N. T. Wright on how to get along

Q&A with N.T. Wright:

Esser: What advice would you give to us as a community to better work in an interfaith way with other denominations?

N. T. Wright: We make the distinction between ecumenical discussions, which are specifically between different ideas or Christian groups, and interfaith discussions, which would be, say, Christian with Muslim or Christian with Buddhist or Christian with Jewish, but whatever you are doing, I would say the primary thing is making friends. We Anglicans tried to do dialogue with the Romans by having theologians sitting around discussing dogmas, and of course, the first thing that happens is, “We believe this and you believe that,” the clashing. 

But actually, the best way of doing it is what I did as bishop in Durham, which was I got my opposite Catholic number and we played golf together, and then we got our clergy and we had a Catholic-Anglican golf game, which was great. Then we’d go out for dinner and have a pint of beer. At the end of the day, you’ve created a context within which other conversations are going to be much more healthy.

And I would say the same about working with a Buddhist group or a Jewish group or Muslim group. We say, particularly in our country at the moment, about Muslim communities that who knows what the next flashpoint is going to be globally or locally. It’s vital that, say, the Anglican vicar of the parish gets to know the local Muslim representative so that if there is something really bad that happens, they can appear on the street linking arms and saying, “Not in our name.” Doesn’t mean they’re agreeing about everything; they’re not. It just means they’re sending a signal to the community that we ought to be working together on this. So friendship.

  https://www.deseret.com/faith/2024/06/21/latter-day-saints-meet-nt-wright/

An organization called UNITE has developed what they call the Dignity Index. Their concept has a lot of promise.

Here's their explanation (https://www.dignityindex.us/about):

Ease Divisions.
Prevent Violence.
Solve Problems.

We formed UNITE in 2018 to find ways to help ease divisions in the country. In 2021, we began developing the Dignity Index, an eight-point scale for measuring how we talk to each other when we disagree. Our faith in the Index is grounded in a few core beliefs: 

• Contempt causes division; dignity eases division.

• If we put a spotlight on dignity and contempt, we will use more dignity and less contempt.

• If we show Americans how they can help ease our divisions, they will jump on it.

https://www.dignityindex.us/

THE DIGNITY INDEX

The Dignity Index is an eight-point scale that scores speech along a continuum from contempt to dignity in as unbiased a manner as possible. By focusing on the sound bites, not the people behind them, the Index attempts to stay true to its own animating spirit: that everyone deserves dignity.

The have several graphical resources that convey the principles of the Dignity Index. The're available here: 

https://www.dignityindex.us/resources

Here are some examples:

(click to enlarge)

(click to enlarge)

Dignity Principles:

1. Dignity is the inherent worth we all have from birth. We all deserve to be treated with dignity no matter what. 

2. Along with our survival instincts, the longing to be treated with dignity is the single most powerful force motivating our behavior. 

3. If we violate someone’s dignity repeatedly, we will get a divorce or a war or a revolution, because a desire for revenge is an instant response to a dignity violation. 

4. Treating people with dignity means seeing ourselves in them; treating people with contempt means seeing ourselves above them. 

5. When contempt tears us apart, dignity can bring us together, whether we’re talking about our friends, our family, our community or our country. 

6. Treating people with dignity helps bring out their best and discourage their worst. 

7. Treating people with contempt makes both sides angry, anxious and depressed. 

8. When we use contempt, we create enemies for ourselves and the causes we care about. 

9. Contempt gives us an addictive buzz, and people exploit our addictions to get rich, famous and powerful. 

10. When people use contempt, they claim noble motives because contempt needs excuses and disguises. When we expose contempt, it loses its power. 

11. When we put a spotlight on dignity and contempt, we use more dignity and less contempt. 

12. When we create communities that reward dignity and challenge contempt, we can change the culture. 

BYU conference June 20, 2024

BYU is hosting a conference titled "Becoming Peacemakers Through Supporting Religious Freedom and Pluralism."

The program is here:

https://religiousfreedom.byu.edu/program/

I'm happy to see all the participants, presentations and panels that are focusing on "no more contention" through clarity, charity and understanding.

