Don’t look now, but the “Other Side” just might have a point

by B D Fenton 

Years ago I attended a remarkable presentation by Steven R. Covey (“7 Habits of Highly Effective People” – among his many bestsellers). One simple demonstration was very enlightening. He divided the audience down the middle with an imaginary line. He asked one half to close their eyes while he showed a black and white drawing (of a young girl) to the other half. He then reversed the procedure showing another drawing (of an old woman) to the portion of the audience who had closed their eyes the first time. After both sides had a chance to view ‘their’ picture he had everyone open their eyes and he showed a third drawing to the entire audience simultaneously.

The third picture was a composite of the first two pictures shown. However, because each side had been preconditioned to see the picture shown to them previously, it was not surprising that each side saw in the third picture only what they thought they had already seen. When he asked them what the third picture was, half of the audience said it was a young girl and half said it was an old woman.

Here is where it got interesting. Covey asked which it was and the two sides began to argue about it. Both were certain they were right. Some of the interaction became rather heated as the two groups disagreed. Covey then allowed members of the audience to come up onto the stage with a pointer to make their case – “here’s the forehead, here’s the nose, these are her lips”, etc.

As he encouraged each side to try to patiently explain their view to the other it gradually became apparent to all that the picture contained both images. When both sides began to realize that looked at one way, the picture indeed showed a young girl, but viewed another way it showed an old woman, he brought out the first two pictures. Immediately both sides recognized that because of a little preconditioning, when the third image was shown to them they still saw what they assumed was the same picture they had already seen. It was difficult for them to see anything else. Only after having it pointed out by someone from the ‘other side’ were they able to see what was really right there in front of them the whole time.

He made many worthwhile points that night, but the one that really rocked my world was: If you spend all of your time listening to people who agree with you, you will be more apt to just reinforce what you think you already know. However, listening to someone who disagrees may provide new information and instigate new perspectives. Now it seems pretty obvious, doesn’t it? Yet I had to have it demonstrated to really get it.

If you want to learn something new or gain a fresh perspective – if you want change - go talk to somebody who disagrees with you and try to understand their position. After listening, you still may not agree with them, but it will enlarge your world and at least open your mind and you will learn new and diverse ways of looking at things – changing you. Once you really understand why they believe as they do you may find your own position shift somewhat.

Over the years I have found this to be a profound truth and it has influenced many formulating opinions. As a result, I have learned new things and revised my position more than a couple of times. And each time I think I have improved my perspective. That of course, is the danger for idealogues and true believers – if they really listen and try to understand the opposition they run the risk of having to change their view as a result. Then the question becomes which is more important – the truth or their dogma?

Truth is where you find it. No one, but Providence has sole proprietorship. For the rest of us, keeping a reasonably open mind and learning as much as we can about a given subject is about the surest path. If we allow dogma or ideology to define our thinking – we impede our ability to learn. The moment we think we know the whole enchilada we cut ourselves off from acquiring any new information and our progress is impaired.

Although defined conceptualization is beneficial and necessary, rigid adherence can paradoxically restrict growth. Whoever controls the paradigm can directs the arguments into conveniently manipulated topics. Consider what is occurring today. The current political polarization in America is only a symptom of the contrived system developed and nurtured by our career politicians. It is promulgated by dumbing down the public via distilling complex issues into simple ‘either/or’ soundbites. Both parties want you on one side or the other. Membership in either of the “:two” is the key. It keeps us in the game and keeps them in office.

Thinking and voting independently is what our political leaders fear the most. They want to define the issues for us. They want to box us into one of the two camps by defining issues as “liberal” or Conservative” or “:Democrat” or “Republican”. Party hacks constantly push their party platforms claiming all elections are between the two packaged positions. The politicians, the establishment media and even most pundits champion one “side” over the other. Both routinely accuse each other of mental deficiency and heinous evil, but the arguments are kept between the two sides – always between the two because as long as they control the arguments and define the issues they will maintain their power and keep in office permanently.

Only by voting issues and people rather than by party platforms can the the deathlock the two parties have on American politics be broken. Only by casting votes un-restricted by party constraints can the people reclaim the ight to define the issues that are important to them. Remember, every American that refuses to walk a party line is a vote they do not influence or control.

Don’t let a political party or ideology define you. Make up your own mind. To really learn something new, take Covey’s advice and engage the opposition’, but instead of just trying to convert them to your view, try holding your brilliant arguments until you have really listened and understood theirs. Contrary to their ludicrous claims, neither party has the answers to all of the questions. You may find the other side does not consist solely of morons, nut-jobs, fringe thinkers and evil doers. In fact, don’t be too surprised if you encounter some surprisingly intelligent and reasonable arguments from unexpected sources.

Your world may be black and white now, but like my father told me when I was first starting out on my own,  “You are going to find there is a whole lot of gray out there” . Watching the same news broadcasts and reading the same blogs and periodicals or listening to the same radio programs all the time simply reinforce what you already know and believe. Break out of the mold and try new programs and sources of information. Seek out the websites and media outlets that the two parties villainize. At least check them out for yourself. See what they are saying. Chances are you will at the very least be exposed to new information, but maybe – just maybe – you will learn something new.