Working together in a deep intimacy and open sharing at depth that society has in no way prepared us for will need to be learned. To think that those of us who have recently become aware of peak oil, climate change, population imbalance, etc. are already fully awake and ready to found a new world is a foolish illusion. It is this kind of hubris which has made us such a danger to ourselves and others.
In short, what kind of situation is needed for us to restructure our damaged selves? It is really frustrating to observe peoples cocksure attitude that they are OK, it is just other people who need to change. The degree of unconscious arrogance and denial evinced by many is breathtaking. Why not admit that our lives demonstrate that we don’t have a clue how to live together in peace and harmony? I will not here get into the preconceived biases folks have towards the mere mention of: therapy, small groups, spirituality, meditation, etc. It only goes to show how deeply conditioned we are, and how little truly open to new ideas. So many are hot for “action”, with little regard for the whole history of things undertaken without a deeper basis of consideration.
September 5, 2010 at 6:13 am
Great post, leavergirl!
Indeed, to me this speaks to the whole subject of education – when teachers try to pull Correct Answers out of their students with no regard to the unique & deep individual processes that they must go through in order for the answers to have any real meaning or significance, how much learning really takes place? Teachers should just be people who make themselves available when other people feel ready to receive what they have to offer.
I recommend Marshall Rosenberg’s ‘Nonviolent Communication’ (if you hadn’t already heard of it) for ways of building bridges with those whose opinions you find initially repulsive. Here’s an excerpt of dialogue to whet your appetite: ‘NVC in Action: “Bring Back the Stigma of Illegitimacy!”‘
cheers,
Ian
September 5, 2010 at 3:39 pm
Ian, So glad you stopped by! Yes, I took my first NVC workshop last year, and it was a life-changer. Highly recommended for all.
Been thinking that the current educational system really bred creationism and other rebellions… after decades of crass indoctrination, these folks finally get to stick it to the man. Can’t say I blame them.
Education worthy of its name must be a respectful and collaborative enterprise. Yeah! 🙂
September 5, 2010 at 5:20 pm
My pleasure – I chanced on the site via the Dark Mountain pages and liked what I saw 🙂
I thought this post had a bit of an NVC ring to it! I’ve just read the book for now and made abortive attempts to introduce it bit-by-bit into various relationships and my general manner of speaking. Still suck hard at it though! Maybe it’d be a good idea to find a course and cement it further…
Yeah, it feels weird to think of them as rebels (with perhaps even -*shock*- a common cause) when my inner Dawkins is screaming that they’re a bunch of reactionaries intent on bringing back the stale, lying orthodoxy ‘we’ thought ‘we’ had left behind. But if they weren’t ready to move on yet (how condescending does that sound…) who am I to yank them along on the path I’ve chosen?
I’m starting to prefer shared perception to an emphasis on facts and ‘being right’. Seems like you can build on the former and have a win-win, whereas the latter has a socially crippling divisiveness inherent in it – I wonder why it got to be so prevalent, right?…
I have no problem with people splitting off into ‘tribes’ of divergent understanding. Why is it so important for everybody in the world to think the same things in exactly the same way anyway? Maybe the global culture is trying to maintain some kind of integrity in this way, but there’s no way it can succeed. It’ll be like language – with no globalised economics driving the adoption of one trading language (business English) the thing will splinter up into a million pidgins and be unrecognisable from valley to valley in just a few generations.
Hope you don’t mind me thinking aloud like that.
Ian
September 6, 2010 at 12:25 pm
I love it when you go thinking aloud like that! 🙂
My experience with NVC was very frustrating until I took the workshop. I believe that it cannot be learned from the book and other materials. Once I took the workshop (full weekend) then it all fell into place. I am still learning, of course, but the basics are now solid. I cannot recommend it enough.
I am with you on all the splitting up. Nothing wrong with that… people deserve the freedom to shape their lives and language and other things as suits them and their regional environment. I guess I am a fan of bioregionalism and devolution…
There are a number of people, the P2P foundation among them, talking about the further creation of collaborative knowledge. I am on that bandwagon and tootin’!
September 7, 2010 at 1:08 pm
“are they really stopping us?”
Yes. We’re all sharing one biosphere and if a tiny remnant figure out how to change, we’ll just get dragged down by the masses.