Being part of a community

RFK Jr.: "An individual, like every nation, has a darker side and a lighter side. The easiest thing a politician can do is appeal to our dark angels—to our greed, our anger, fear... That is the most potent instrument for manipulation. It's much harder to do what my dad was trying to do. Which is to get people to transcend their narrow self interest and find a hero inside themselves and say we are part of a community here, we are a part of something larger."

Think again-faith again

We applaud a website called "think again-faith again" that offers suggestions about "What it takes to passionately disagree without being disagreeable."

https://www.thinkagain-faithagain.life/intentions/

The pursuit of clarity, charity and understanding can be enhanced with these intentions expressed on their website:

Six intentions for a fruitful conversation:

1. I will listen with respectful curiosity and offer the most generous interpretation of the intentions of others as I hope others will do for me.

2. I will avoid making grand sweeping judgements. Rather, I will connect what I hear and express to my life experience and beliefs. I will not speak on behalf of groups, institutions, or other individuals.

3. I will listen with resilience, “hanging in” when I hear something that is hard to hear and remembering that this conversation is about me understanding the other person, rather than persuade them.

4. I will share airtime fairly and refrain from interrupting others.

5. I will pass and let others pass if I or they do not want to comment.

6. I will honor the confidentiality of participants and conversations

The site hosts conversations and articles about how to achieve "no more contention."

Thomas Jefferson on friendship

Thomas Jefferson to William Hamilton, April 22, 1800

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. 

During the whole of the last war, which was trying enough, I never deserted a friend because he had taken an opposite side; & those of my own state who joined the British government can attest my unremitting zeal in saving their property, & can point out the laws in our statute book which I drew, & carried through in their favor. 

However I have seen during the late political paroxysm here numbers whom I had highly esteemed; draw off from me, in so much as to cross the street to avoid meeting me. The fever is abating and doubtless some of them will correct the momentary wanderings of their heart, & return again. 

If they do, they will meet the constancy of my esteem, & the same oblivion of this as of any other delirium which might happen to them. I am happy to find you as clear of political antipathies as I am...

https://www.loc.gov/resource/mtj1.022_0228_0229/?st=text

(click to enlarge)

WSJ - Disagreeing respectfully

An article in the Wall St. Journal offers some practical advice on how to disagree respectfully.

https://www.wsj.com/lifestyle/relationships/disagree-respectfully-conversation-how-to-746fee3b?mod=wsjhp_columnists_pos1

Excerpts:

There are many tough talks we need to have right now, about everything from the Israel-Hamas war to how to care for Mom as she ages.

Too often, we’re avoiding those productive and necessary conversations. When we do have them, we end up yelling at each other. We can just look at the unrest on college campuses to see what happens when discourse melts down.

It’s time to master the art of disagreeing—having a productive conversation when we’re passionate about a topic but our opinions differ. Experts in conflict resolution have advice that can help: Plan ahead. Actively listen. Discuss how to move forward.

...

Conversations tend to become heated because we’re wired to have a fight-or-flight response when we feel threatened, especially during times of chronic stress, psychologists say.

 “Our brains treat having our ideas attacked in the same way as if our body was being attacked,” says David Supp-Montgomerie, an associate professor of communication studies at the University of Iowa, who directs the school’s Civic Dialogue Initiative.

What can we do?

It’s OK not to talk about a topic if you think the conversation won’t be productive. Sometimes that’s the best way to preserve the relationship.

But if you’re up for a tough discussion, here’s some advice.

Prepare yourself and start off right

Set a goal. Do you want to explain how you feel, understand the other person’s point of view, or solve a problem? “It’s important to understand why you want to have the conversation in the first place,” says Supp-Montgomerie. 

...

When you begin the discussion, acknowledge up front that you may not agree but you want to talk so you can better understand each other.

Explain that you’d like to start by hearing the other person’s point of view. (Be sincere!) This defuses tension and shows that you’re on the same team.

Choose your words carefully. Use “I” instead of “you.” (Think: “I feel unheard.” Not: “You’re not listening.”) The word “I” comes across as less judgmental.

