Podcast |
It all comes down to fighting the Conditioned Response and/or the Confirmation Bias and/or the Reflexive Reactions that we're all susceptible to - in order to move a little closer to the big-t Truth. But just substituting one kind of knee-jerk response for another doesn't get us where we need to go either.
One suggestion: Everybody gets tired of trying to rebut the idiot emails they get from their "conservative" friends and in-laws. One solution is simply to stop rising to the bait, and instead demand the sender provide straight-up proof of whatever the email's about. Let the facts tell the story. And yeah, I know - some "conservatives" flat out deny the facts, or just make shit up. The direct challenge is still the best antiseptic for that. "What you can't prove qualifies as nothing more than a crock full of shit." One thing that comes in pretty handy is that I can look stuff up on my phone now and make 'em look foolish in public. I love that.
Something else that sticks in my brain is the idea that people are not just well conditioned in what they say, but also in what they hear you say in rebuttal. It's pretty apparent, but I think it bears repeating. And really, it's just the Straw Man thing, where they take what you say; turn it into something you didn't actually say; and proceed to tear it apart.
Whenever I'm arguing policy now, I'm trying to remember the thing about framing that George Lakoff talks about in Don't Think Of An Elephant.* If the listener is properly conditioned (ie: the frame of his thinking is set), then he'll hear and agree with whatever is said that fits that frame, and disregard or dispute anything that doesn't fit.
(*)
If your debate partner is at all "typical" of the total putz nozzles who pass for conservatives these days, then he's going to be in line with "The Sweeping Generalization" --government is bad. --poor people are just lazy. --taxation is burdensome and oppressive. --and on and on; We all know the drill. You make a point in criticism of something generic like Corporate Greed, and you can bet the rebuttal will be all about how you hate Capitalism, and how you want the gubmint to enslave the noble job-creators, blah blah blah. It has nothing really to do with the point you made, but it works if you don't recognize what he's doing, and if you don't then turn it back around by insisting that he address the actual point instead of the one he just pulled out of his ass.
Being aware that the other guy is only hearing what he wants to hear, requires me to improve my arguments and to improve how I make my arguments. If I can anticipate his reaction, I have the advantage.
But here's the real kicker: I'm not going to convince the guy I'm arguing with, and he's not the guy I'm really talking to. I'm talking to the people who are listening around the edges; the people who read the comments on facebook or the blogs, but never leave comments of their own. They're there looking for something that strikes them as reasonable. They're looking for something that rings true. Give it to them.
Another part of the ProLeft podcast had to do with keeping up with the machinery that produces the crap that too many people take for the truth.
Whatever you believe nobody cares
Whatever it is you think you know
Don't give a Goddamn
Reality is bullshit
Reflection is a concept
Based on your own fucked up ideal
Don't call it part of your faith
Another way you justify hate
Voices shouting under water
Drown you out, steal your air
Blinded by their own illusion
Through a crooked looking glass
Army of theives
Blood on their hands
Lightning, fire and brimstone
They'll say whatever they can
Conspiracy theories, Arrogant trash
They prowl alone and trvel in packs
[Chorus]
Vocies shouting in the water
Drag you down, steal your air
Dissolut, Diabolic
Snake oil salesmen everywhere
[x4]
People of the lie
Whatever you believe
Nobody cares
Idol worship, made of fantasy
Don't push your deity on me
Reality is bullshit
Reflection is a concept
Based on your own fucked up ideal
[x4]
People of the lie