Tuesday, September 04, 2012

Debate



Is it possible that I keep forgetting that not everyone is as interested in discussing politics as I am? Yes. Yes, it is.

Not too long ago I was unfriended on Facebook. Most of us are unaware when someone takes this action, as there is no jubilant timeline post letting us know that one of our "friends" no longer likes us. This is something I know, not because I obsessively stalk this person, but because he and I were engaged in what I thought was a civil discussion about the recent issues with Chik-Fil-A.

This "friend" (merely an acquaintance from a few years ago, not a true bosom buddy), was taking the time to vehemently denounce my favorite purveyor of chicken sandwiches because of comments and actions taken by the owner of the company regarding homosexuals. If you don't know about this recent issue, you're probably on the wrong website anyway. Please feel free to click here.



Anyway, this "friend" was spending an inordinate amount of time spouting epithets, suggesting we boycott, protest, etc. All this in reaction to one man's chicken shack and his opinions. In typical fashion, rather than reply to his invective with invective, I proceeded to ask a number of questions challenging the assumptions on which his arguments were based. While this was initially received with hesitant engagement, the next thing I knew, the thread had been deleted and I had been de-friended. I sent a quick response, commenting on the childishness of his reaction to my questioning. He promptly replied:

"You support bigots and murderers. F*** off!" And he then blocked me from messaging him.

This brings me back to the opening sentence of this post. I frequently forget that some people are not at all interested in challenging those beliefs they hold most dear. There are many who, for whatever reason, have closed their minds to other possibilities and do not delight in the free exchange of challenging ideas. While I have portrayed myself as relatively innocent in this exchange, I have no way of knowing exactly how this person took my responses to their ideas. It's entirely possible they thought I was bitterly attacking them rather than just engaging in what I consider to be curiosity and intellectual investigation. Ah, the weakness of the written word.

This led me to the thought for today's post. It seems to me (and to someone far wiser than me, someone like Kurt Vonnegut, although I can't seem to find the quote) that the majority of the world's problems seem to stem from our inability to communicate with each other effectively. I'm no linguist, but it's easy enough to see in every day life and conversation that two or more people can easily mis-communicate because one or more parties engaged in an exchange are simply using one or more words incorrectly. I think most people operate on contextual definitions to inform a large part of their vocabularies (myself included), rather than obsessively consulting dictionaries for clarification. This imprecise method for expanding our word pool is bound to lead to incorrect usage, but it also seems nearly impossible to determine how often this happens.

Take the word "Debate".  When I hear this word I think of a spirited exchange of ideas, an opportunity for people to ask questions of one another, to talk about facts and get to the heart of issues and celebrate the fact that they're usually more complex than they seem at first glance. However, for some, the same word might mean something completely different. It may just be a synonym for "Argument" or "Fight" and the idea might seem abhorrent. To the Commission on Presidential Debates, it obviously means a "Joint Press Conference". Still, for others, it may remind them of the crazy folks in high school or college who spoke faster than your average auctioneer. How do we iron out these differences? Is it possible? Worthwhile?

As stated, I'm no linguist. In fact, I'm probably just a pseudo-intellectual ranting at length about a non-issue. Still, I get the feeling that if we could just make the first step to start agreeing on what words mean, we might be able to make a little progress with our national dialogue or debate or discourse or discussion, or whatever you want to call it. This just brings us to our national need for improved education, but that's another post.

In the mean time, I'll just have to remember to tread a little more lightly. Just because someone is posting something (be it on Facebook or anywhere else) that relates to their beliefs doesn't necessarily mean they are ready, willing, or able to discuss them.

2 comments:

Unknown said...

Eh I dunno man, I'm totally with you except for that last part where you're going to tread lightly. Sounds to me like your "friend" is acting like a goddamn child. If your response to somebody challenging your views is to block them from further communication and call you an ignorant supporter of murderers, I feel like it's just fucking game on at that point. Act like a child, get treated like a child. Act like a troll, get flamed like one.

-Andy

Anonymous said...

Meh, sometimes I'm probably too self-conscious. The person in question isn't a bad person, just someone who maybe isn't quite as bright or willing to question their beliefs as I thought. You're right, children (and those who act as such) will get treated like children. I just have to remember not to have political conversations with kids (or their equivalent).