When we encounter a concept that doesn’t fit in to our belief system or preconceptions, why are we more prone to attack the person, rather than engage their idea? Recently, I was reading an online discussion about a church denomination’s position statement on a particular issue. The statement took a middle ground of saying that some authors who wrote on this topic had had useful ideas, while others’ writing contained ideas that were not historically orthodox. Nothing new there. Denominations are infamous for vague statements.
What intrigued me, however, were the response of the commenters. In pressing for more specificity about unorthodoxy, rather than ask “Which ideas?” most commenters asked “Which authors?” No one assumed an author might have some good ideas, as well as some bad ones. One disagreeable concept in an author’s writings made him a heretic, and therefore rightfully and easily dismissible. It was as if such a categorization would provide one with a convenient blacklist that could save one from the trouble of actually having to read the author and wrestle with their concepts.
This scenario is common outside of religious circles as well. Whether the debate is about religion, politics, or even a topic as seemingly innocuous as entertainment, we humans find heretics in all fields. We tend to pledge allegiance people rather than ideas. We often then buy into their whole package, with little critical thought. In conversations, we will willingly defend our favorite author, talk show host, or politician.
Conversely, when we are told that another person is on the wrong side of an issue, unorthodox, or heretical, our eyes skip over anything in quotation marks after their name and we reach for the remote whenever they appear on television. Sometimes, we go further and dismiss other people who associate with them, endorse their books, or who mention them in the footnotes of their own books.
I understand that ideas do not spring out of the ether. I’m as postmodern as the next guy, so I appreciate understanding the context and source of ideas. I also value character and realize that an idea can be rightfully criticized if its proponent doesn’t actually practice it. Yet, I also know that I am a blend of both good and bad ideas. My positions are often a mix of orthodoxy and heresy, be it in religion, politics or musical taste. Often my in-ness or out-ness is determined by which one people discover first.
I am reminded of the saying, “Great people talk about ideas. Average people talk about things. Most people just talk about people.”
We have much to learn from everyone. Have you ever learned something important from someone who was “on the other side”? Conversely, have you ever regretted not engaging with the ideas or having a relationship with someone whom your like-minded friends labeled as a “heretic”?
If this gets you thinking – great. If not, well ... just add me to your “do not read” list.
Comments