I hate pickles. I know, I know… that’s not really an appropriate use of the word “hate.” But it’s true; I hate them.
As an adult who desires to be at least perceived as semi-mature most days, I confess to hiding the depth of my loathing. If the watching world knew that I’ve totally caved to hating something with a passion — that is based solely on my own perspective and experience — and has been steadfastly fueled by the other secret pickle haters out there in existence — I know I’d be subject to rampant disrespect.
And yet, my hate continues.
But wait; it gets worse…
Not only do I hate pickles, when I observe someone else ordering “extra” pickles or ordering those stinkin’ fried pickles as some sort of desired, tasty appetizer, I cringe inside. I have zero comprehension how someone I otherwise admire could adore something that I do not. I have no idea how their taste buds and logic could allow them to even entertain the idea of eating “extra.”
Geesh.
The reality is (confession time, friends) that sometimes — instead of only offering a thinly-veiled, judgmental stab at why abstaining from pickles is far better for the soul — I go one step further; my hatred alone is not enough. So instead of advocating for pickle abstinence, instead of simply stating why I feel the way I do, I go after the person who feels the way I don’t. In a calm quiet, logical argument, I tear apart the pickle eater. I demonize the opposition.
Recently on the Intramuralist, we’ve found a bit of strong commonality — a thread woven into the lives of many, regardless of the perspectives from which we individually hail. Collectively, the masses seems to agree that the “I’m-mad-as-hell-and-not-going-to-take-it-any-more” rant is not an attractive articulation. In fact, it is quite possible that it has the exact opposite effect than what’s desired; instead of spewing the opinion in a way that wins friends and influences people, it only influences people in a non-positive way.
Cognizant of my very true pickle example, I’d like to go that step farther today. I believe it’s significant.
There’s another kind of articulation that is equally unattractive. It may be absent the zealous rant of our “mad-as-hell” folks. The passion may also seem dampered and enthusiasm subdued. But make no mistake about it; judgment still often drives the argument.
As opposed to that list of things that are universally considered right and wrong (note: there are at least 10 of them, starting with having no other self-created gods), why is articulating our own opinion not enough?
Why do so many spend so much energy tearing into another instead?
Does our opinion not stand alone?
Will another poke holes in our argument, so much so that we cannot substantiate it via reason and compassion?
And why do we have trouble resisting judgmental stabs at another?
My sense is that too often we attempt to make ourselves look better, sound wiser, and be of increased influence by demonizing the perspective of others as opposed to engaging in healthy, interactive, respectful dialogue. An added few, semi-random points: no rant will ever qualify as dialogue; no unwillingness to listen will ever gain full respect; and demonizing of opposition rarely equates to wisdom.
This is a hard one, friends.
Off now for a snack. For the record, it may be me in front of you in line who respectfully requests that they withhold the briny green relish. But I’m working on not adding the word “hate” or “slimy” to my order. I’m also working on remembering that such is based solely on my own perspective and experience.
Respectfully…
AR