Considering the viciousness and divisiveness of our discourse today, we certainly do not exude the cooperative and increasing human development spirit that prevailed among ancient pioneers of deep thinking and knowledge such as that from Greek philosophy ranging from Thales, Stoics, and Skeptics, among others.
Those ancient philosophers and their scholars never subscribed to the “winner-takes-all” approach common nowadays. They were open to accept or build on the knowledge prior philosophers discovered. To them, it was never about self-gain primarily, but advancement of knowledge and human development.
We rarely see such interactions nowadays. If at all, the lines are drawn and people forced to be on polar sides of the debate, with no side willing to concede some aspects of truth from the other side to combine the best of both sides to develop better and useful knowledge.
Notwithstanding our divergent beliefs, but when considering even ancient authors of the canonical writings of the Old and New Testament Gospels, we can clearly see that those authors have demonstrated constructiveness in their knowledge and writings. None has ever criticized another author’s writings to advance theirs. We need not look further than topical discussions of today to realise that there is extreme divergence of views and hardening of hearts and attitudes towards those holding contrary views. Where did we lose it? By Nimroth Gwetsa, 30 September 2021.
Take any topic, from politics, economy, Science to social issues, there is bound to be fierce and uncompromising debate coupled with name-calling among participants. Intolerance is at such high proportions that debates stop short of just becoming violent. The more we learn and advance technologically, the more we seem regressing intellectually and emotionally.
May we revert to progressive approaches that enabled earlier human development and abandon this toxic division we are now witnessing?
Our differences of opinions is not because we do not necessarily comprehend the other side’s perspective, but that we are dealing chiefly with fear, pride and unbelief!
Fear, because, by agreeing with rival views in a “winner takes all” climate we live under, it would imply discarding everything else from our end to accept the opposing side’s views. Instead, to develop and progress as humanity, we need to harness ideas based on our pursuit of truth by taking good elements from all sides and discarding tainted and “unworkable” ideas. We should also avoid arguing about what the truth is. Truth is absolute and it is “that which is”. This idea of “your truth” versus “my truth” is nonsense! We should not equate truth to facts. Truth is indeed fact(s) but facts are not necessarily the truth.
For instance, a “witness” giving testimony in court saying, “I saw Joe stab Soap” and another witness saying, “I did not see Joe stab Soap” can both be telling the truth and having facts to back their claims. But when absolute truth is sought under specific context, some facts on one witness’ testimony, may not necessarily be true. Indeed, it may be true that Witness One did see Joe stab Soap and provide facts to that effect because the context then of that witness’ testimony is that they were present at the scene of the crime and saw and could remember “everything” that happened. Whereas Witness Two’s facts may be seen to be untrue and as non-evidence in the sense that they may not have been present at the scene of the crime, hence they did not see Joe stab Soap (thus their true evidence, albeit unhelpful), or that they were present, but did not actually see the act of Joe stabbing Soap. Either way, instead of pitting witnesses against each other in a winner takes all scenario, the best approach would be to take the best from both sides to determine the correct decision towards the (absolute) truth.
Pride is sometimes the reason people on opposite sides never agree on anything. In a winner takes all scenario, conceding to the other side could make one to think the other side is superior and one’s inferior. And knowing how class-conscious our society is, everybody wants to appear stronger, in control and superior to the other side to avoid being undermined and taken advantage of. Wrongly, humility is considered a weakness by some, and arrogance as assertiveness. One can be humble and sternly (assertive) without bullying and arrogance to get one’s way.
Pride has never been good for anyone, though we are normalising it nowadays. In the interest of being the “bigger one”, one must overlook those with excessive pride and let them have their glory, than one being resentful.
Unbelief is not lacking trust or faith, but refusal to believe despite the truth presented. It amounts to pure denial of truth despite convincing and undeniable evidence presented. Unbelief is a matter of conviction and not an intellectual or emotional one! It exposes one’s foolishness, and foolishness is not an intellectual but wisdom matter. Unless a blatant liar and narcissist, it appears the only way of changing such convictions is by the person living and experiencing severe adverse effects of their unbelief before regretting and changing their mind (hopefully).
Despite the underlying reasons, be it out of fear, pride or unbelief, such fierce polarity often stems from the desire for self-gain. Rather than facing losses or hardships of overcoming such losses, the easier route is protecting gains, even through unacceptable means.
We cannot sustain our mental well-being, much less life, with such hardness of hearts and attitudes. Let us go back to basics, call on truce and pursue (absolute) truth, rather than self-interests and hidden agendas. The vicious vindictiveness cycle will never end, unless we increase our wisdom and learn to be tolerant, understanding, and developmental oriented.
Though we may be in denial about it, ultimately, the root of all our fiercest debates lies in our spirituality! A topic for another day.
