Understanding and Respect:
Practical Applications in November 2020 and Beyond
I.O.U. - Currently this page is very under-developed, but I've already listened to MANY video resources in youtube, and later I'll link to some of them in this page.
Currently the only section that is fairly well developed, with more content, is about peace-making efforts by some churches and, more generally, Christians in politics.
My original page-introduction began by saying "This page supplements my home-page about Understanding and Respect that explains how a high school teacher helped us learn that..." and continues like this.
This section has gray text because (as explained in the page-beginning IOU) it's extremely rough and underdeveloped, but later it will be better.
I won't say much more here, will just link to some of the MANY pages & videos you can find about these topics and related topics.
Cognitive Dissonance - A Crash Course - Khan Academy - admit wrong? (5:31) - many (short) - many (longer) -
- 12 Cognitive Biases Explained -
Confirmation Bias: many (short) -
Wikipedia pages: cognitive dissonance - confirmation bias - rationalization - cognitive biases - fallacies - common misconceptions - in-groups & out-groups -
in Psychology Today: rationalization - confirmation bias - cognitive dissonance - cognitive biases - fallacies.
from many sources: cognitive dissonance - confirmation bias - rationalization - cognitive biases - fallacies - misconceptions.
groupthink - tribalism -
GROUPS -- Compared with --- individuals, I didn't say much about groups, because the interactive dynamics of groups is complex, and I still have a lot to learn before I try to write more about it. [use part of full paragraph, with comparison of groups-vs-individuals, re: complexity]
psychological benefits, for improved self-image and better relationships within personally-valued groups
rationality -- epistemological [scout], instrumental functional utilitarian
preference for A (not B) is ok, but if refuse to accept B even if strong evidence-and-logic, self as lawyer-and-judge
graph of despair -- usually education doesn't help, because polarization (for views on climate change) is most among people with high scientific literacy
conceptual ecology
Over-Confidence by Individuals and Groups: The main page describes appropriate confidence and how Understanding and Respect can be reduced by "people being over-confident about the logical justification for their own personal views, and the views of their in-groups. Why does this happen? and how?" Then I describe a few of the many ways a person can become overconfident: when their cognitive dissonance is reduced by view-adjustments, rationalization, confirmation bias, shifting the burden of proof. Some interactions within (and between) groups is described earlier.
scout & judge: iou - soon (by mid-May) there will be resources about Julia Galef, and more generally about scouts & judges, etc
do clever and kind go together? –
The final part of the main page is about "Monday plus Tuesday" education; one activity is debates where students are asked to argue for each of two (or more) positions. Eventually I'll have a list of debate topics that include this one:
For example, a high-level version of this classroom activity is a recent debate tournament when the topic was "Medicare for All" and in different rounds a team was arguing sometimes for it, but sometimes against it. Therefore, students were highly motivated to know "the best information and arguments [and counter-arguments] that both position-views [pro & con] can claim as support." The main pros & cons are described in these videos, along with tips for skillful debating. {iou – later I'll choose a few shorter overviews for links, but so far my favorite is thorough but long [1:29:29] by the coach for MSU (Brett) and a national champion (Mia), plus some intelligent comments by viewers.}
There also is an interesting interview with the two members of a national "winning pair" with them discussing their cooperative debating strategies, planning what each of them would do, with a combining of pre-event preparations plus real-time improvising.
Peace-Making Efforts by Some Christians
Generally, I'm hoping that more people will help us improve our mutual understanding and respecting.
