Conversation Is All We Have

First published on June 23, 2020

Conversation, on some level, is all we have for facing the great challenges of our age. At the very least, it is a fundamental component of solving any significant societal problem. Almost no notable challenge that our societies face in the present day can be 'worked out'. They are, instead, what a complexity theorist might call a 'wicked problem'. Move one piece and three others move, change one thing and fifteen more things change.

To effect societal change, then, we have to have conversation, and in societies with incredible access to information and differing interpretations, we need to be able to have conversations between people who disagree.

And this is to be encouraged. Think about a human head as a sense-making system. If you have one eye, you can see things. But one eye doesn't show us EVERYTHING. Add a second eye, and we can see more and have a greater understanding of what is happening in front of us (we gain depth perception, for example). But, having two eyes isn't as useful as having one eye and an ear. An eye and an ear gives us a far greater sense of reality than two eyes or two ears. Add in two of each, plus touch, taste and smell, and we have a system designed to grasp reality far better than it could have with only one sensory organ.

Human society can be looked at like this (h/t Jordan Hall): how do we have the conversations so that we are picking up the new information, the signal, that each of us is holding, and let go of the noise and static that each of us is holding. And, remember, we're far better off with two senses, working together, which sense different inputs.

To bring it back to the idea of conversation, we are better, with a plurality of worldviews listening to each other as we try to make sense of the world.

It's hard to have a conversation about complex things, but these conversations are - on some level - all we have for working through the problems our societies face. So beware the things that shut down conversation.

Conversations seeking the truth and new ideas are like a statue: it takes a lot to create it and only an idiot with a hammer to smash it to pieces. You only need one person who wants to derail conversations seeking the truth in order to derail them. Don't be that person, and ask others not to do the same. Notice how you and others derail them, and make sure you aren't using those tactics.

Be aware of the way you work as a human. What are the parts of you that have evolved but aren't fit for the complexity we live in, that you need to be aware of?

Assume the best of the other people around you: what if they are all good people, who have thought about what is going on a lot, and have something interesting to say? What if everyone is partially right?

Beware the ways our social selves have evolved: we are groupish creatures, which is probably what has enabled the primates we are to create such enormous societies. And, we have circuits which get confused. Where are your religious circuits getting tripped, leading you to see those who disagree as people committing heresey? Where are your 'stay in the in-group' circuits being tripped, leading you to say what you think should be said so you're seen as a 'good person', rather than saying what you really believe to be true?

Above all, in moments where societies' conversations are breaking down, it's up to all of us to take responsibility for the conversations around us. We can't all do be our most skilful selves in conversations all the time, because we're human. But if we all try to do it all the time, the regularity with which some of us will get it right will increase.