September 7, 2010 at 2:15 pm
Well, then, we gotta figure out a game so good they will be joining it in droves! 🙂
September 7, 2010 at 2:39 pm
Look at the civil rights movement. There were masses against that, but they couldn’t stop it. Or women’s lib, plenty of resistance to them, but they got a lot changed. If we can ever get the churches involved in a positive progressive way, that would be a formidable ally, as it was in the civil rights movement,and in South Africa. Too many leftists have turned their back onthe power of religion and spiritual causes as energies for revolution.
September 7, 2010 at 4:13 pm
Hi Vera, Mike, Jay D and other folks.
Interesting conversation, and one I have perhaps avoided (too close to the bone?) And also a little discombobulated by the experience of NOT agreeing totally with Vera (like one of Rush Limbaugh’s dittoheads?”)
And so it came upon me to wonder: what would it be like to surrender the idea, the burden!, of having to persuade or convince other people to think or believe differently? There is so much moaning out there in the doomersphere regarding all the folks who cleave to mistaken beliefs, those who are asleep, ostrichlike, or zombified. Why? Apparently we think that these folks are somehow getting in the way, they are stopping us from doing what needs to be done.
But are they really stopping us?
Maybe!!! If “they” run policy in your town, about what gets built, doesn’t get built, what gets funded, doesn’t get funded…
Or are we projecting on them our own frustration regarding not having a viable alternative in place yet?
It’s not either/or! But you’re right- we often just bash the other guy because that’s easier than building a plausible castle in the air!
And when we are totally powerless (as we – or I – feel now), then it’s easier to tear a chunk out of someone who agrees with us on most stuff, than it is to engage with the denialists/skeptics/suicidalists. “Narcissism of small differences” etc. etc.
September 7, 2010 at 7:06 pm
Hey Marc… if I ever come across as someone needing people’s total agreement, do me the favor and smother me with a pillow, will ya? 😉
I was talking about the sheeple. The ruling class? Of course they are stopping us. Will persuasion coupled with pressure tactics wrench out concessions from them? It might. And for those who see themselves doing this work, good luck. Concessions can make our lives easier sometimes.
However, I am barking at another tree. I am not interested in reforming Babylon. I am interested in doing away with it. Which means, figuring out how to play a whole new game. Whee!
September 8, 2010 at 1:13 pm
The desire (need?) for agreement was in me, not in you! I will happily enter into a mutual pillow/smothering pact with you!
I really liked your latest piece, btw, read it out loud to my wife- you give good rant – focussed and invigorating.
I have just about given up on the reform thing – verily, the only way you can fight City Hall is with a learning and growing mass movement. And, pace Mike, we don’t have time for that. (I think Mike is right about how those small groups – reading and DOING) would have both a liberating effect on the group members and the wider society…
Anyhow, off to fight a different losing battle now – the fight against flab… All best…
September 8, 2010 at 1:49 pm
Dwight — I wonder if you possibly have an inner mantra (unconscious) “There isn’t enough time?” That’s one that goes around a lot these days. If so, you could try replacing it with, “It’s never too late…”
If you find a way to zap the fat, let me in on it!
September 8, 2010 at 3:14 pm
“There are no answers, there are only questions.
Fallible creatures that we are and being ourselves in question, we inevitably demand answers to ease the lack within us. All things must be capable of explanation, every effort must have a cause, each problem a solution. It is thus that we arrive at conclusion, for conclusion brings about the ending that we mistake for an answer. “That’s finished,” we say, mendaciously. “We can go on to something else.”
But nothing in life—nor, perhaps in death—is ever really finished. A book, for instance, is no book at all, unless, when we come to the last page, it goes on and on within us.”
Pamela Travers
September 9, 2010 at 4:15 pm
Marc: it’s a deal of a pact!
Did your wife like my rant?
Yeah, Mike is right about them groups. In a big way.
September 15, 2010 at 4:23 pm
Hmm, I’m thinking the most poisonous human meme ever was the idea that any one of us achieve anything significant by ourselves. There’s always a chain of supporting actors from the guy who put your breakfast cereal on the supermarket shelves on back to the first person who figured out how to plant and store grains.
Failure to share is simple denial of reality.
September 16, 2010 at 5:37 pm
That anyone or anything exists in isolation is a key illusion that Buddhism seek to penetrate. We are ALL in this together.