And avoid the word “but.” It negates what the other person said. Try the phrase “yes, and…” instead. Like this: “Yes, I agree with you, and…”  

Actively listen—and ask questions

Stop waiting for someone to finish a sentence just so you can have your say. Don’t interrupt. Really listen.

Summarize what the person said and ask if you heard it correctly. For example: “I heard you say you’re upset because you think I haven’t been helping take care of Mom enough. Am I right?”

Then ask deeper questions that get at the person’s values, rather than opinions. Some good ones: “What led you to feel so strongly about this?” “Do you have personal experiences you can share?” “Will you tell me more?”

The goal is to find common ground, says Mylien Duong, a psychologist and senior director of research at the Constructive Dialogue Institute, a nonprofit that teaches people across the political spectrum how to talk to each other. “There are always points of agreement, even if it’s as simple as you both wanting the conversation to succeed.”

...

Discuss your next steps

Ask the other person how he or she wants to move forward. And remember, it’s OK to agree to disagree.

If you learned something, say so. That’s both validating and reassuring, says Elizabeth Esrey, a professional mediator, who has worked with families, gang members and with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa after apartheid ended.

And thank the person for his or her willingness to talk.

“People are giving you the gift of their time even if they disagree with you,” Esrey says.

Mayer, of the NFLPA, has developed strategies for difficult conversations. He practices his message, cuts to the chase quickly and listens closely.

“The goal is not to ‘win’ the conversation, but to communicate important, if difficult, information in a way the other person can process and be heard themselves,” he says.

...

BYU research on conflict resolution

Thoughtful article here that discusses aspects of clarity, charity and understanding as opposed to convincing, misattribution, and confusion. 

https://magazine.byu.edu/article/blessed-are-the-peacemakers/

(click to enlarge)

The article opens with a perfect anecdote about having lunch with one's adversaries.

Excerpts:

BYU’s Center for Peace and Conflict Resolution—initially established to mediate conflicts between students and their landlords and now housed in the Law School, where it serves both campus and community mediation clients—is growing into a hub for faculty research and student education, a place to connect academic and spiritual thinking.

BYU Law dean David H. Moore (BA ’92, JD ’96) says that BYU has a key role to play “in a world that is rife with conflict”—from interpersonal disagreements to legal challenges to international strife. Here researchers “can combine academic study and the insights of the gospel of Jesus Christ to benefit the world in thinking about how we achieve peace.”

The good news is that, while disagreements are inevitable, we don’t just have to wing it, says Emily de Schweinitz Taylor (BA ’97, PhD ’24), former assistant director of the Center for Peace and Conflict Resolution and author of two books on mediation. “Instead of just going on all your intuition and prior experience, there’s research on what actually works,” she says. 

Taylor, Moore, Witesman, and other campus experts offer research-based and gospel-backed approaches to engaging in conflict and finding ways to disagree better. 

Struggle for struggle's sake

X post by Governor Cox of Utah:

Spencer Cox

@SpencerJCox

·

1h

Can’t stop thinking about this Francis Fukuyama paragraph from The End of History.

(click to enlarge)

The Peace Wall in Belfast, Northern Ireland

Today I visited the Peace Wall in Belfast, Northern Ireland. I was struck by one of the messages, taken from the film (not the book) of the Lord of the Rings.

(click to enlarge)

High walls might keep fear in check, but they don't lead to no more contention. 

The Peace Walls were constructed in an effort to reduce tensions in the city between the Loyalist and Nationalist communities. They are a reminder of the city's past conflicts during "the troubles."

(click to enlarge)

Toward the back of this photo I took, you can see how high the walls are.

Fortunately, the conflicts that raged years ago in Belfast have been resolved. 

We can all hope that social and interpersonal contention can also be resolved everywhere in the world. 

The main purpose of contention

The main purpose of contention is to make sure all the smart people don't end up on the same side.

Adapted from

Scott Adams

@ScottAdamsSays

·

23h

The main purpose of fake news is to make sure all the smart people don’t end up on the same side.

Einstein's rules

 

Happy Birthday to Albert Einstein!

Einstein's works revolved around three rules which apply to all science, problems, and times: • Out of clutter, find simplicity; • From discord make harmony; and • In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity.

Prof. Feynman

@ProfFeynman

·

13h