The Need for Nuance Is At An All-Time High

Have you ever been aware of a serious issue that you ignored or underestimated? Maybe it was a weird sound coming from the car engine or a strange change in health. You may have acknowledged that there was a problem but it seemed that time was on your side. Often times, those issues come to an unexpected climax rather suddenly and we realize just how foolish we were to believe that “time was on our side”.

Recently I’ve been faced with one such situation. I’ve known for a long time, as we all have, that our nation is deeply divided and that our public discourse is dominated by tribalism and misunderstanding. However, I generally assumed that this was the way it “always was” and would always be and there was no more cause for concern than existed in the fact that forest fires destroy nature and homes, and displace humans and forest creatures alike. Tragic, yes, but no more cause for alarm than it was fifty years ago or would be fifty years from now.

My tune has changed though. I no longer view national division and political and cultural tribalism as just another eternal, unavoidable ailment that lingers steadily. I’ve begun to see this as a growing problem. Forest fires may wreak nearly the same damage now as they did fifty years ago, but I am afraid that tribalism is much more alive and well (or at least out in the open) now than it was even thirty years ago.

I’m afraid that a great number of Americans, on both ends of the political spectrum, have given up on nuance, critical thinking, and open debate. We’ve settled into our trenches and we’re not afraid to shoot anyone who dares poke their head into no-man’s land.

We’re Sorry, Free Speech is Cancelled

On July 7, 2020, a number of prominent intellectuals and writers penned and signed their names to “A Letter on Justice and Open Debate“. The letter tackles the issue of “cancel culture” and the alleged attack on open debate and free thinking. The writers state, “We are already paying the price in greater risk aversion among writers, artists, and journalists who fear for their livelihoods if they depart from the consensus, or even lack sufficient zeal in agreement.”

They go on to say, “The way to defeat bad ideas is by exposure, argument, and persuasion, not by trying to silence or wish them away.” The point is made that free speech and free debate of ideas must be protected from both “repressive government [and] an intolerant society” and that writers cannot stand to make “any false choice between justice and freedom, which cannot exist without each other.”

Although the ranks of the left were well-represented among the signers, the signatories of the piece included people from diverse cultural and ideological backgrounds. The piece certainly originates with a left-leaning outlook and attitude and the likes of Noam Chomsky and Gloria Steinem contributed their digital John Hancocks. To even say that this letter was a united effort from liberals and conservatives would miss the mark terribly. But this actually makes the response to the letter even more disturbing.

The response was more controversy. And backlash. Many internet warriors on the left flank of the political spectrum took issue with the letter and the implications they perceived. In particular, they took issue with several signatories including Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling who has expressed disagreement with the transgender narrative.

Members of the transgender community criticized the letter based on Rowling’s signing and their perception that the letter was written to intentionally target the transgender community.

But that’s not even the basic crux of the matter. The bottom line is this: some writers got together and wrote an (arguably useless) open letter encouraging free thought, free speech, and open debate of ideas without threatening people with loss of jobs or livelihoods if they didn’t agree with the popular narrative of any given issue. They were essentially saying “we should be able to write and publish things that challenge or even offend some people, without fearing that we’ll face personal consequences.” And that position was violently criticized.

Which of course, reinforced the point the writers were originally making. This article offers a good analysis of the backlash and why it’s so shocking. Essentially, some folks on the political left said they wanted to speak/think freely and other folks on the left lost their minds.

The Abolition of the Middle

This was the wake-up call for me. I realized that we aren’t faced with an issue of division that can be remedied by “thoughtful, civil debate”. In fact, the potential for thoughtful, civil debate is disappearing faster than the Cheshire Cat’s grinning face. Considering the reaction that these liberal thinkers faced from their own echo chamber, imagine what kind of reaction would be unleashed on conservative thinkers who expressed the same principles: free thought and open discussion of ideas rather than censure!

It’s not just the left’s problem though. Conservatives are guilty too. Once you go far enough to the right it becomes dangerous to step out of line. Criticize Donald Trump? Think critically about immigration? Admit problems of racism in our society? That could be too going too far for a certain brand of conservatives.

