A Healthy Mistrust

"Mistrust Healthy?" Yes. Not the natural mistrust we easily have for those whose social/political positions we disagree with, but rather a mistrust of our own ideologies that all too often lead us to uncritically believe our own "press releases" and reject out-of-hand the opinion of contrary viewpoints. Nothing illustrates this better than the often onerous debate between economic ideologies. There are those who believe that the free-market system is the best (and perhaps only) system that rewards diligence, creativity, and initiative to produce wealth and a better life-style for everyone. Taken to an unquestioned and unexamined extreme, the "market" becomes "god", needing no regulation and in-and-of-itself, taking necessary self-action to correct imbalances. On the other hand, there are those who believe that the "market" leads to a "social darwinism" of "survival of the fittest" so that those who cannot make their way in the free market system are simply left behind to struggle or (in the attitude of Ebenezer Scrooge) die. In this view, the "market" cannot be trusted to "do the right thing" and needs strong regulation and oversight. If the believers on both sides of such an argument would take some time and make some effort toward a healthy mistrust of their own position, it would lead to a more civil discussion of the strengths and weaknesses inherent in both ideologies.

Compromise is Not Necessarily a Bad Thing (Re-visited)

It's been 3 months since the last post to "Gentle Answer", in keeping with my policy of not writing simply for the sake of writing something. However, the events of the past several days in my home state of Wisconsin have prompted me to revisit a post from October 2010.

For your enjoyment (hopefully) again...

There's an old saying, "Half a cake is better than no cake at all". However, in the emotionally-charged arena of social and political discourse, we have slid into an "all-or-nothing" mentality where it insisted that one "buy the whole package", without any deviation from "the party line", of a particular agenda without stopping to consider that the truth of all social and political issues may very well be nuanced and certainly more complex than reduction to sloganeering would suggest. A good way toward more civility in our discussions would be to admit that we have succumbed to the disease of "hardening of the categories" and at least be willing to admit that those with whom we have disagreements have reasons why they hold their particular positions. A good beginning on the journey toward civility would be that of going to meet someone "halfway".