Stretch Your Intellectual Comfort Zoneby
Bill Barnwell
One of the problems with writing opinion columns is that I feel I rarely, if ever, get unbiased feedback from others. Any writer could probably attest to this, but feedback from outsiders tends to sometimes fall on one extreme or the other. I either hear "That was great! You’re an amazing thinker!" or "How could you write such trash? You’re an idiot!" Are they all reading the same piece? Yes, they are, the problem is that many people rarely think for themselves. We have developed a very simplistic approach to reasoning where all points of views that don’t correspond with our own are filtered out and never considered. This pseudo-reasoning plagues individuals in almost any academic field and is especially evident in how people approach religion, politics, and other broad and complicated cultural issues. Usually, when people write to tell me that a column was "brilliant" what they are actually saying is "I agree with you, therefore what you are saying is great." When people say I’m ignorant, hateful, etc., more often than not they are just outraged somebody could possibly disagree with them. I’m not convinced either group actually takes the time to sit down and work through the complicated issues at hand, gather all the facts and various opinions, and then reach their own conclusions. On politics for instance, most politically "aware" people see the system in a highly dualistic fashion. If you are a Democrat then Democrats = forces of goodness and Republicans = forces of evil. Or if you’re a Republican just switch things around. There’s no room for "nuance." Everything is black and white, a battle between ultimate good and ultimate evil. If you want an example of this, just watch the hysteria on both sides before each election. The commentary, fundraising letters, and official pronouncements from each party would lead you to believe that if their side doesn’t win, the opposition is going to come hide under their beds at night, kidnap their children, and basically just destroy America. If they win, however, then they will be on the path to righting all the wrongs in the world and everyone will live happily ever after. Perhaps if people actually took the time to think through this they’d see how ridiculous such reasoning really is. They don’t do this though in part because they are convinced that anyone who doesn’t think like them is irrational, nuts, or perhaps even evil. I think it’s good for an individual to take the time to actually consider and evaluate positions, people, and points of view they don’t agree with. I can’t count how many of my conservative friends have denounced Fahrenheit 9/11 as a "bunch of lies" when in reality they never have bothered to see the film or consider the information it presents, and they never will. They will just lock themselves up in their safe little ideological box where they won’t be corrupted by people who have the nerve to have different outlets and opinions than them. The same goes for liberals who refuse to read anything other than The Nation or Mother Jones. Instead people would prefer to expose themselves only to materials and points of view that reinforce their own. There’s no room for critical thinking or actually trying to figure out why others think, feel, and believe as they do. Sometimes when I put together an essay I’ll hear a response like "You normally write very well, but today you are just way off." Well, it’s the same guy, and my style of writing is usually pretty consistent. The only difference is that last time you agreed with me and this time you don’t. It’s as if I could write a pile of slop but as long as it reinforced a particular guy’s point of view he will think it is "brilliant." Or I could put together something very logical, reasonable, and effective but if he disagrees with the central thesis then it’s "way off." Most people, however, don’t even get that far because they won’t even bother to read or listen to anything that might challenge them. That’s one of my problems with broadcasts or publications that only present "conservative" or "liberal" points of views. Sure, there’s a lot of good merit to rallying up the troops and encouraging and building up like-minded individuals. But if all a group is doing is sitting around and high-fiveing each other and complimenting each other on how brilliant they are and how dumb everyone else is, not much is actually being accomplished. And if all an individual does is evaluate everything through the narrow prism of his narrow point of view then he is denying himself the opportunity to ever learn anything new or be challenged. Some may object and claim that being truly open-minded will make someone spineless and intellectually cluttered. Therefore, it’s better to be obtuse and stubborn. For example, I’m supposed to think it’s a great quality that George W. Bush is a "man of his word" in the sense that he never admits he’s wrong or looks at different points of view. The race between Bush and Kerry was one of extreme opposites in this respect. It’s true that Kerry was too wishy-washy on some matters, but Bush demonstrates the rigid stubbornness that in any other profession would be a major vice, but in politics for some reason is a great virtue. Instead of being a nation of critical thinkers, America has become (or perhaps always has been) a society of black and white comic book dualists who are incapable of thinking outside the box. It’s not only true in politics but other institutions as well. For instance, just try and question naturalistic evolution in a secular academic setting. You will be slandered, marginalized and attacked without even having your facts and opinions considered by supposedly "objective" people. The irony of all this is while people are trying to protect themselves from points of views that will corrupt them, they are actually making themselves less effective as intellectual thinkers. This is even true on matters of religion where particular religious groups are terrified to look at the arguments of other faiths and skeptics. Doing so, they fear will weaken their own faith or corrupt them in some other way. In my experience, the exact opposite occurs. It makes me more aware of what other people believe and why, and what the central arguments are against my beliefs. In knowing these things I’m able to know my opposition and have a ready defense for the attacks against the Christian world view, the validity of the Scriptures, central arguments of the Christian faith, etc. Therefore, by engaging with points of views that were radically different than mine my faith was actually strengthened. It helped me develop a better insight into why others believe what they believe and behave as they do. Not only that it made me test and evaluate my beliefs and this process of refining made me stronger in the end. Of course there have been other times where I have concluded that I was wrong about something and changed my mind. Again, in politics this is seen as a cardinal sin, but in real day-to-day living, this is actually a good thing. In the past five years I’ve changed my point of view on some political issues and even on some minor doctrinal matters. On other areas of just simple practical living I’ve grown and matured in my outlook. And just as I’ve modified and changed my opinions on some matters in the past five years, I’m sure I’ll feel differently or more informed on other issues in the next five years. This doesn’t mean I’m a spineless jelly-fish, it just means that I’m constantly evaluating the evidence and trying to make reasonable judgments. This is not a heroic virtue that calls for a pat on the back, nor is it a terrible vice, I think it’s just a responsible way to approach the world. However, none of this is possible if I were to just remain in my ideological safe zone and ward off any information that might actually make me think. The moral of this whole story? Life and the big issues that confront us are rather complicated and call for intelligent and informed thinking. The cartoonish approach we have to most issues – be they political, religious, cultural, or whatever – has severely impeded intelligent and rational debate. Until we learn to deal with issues in a more informed and reasonable matter, we will continue to live in a comic book world that doesn’t reflect reality.
December 14, 2004 Bill Barnwell [send him mail] is a pastor in Flushing, Michigan. He spent most of his undergraduate college career studying politics and government before feeling called to the ministry. He has completed a Master of Ministries degree and is currently working towards a Master of Arts in Theological Studies degree at Bethel College in Mishawka, Indiana. Copyright © 2004 LewRockwell.com |
It
would be a good idea for people of all persuasions to get out of
their box and challenge themselves. The naïve approach to life
that far too many people have and the radical intolerance to any
point of view that contradicts one's own have left people intellectually
straight-jacketed. For fear of developing a weaker faith or weaker
principles, people have bought into a simplistic method of thinking
that never challenges them and actually makes them less effective
in the long run. Perhaps it’s time for everybody to take off their
straight-jackets and stretch their comfort zones a bit. It might
be a scary ride at first but you’ll be thankful in the long run.