There’s no more room in no-man’s land for anyone to be objective. We’re losing the ability to balance our views. We can now hardly acknowledge our President’s good accomplishments and call out his wrong turns and outright abuses of power at the same time. We can now hardly appreciate the efforts of people concerned about racial justice while rejecting Marxist ideology. We’re losing the ability to express nuanced concern for public health in the face of COVID-19 and for personal autonomy in the face of government overreach. It’s becoming clearer and clearer: the choice is one or the other. No nuance or balance will be tolerated. Rather than respecting nuance, our culture seeks to punish dissent from the fringe corners of the political spectrum.

Nowadays, you’ve got to be either blue or red. No more purple. Choose between black or white. There’s no more gray. You’ve got to be left or right. We’ve abolished the middle. Nuance, critical thought, and openness to new ideas is at an all-time low. The need for such things has never been higher.

This isn’t getting better anytime soon. In fact, it’s getting a whole lot worse. We’re losing the ability to empathize with (or even listen to) the “other side”. In fact, we’re losing the ability to acknowledge that there are more than two sides to a lot of the problems facing us. Heck, we can’t even agree on what those problems are!

We aren’t just characterized by division and tribalism. We’re characterized by a lack of willingness to listen, think critically, and responsibly engage with ideas. We are characterized by a dangerous poverty of nuance. To what end will this lead us? That’s a sobering question.

So What Now?

“Cool”, you say. “So, it’s becoming impossible to express a balanced perspective in our culture. The question is ‘what do I do about that?'”

That’s a question we certainly need to be asking. I plan to continue asking that question. In the meantime here are four strategies that I suspect would do us well as we fight for the middle ground we hope to stand on.

Strategy #1 – Listen.

This one is pretty simple, though not necessarily easy. It’s the strategy of actively listening to people. Not listening in order to form a response, but listening to truly understand. Empathize with people and understand that we are all chasing the same thing at the end of the day: peace, acceptance, and satisfaction.

Strategy #2 – Unplug.

That’s right. Log off Facebook and Twitter. Give your eyes and ears a break from the culture wars. They’ll be there when you get back. After all, they’re not going anywhere. Invest in the people right in front of you. Humanity has survived with local community and non-digital pastimes for generations. Take a nod from your grandparents’ generation and go do something outside. Build relationships with people over something other than opinions and current events.

Strategy #3 – Read a (long) book.

Somewhat akin to #2, this strategy prescribes ingesting “long-form” content. Take the time to read a long book and engage with the ideas. Challenge yourself intellectually. Read something that will take you a week (or two) to finish. Tolkien’s Ents, after all, don’t bother saying anything “unless it is worth taking a long time to say, and to listen to.” Be more like the Ents. Engage in long-form arguments from a variety of perspectives and apply critical thinking to the arguments that come across your path, regardless of whether they’re proposed by people in your “camp” or not.

Strategy #4 – Assume that people are as serious about their perspectives as you are.

We would all probably take offense at our perspective or worldview being folded up into a trite, shallow simplification. We have “good reasons” for believing the things we do, right? We have experiences, beliefs, perspectives, and values that inform our outlook and it’s not fair that they’re boiled down to a sound bite. That’s true. We all have employed nuance in reaching our own conclusions about things so let’s assume that others have as well. Let’s assume that people who disagree with us “have a good reason” for doing so. That’s not to say that they can’t be wrong and we can’t be right. Truth exists and there is a chance we are right and “they” are wrong (just as the inverse is also possible). But let’s not toss out opposing ideas with the assumption that the people that hold them are “ignorant” or worse, “deceptive”. Let’s assume that people who disagree with us are just as sincere and serious about their perspectives as we are.

Preserving Nuance

The preservation of nuance and thought diversity is key to the continued growth and survival of our free Republic. We’re losing the middle ground and tribalism is quickly becoming the only view we have going forward. We can do our part though by really listening to others with whom we disagree, removing ourselves from the tense digital battlegrounds that polarize us, taking the time to intellectually challenge ourselves, and respecting the sincerity and seriousness of those around us.