Do We Know How "The Other Side" Really Thinks?

Hurricane Katrina is a reminder that none of us sees reality. Fortunately, our human capacity to reason allows us to get outside of our subjective perceptions to achieve a degree of objectivity if we choose to do so -- to visit the perceptual worlds of others and achieve something akin to an unbiased view. The trouble is that not many of us devote the time and effort to do this. And so we sink deeper and deeper into our own perceptual sphere. This is what has happened to our leaders and, as if infectious, to so many of us as well.

As a debater and life-long student of persuasion and negotiation, I learned early on that no one wins an argument without a deep understanding of how the other side thinks. No matter how right or persuasive we consider our ideas, we preach only to the choir if this understanding is absent. So does this mean we need to truly understand George Bush's view of the world and those who advise him? Couldn't hurt. When Laura Bush says, "I live with him. I know him," she is telling us that we only see him through the haze of our own subjectivity. She sees him as a good man, and since this designation is always relative, he may well be a basically good man. In any case, he and his supporters are in power and -- rant and rave as is every American's right -- very little will change until comprehension of his thinking and that of his staunch supporters is achieved and used as the starting point from which to encourage change. The whole liberal-conservative debate can be analyzed from two competing views – one with a first-order argument of fairness and another with a first-order argument of appropriateness. Put two people in a room with these two basic opposing views, as I have, and they'll end up shouting at each other unless and until they locate the basis for their differences and one, the other or both begin to link their ideas to the foundation to which the other so strongly clings.

My son asked me the other day why we celebrate Columbus Day when there is considerable evidence that he did not discover America. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing! One answer is habit. Another is that we don't want to tamper with what we've committed ourselves to in educational circles or we're just lazy. Then there's the argument that he came awfully close and the question "Why tamper with something that's working?" Much of history is based on habits of thinking. So too is much of politics. In many cases habits of thinking are so entrenched that they seem infallible. Most of us, including our leaders, don't like to use much of our brains. We're miserly thinkers, not wanting to expend much energy to question ourselves. In times of crisis, this habit is particularly dangerous. Errors are made that cost lives.

In order to truly serve the suffering people of Katrina, we need to take a deep collective breath in this country. We need to ask what firmly held perceptions are governing our decisions and those of "the other side." What belief or attitude, for example, supports the forced evacuation of people from their homes? Such may be the right course, but we should be clear on what prompts us to do it. What reasoning stops the flow of checks to those in need? Why do we keep people in positions of power even when their abuse of it is obvious? What prompts us to accept political spin even in times of tremendous despair? What are the mindsets evoking these events? Bring them to the fore. Let's examine them. Then we'll have a shot at making a difference in the future of a great country.