In the community of fellow Christians, among pastors & churches & members, some (but not all) are helping do this. For example,
Can Democrats and Republicans Live Together in Peace in September 2016 (during a divisively polarizing election season) by Rich Nathan, senior pastor of Vineyard Columbus, a large theologically conservative church in Ohio. {note: theologically conservative is not necessarily politically conservative, because the term “conservative” has many meanings.}
Politics and Faith: Before another polarizing election in 2020, theologically conservative Blackhawk Church (mainly “white” but having relationships with “white” churches, with 5,000 attendees in a city of only 260,000, in Madison WI, home of UW and Wisconsin's capital) did a two-part series about Politics and Faith, with Part 1 by Chris Dolson (senior pastor from 1994 until now) and Part 2 by Matt Metzger (senior pastor beginning July 2021) on Oct 25 and Nov 1. Here are some timings:
for Part 1, introduction by Michael Knapstad (27:00), then Chris Dolson (message 29:14-108:38 → 39:24), worship music (Jesus at The Center of it All,...), Michael K (115:07-118:45);
for Part 2, introduction (at 26:29), then (28:31) Matt Metzger, starting with a personal story, followed by his main content 32:03-107:12, including five currently-relevant prayers starting at 101:27; music; wrap-up (112:37-115:20);
Both messages are designed well, in content & style, so I highly recommend listening to Chris and Matt. But FWIW (and it's less than you'll get from hearing the full messages) if you want a quick overview, here is a summary of main ideas from Part 1: in 2020, instead of a typical distribution of views (with most people “near the middle” and mild interest), more people have separated themselves into groups on a left-extreme or right-extreme, with intense interest, so instead of the usual bell-shaped curve (like an inverted U, ⌒ , with one peak in the middle) it's bimodal (like an M, with two peaks on the sides); the Bible is political (by urging people to care about important practical things in the lives of individuals and in society) but it isn't over-simplistically “political” as when a person “chooses a party” and then “over-confidently fights for the superiority of everything in the package deal offered by their political party” {a statement about politics and Blackhawk Church adopted by church elders in 2008}; Jesus is political because He cares about "important practical things in the lives of individuals and in society"; the POLITICS of Jesus include... a special concern for the marginalized (poor, homeless, ill,...)* and also concern for the unborn; the STYLE of Jesus included an emphasis on caring about other people and serving them, as illustrated by his washing of their feet in John 13. {* in two thousand verses, throughout the Bible we see a frequent-and-strong emphasis on helping the poor – e.g. 100 verses} {a reminder: the message by Chris Dolson is MUCH better than my summary.}
Part 2: IOU – Later, I'll do a real summary. For now, here are two main ideas: unity among Christians (John 13,17), treating everyone with kindness & respect, only bold-highlighted sentence in intro-blog for Politics and Faith, "What does it mean to be first and foremost Christ-followers before anything else?" which means putting politics below being a follower-of-Christ, in our priorities.
The term “conservative” has many meanings; instead of thinking-and-speaking in ways that are sloppy & confusing, we should try to communicate with precision, as in distinguishing between theologically conservative (defined in various ways) and politically conservative (also defined in various ways). {iou - later, this paragraph will have a little more content}
"two thousand verses deal with the issue of the poor in Scripture" -- https://tifwe.org/what-the-old-testament-says-about-poverty-and-riches/ -- 2000 verses about poor -- rick warren & institute -- sojourners -- 100 (open bible) / it's emphasized often throughout the Bible — in 2,000 verses of the Old Testament & New Testament — frequently and strongly, in
Christian Politics: Although some people claim to know The Christian Way to Vote (for The Christian Political Party), among Bible-believing theologically conservative Christians the votes are split. For example, in 2016 most white evangelical Christians (81%) voted for Trump, but most black evangelical Christians (96%) voted for Clinton. Therefore we can ask Why do White Christians Vote Republican, and Black Christians Vote Democrat? and why did both voting patterns change between 1860 and now?
Here are views, by some Christians, about one question:
should Christians support Black Lives Matter? by Allen Parr, is a video (12:48) and to summarize its content I've divided it into sections: intro (starting at 0:00); reasons to not-support the organization, because it wants to defund police (1:22), promote gay lifestyles (3:06), and criticize biblical family structure (5:18); reasons to oppose the organization but support the principles (7:07), then (7:59) why we should emphasize specifically that Black Lives Matter more than generally All Lives Matter (yes we all agree, but...) including an excellent cartoon-with-comments (10:44); conclusion (12:05) and post-talk farewell (12:48 to 13:22). / similar ideas are in Matt Chandler's brief summary (1:48), recommending "look for the light, while you reject the darkness" (1:49) but I was disappointed in the un-peacemaking comments by some viewers who ignored his acknowledging of some "darkness" and saying "reject the darkness," instead they seem to want him to say “it's all darkness” with nothing good; T.D. Jakes - Addressing Black Lives Matter (12:11) on Trinity Broadcasting Network, which is theologically conservative and also politically conservative; here I say "also" because theologically conservative and politically conservative are not the same, so instead of simply saying "I'm conservative" a person should state whether they mean theologically conservative or politically conservative, or both; by contrast with the previous videos, John MacArthur (1:55-9:19) doesn't like the org so he rejects everything; Pastor Nelson (of Bible Munch, speaking for GotQuestions.org) says (5:59) "there is no point discussing either statistics (why not?) or the details of specific cases (why not?) due to "dueling statistics" and the entrenched positions of most people (but why don't we try to un-entrench people by improving their understandings?), and criticizes the BLM organization (as has every video above), supports "peaceful protests against racial injustice" but says Christians should never be involved in rioting, looting, violence against police, or hateful speech, or racism against non-blacks (almost everyone who generally supports BLM agrees with this), says "all Christians should be in full support of ‘black lives matter’ as a concept," but we should oppose the organization's "hijacking" of this concept; more about the BLM organization (2:55) from the secular Heritage Foundation; these videos cover the basic ideas, but later I may link to others if I can find some with new perspectives.
