It Takes Two

Communication and compromise. Who and why? Two sides to an argument, issue, group, polity, or society. Two different opinions, two objectives to seek, two paths to take, two values to weigh, two views to see, two ways to go. Choice, decision, action, and accomplishment, depending on the balance and will of the two, may or may not require these to arrive at one. While communication and compromise may be desirable, they aren't always possible. One side may not be willing, whether due to inability to make a difference, or an ability to have it their way without it. One side may not be able, whether due to inadequacy, or that the other is unwilling under any circumstance.

Communication and compromise take two. Too often these are unsought and unwanted. Communication will be talking at and compromise be unacceptable, all the while complaining the other side won't listen or accept what they offer. If people won't listen to you, maybe it is because you have nothing worthwhile to say. If others prefer an echo chamber, perhaps it is they prefer the honest communication of their own to the lack of that of others and what passes as echos to you is actually diverse opinion. Are the subjects you choose the ones that interest you or ones that would interest others? If others don't communicate, perhaps neither do you. Do you listen to others or is it that everyone should listen to you? Can you identify and admit the weaknesses of your position or can you only fail to understand that of others? Do you seek contrary information to probe your own beliefs, or discount them offhand? Do you engage others or only complain about those who won't, or about how unfair their attacks are instead?

Communication and compromise, fonder in the breach than the fulfillment. Do you actually have anything you want to? Or do you just want an excuse not to? That's alright, time is precious. If people don't see it as productive, they probably won't. Just don't claim you do when you don't, that you will when you won't. That is only a wish to be ignored.

Beliefs and Speech

Most fail to doubt their beliefs but have nothing but doubt about those of others. They will claim modesty about what we know while not even recognizing their beliefs as beliefs, but just assume them without question. They will profess ignorance whenever there is a challenge to their beliefs while not examining their own to which they are blind. Everyone is blind in their own way, but some are better at recognizing this and trying to remedy this though not always succeeding. Are only the beliefs of others, only beliefs that would cause problems for your own, only beliefs that you wish were not true, the ones you doubt? What are you certain of that if not true would be most damaging to your own? True modesty means not just to doubt what we know, but to doubt that our doubt should take precedence.

Entertaining new beliefs leads to the possibility of error, while not leads to the persistence of it. Diversity of opinion should not be confused with tolerance of bad ideas. Opinions are worth what you pay for them and everyone has one. That does not mean they are equally valid or valuable, and so often those who complain about a lack of free speech are just pushing some bad ideas of some long dead philosopher to reinforce them in their ideas, position, and status, not to question or discuss them, for their interest is in promoting them, not examining them, nor engaging those of others on their merit, but of changing the subject and attention to their own.

Free speech is often not about free speech, but about forcing others to listen, distracting attention and diverting debate to themselves, assaulting others, and attracting adherents. Free speech and promotion go hand in hand and the first question of anyone should be why since the purpose is often disguised or unknown. Should speech be free? Yes. Does that mean it is without subterfuge and subtext, conscious or not? No. Does it mean others shouldn't respond to that? No. Does that mean others must listen and respond? No. Does that mean they must be allowed access to any avenue, event, and venue to promote it? No. The world is out there and those in any democracy have access to it. If your ideas are unpopular, just maybe there is a reason for that. Maybe you should ask yourself why.