Not because they can't... but because they won't. This is what I've realized anyway. We are more than capable of bridging the gaps between us, but we refuse to because it means letting go of our pride and admitting that our positions could be wrong. It's hard, and I'm guilty of this too. But at least I'm willing to admit that, and I would hope that most people can too. Humans are, by nature, biased according to whatever backgrounds they come from, but we should at least be open to learning more and admitting mistakes when they are made.
This is not to say that there can't be a diversity of opinions, even misinformed ones. That is natural and healthy in a free society. Ignoring our differences doesn't make them go away, and there are some really important ones worth talking about at length. It only becomes a problem when there is a willful misrepresentation of what the other side thinks, with no attempt to fact check oneself, or take correction because it's not convenient to your biases. It's one thing to feel strongly about an issue. It's another to contort your opponent's argument so much that it's a barely recognizable caricature, and then think you're smart for doing so.
Perhaps it's always been like this to some extent or another, but the internet has magnified our egos and those of our ideological groups. We increasingly live in echo chambers isolated from the actual words of our opponents. Mainly, we are exposed to them second/thirdhand through agenda driven news media, out of context quotes, or memes. Especially the memes. I'm sorry meme-lords (especially my brother) but memes are generally useless pieces of garbage when it comes to debates on current issues. I know, they weren't really meant to be serious, and yet so many people act like they are. This drives me nuts. Sure, there is a place for such in comedic or satirical contexts, but even then... there still has be enough realism left to make the piece funny or relevant. This isn't even to mention the memes that aren't trying to be funny, and yet are still so pathetically stupid, (IOW tumblr and reddit screenshots are NOT valid sources for research people, and they are not scripture!!!).
But people don't really share these things to be comedic as much as it is to, again, stoke their own egos. By sharing this crap, they feel a smug sense of superiority, not only in that they think they've won, but that they've OWNED and DESTROYED the other! They are so woke! They are so smart!! They are so freakin' clever!!! "BOOM! Take that liberal snowflakes/redneck boomers!" And so they shout it on the mountain tops for further validation in likes, retweets and shares. Of course their echo chambers happily oblige this, and the cycle continues. Those caught within the cycle do so deaf to the protests of the people targeted by their propaganda-- some by ignorance, others by pure contempt.
I call this the Buzzfeed/Clickbait mentality, and it is not unique to any one group of people. At some level, the people stuck in this mentality know that what they're sharing isn't helpful, but your interest is not in having an actual discussion. It's only about scoring points to spite the other, and soundbites are your currency.
The problem is, these mindless moments of sharing and retweeting are not epic mic drops. They do not make you look cool, or smart, or woke, or even that funny honestly. They are annoying. They are inaccurate. They are ignorant. They are uncivil. They are divisive. In some cases, they're even prejudiced. But most of all...
They are lazy!
Let me emphasize this again.
THEY. ARE. JUST. PLAIN. INTELLECTUALLY LAZY.
Fine, maybe being an intellectual wasn't your goal; but give me one good reason why I should take you seriously if you won't even try and understand what the other side really thinks first? If you cannot even be bothered to do some quick fact checking or think for a minute before sharing that clickbait, then that is the definition of lazy right there. After a certain point, it also becomes dishonest.
This is what I am talking about when I say that people don't understand each other, not because they can't, but because they won't. Let's show a common example of this:
"You're against elective abortion, which means you hate women and want to take us back to the dark ages!"
Or
"You support abortion because you hate babies and want young people to have promiscuous sex without taking any responsibility for their actions!"
Now both you pro-life and pro-choice readers see those types of things and think: Um, excuse me, that is not what I think!
Right. That's exactly my point. Those are not your positions. They're not you. They are straw men.
A straw man is a type of logical fallacy where instead of refuting an opponent's argument head on, you twist it, warp it and over simplify it into a caricature that's easy to attack. This is supposed to make the opponent look weak and dumb, while you're elevated to a pedestal. In reality though, all you've done is attacked a straw man. This is not helpful to anything.
The cheap shot then spreads like wildfire when the less informed see the straw man, and assume that that's the actual platform of the opponent. And so the memes are spread, and the media is ablaze with a manufactured controversy. All the while, the other person/party is repeatedly trying to correct the record. Few will listen, however.
This leads to another way this happens, which is out of exasperation instead of willful ignorance. These are the people who for a while tried being rational and civil... and then gave up in response to the people who never gave them that same courtesy. I can understand this to an extent. Still, it's not very productive. It's like throwing your own brains out because there are stupid people. Returning stupid for stupid only creates a whole lot of stupid.
Related to this are red herrings which is another type of logical fallacy where someone inserts an irrelevant tangent to distract from the topic at hand. It's just as lazy as the straw man, because altogether it avoids the real issue being discussed.
For instance: "You're so upset about the children killed in this shooting, but what about all the babies aborted every year!?" (I'm sorry, I'm pro-life too, but I am so sick and tired of seeing this crap, stop spreading it!)
Another: "You're so concerned about same-sex marriage, but then there's all these straight people cheating on each other and getting divorced!"
You could say that there's a kernel of truth to both of these arguments, but they're still just red herrings. All they do is derail the conversation. In these cases, they also presume that there's a mutually exclusive binary; if you're upset about children killed by gun violence, you must not think aborted babies matter, or if you're opposed to same-sex marriage, then you don't care about the broken heterosexual marriages. Both of these presumptions are just absurd.
Yet for how absurd both of these tactics are, red herrings and straw men pop up all the time in politics. Why not? Employing them means you can win votes easier. It emboldens a sort of group think mentality, creating an "us vs. them!" and that means huge swaths of people will rally behind you. You don't have to think too hard and they don't have to think too hard. It makes for catchy slogans too, but it does not make for a healthy Republic-- especially not when these things happen during crises that actually affect people's livelihoods and freedoms.
Think of how many times you've seen these fallacies were used against you. And now... think of how many times you've probably used them against someone else.
I can guarantee that neither you or I are innocent of this. The question is, if you don't like it when someone does it to you, why in the world would you do it to someone else? How does that make our country better? How does it actually help you or the person you are arguing with? How does it lead us on the path to become more Christlike?
Short answer: it doesn't.
Humbling ourselves, and letting go of the temptation to straw man our ideological opponents will not make our differences go away. But it will go a long way in learning to work together and live peaceably like we should be.
If you have an opinionated statement to make: instead of just yelling, take some time to really think about it. Really consider its implications, merits and so forth. And make sure you actually understand those different than you too. Not because it gives them credence, but because it makes your position that much stronger if you are able to maintain it in the face of the argument as it actually is, and not through distractions or caricatures.
*
There were two specific examples I saw today that gave me the idea to post this. But it's super late now, and I am tired. Perhaps I will elaborate on that tomorrow. In the meantime, enjoy this creepy picture of a literal straw man. Good night.
No comments:
Post a Comment