I.O.U. – Later, my paragraph about the many meanings of conservative will also include some of these ideas: how should we define theologically conservative? by trying to determine what the Bible teaches and believing it? or believing traditional teaching (but of which sect? Roman Catholic? Eastern Orthodox? protestant? (reformed? anabaptist? baptist? methodist? or another of more than 30,000 denominations); political conservatism can mean laissez faire economics (with limited control of capitalism), less regulation on business, anti-communism, lower taxes, less government action in welfare programs; conservative libertarians who want LESS government control (in most ways, in areas ranging from economics to personal actions) can clash with social conservatives — with goals that can be based on preserving "traditional" social norms (for what aspects of which cultures?), or sexual norms, or other cultural traditions & expectations — who may want MORE government control (as with abortions).
sometimes the many meanings (of conservative, liberal,...) produce strange mixtures in coalitions -- e.g., Republicans embracing libertarian small-government hands-off inaction for welfare, but big-government hands-on intrusion for abortion. {package deals and coalitions}
My original page-introduction began by saying "This page supplements my home-page about Understanding and Respect that explains how a high school teacher helped us learn that..." and continues like this: "if we want accurate understanding we should get the best information and arguments that all position-views can claim as support. When we did this, so we understood more accurately and thoroughly, we usually recognized that even when we have valid reasons for preferring one view, people with other views also may have good reasons, both logical and ethical, for their choices, and this helped us develop respectful attitudes."
In the home-page, I explain the "Monday plus Tuesday" instruction used by our teacher, along with comments about postmodern relativism (he opposed it, and so do I), plus hostile polarization (that hinders understanding & respect), and two of the factors (important principles, interpersonal pressures) that tend to increase polarization. / Also, I describe the relational value of empathy-and-kindness; plus appropriate humility — with a logically-justifiable appropriate confidence that is not too little, not too much — and psychological biases that lead people (as individuals, and especially in groups) to motivated reasoning in which they over-estimate the rational justifiability of their own views, and under-estimate the rational justifiability of other views; and instruction that can promote understanding & respect, with enjoyable-and-productive communication, encouraging students to be clever (by effectively using evidence-based evaluative thinking) and also kind (with empathy-based compassion).
I.O.U. - Maybe some of these ideas (in the gray box) will be included in the page about Understanding & Respect. [[ Because I live in the USA and I began writing this page in early-November 2020, some of these ideas & resources are about politics, but "people in general, in any area of life" is the usual situation. ]] [[ In many ways, the group is encouraging its members to be unkind. {originally this sentence, and later the one that follows, were part of a transition to "Empathy and Kindness" in the left-side partner page so it will be revised to fit in this intro} Hopefully one long-term result [of monday/tuesday instruction] is that students will want to be more kind, to reduce their win-lose thinking — when this is possible (and it usually is, especially in the long run) — that is based on assuming a zero-sum game, to instead aim for achieving an optimal win-win result. ]] [[ but... sometimes for important issues an "us-versus-them warfare" seems necessary, especially when an outcome must be either win-lose or lose-win, as in an election; but even when the election itself is win-lose, other aspects of the election process can be approached so the result is more win-win and less win-lose or lose-lose. ]] [[ pros & cons, benefits & drawbacks, for those within a group and outside it -- hostile, confrontational tribalism ]] [[ why we should avoid a fuzzy postmodern relativism that claims "all views are logically valid & morally good", why we should aim for a reasonable balance (between overly-harsh criticism and no criticism) when we're evaluating different positions on controversial issues ]]
[[ maybe use this after my paragraph about enjoyable-and-productive communication? with this intro -- That's my optimistic hope. Unfortunately, we have reasons for pessimism because some people (young & old) sometimes are unkind. One example is bullying, in-person or in social media with call-out culture doing online shaming ]] a person who is is "woke" is aware of social injustices {but now this is sometimes used to ridicule people} / Now chiefly: alert to racial or social discrimination and injustice / Technically, going by the Merriam-Webster dictionary’s definition, woke means “aware of and actively attentive to important facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)”, but today we are more likely to see it being used as a stick with which to beat people who aspire to such values, often wielded by those who don’t recognise how un-woke they are, or are proud of the fact. |