The Great Divide
(Page 3 of 3)
November / December 2007
interview by Julie Hanus
There have to be ground rules or it’s not going to work. No personal attacks. In England, if someone says something you think is foolish, you say, “That’s rubbish.” You’re not attacking the person, you’re attacking the idea.
RELATED CONTENT
The story of an American song catcher...
The Power of Talk July August 2002 Issue By Jay Walljasper, Utne Reader CONVERSATION IS THE CORNES...
The man behind the '90s microbroadcasting explosion...
Stephen Carter on Writing July 26, 2002 Julie Madsen Stephen Carter on Writing, Robert
...
Stephen Mitchell January/February 1995 Utne Reader Stephen Mitchell borrows the voices of t...
That still seems confrontational to me.
In the United States, people fail to see the distinction between attacking an idea and attacking a person, and they tend to be more offended. But if I say, “I think we can win this Iraq war,” and you say, “That’s a stupid idea,” that’s different than if you say, “That’s just because you’re a crazy right-winger.”
It’s so easy not to deal with an actual idea and instead just say, “Oh, you’re repressed, you’re a Marxist, you’re a whatever.” Don’t make it personal. There has to be restraint for conversation to succeed.
And what good comes from making the effort?
We have a tendency to become intellectually complacent, to get in a rut, so to speak. You need to meet people who will jar you, who will question your ideas. It’s difficult, but it’s also very difficult to change intellectually.
Why take time just to vent an opinion? In real conversation, you get a range of opinions, and that’s fun and exciting. Think about spending a good time with a bunch of friends: You don’t remember exactly what you said, but it’s exhilarating.
Page:
<< Previous 1 |
2 | 3 |