The tidings of the election last year covered me in overwhelm. I saw a multitude of voices standing tall, pushing our individuality into shoved perceptions. I’d see friends press friends into molds—fluidity squeezed out. A glimpse of this terrifies me. I worry about what was brought to the surface, then what rose in our nature.
Through this all, it seems truth grows with an inconceivable amount of layers. Seems our awareness often does not. The gap between the size and what we each can hold is unimaginable. We have no choice but to contort, framing that which appeals to us. We all have natures and propensities—conscious or not—we often project them as righteousness: we are the voice of morality!
Negligence
Attempting to place ourselves, seems we are constantly performing a parsing of synthesis—integration of information. Odd how information so similar can produce contradictory appearing images amongst us. Yet all positions within the spectrum are seduced by certainty. Tensions surround us if (and when) we indulge. In certain times they rise — during elections, war, divorce, everyday disagreement, and culture clashes.
It’s not disagreement that worries me. It’s the gross negligence we all practice in it. Seems we persistently neglect the depth of the other we are splitting against. I believe our tendency to neglect is reinforced by the cognitive dissonance we prompt by capitulating to our desire for a clear vision of reality. We aren’t strong enough to hold the weight of more. Rather than admit our incapacity, we reduce the load. This all creates what feels to be contradictions; we leave no room for space.
Sometimes in our weakness, we mock those whose picture is colored differently. It’s painful to witness. Inflammatory headlines. Personal attacks. This election, from both directions, was consumed by an embarrassing amount of this. It seems to cycle this way every four years.
Loss
Our negligence weaves us each a blanket of unneeded loss. It has been knitted through the false tensions we purport. You hear it in lines like “He or she said this, did this, which means this of him or her, and you align with him or her, so you are that.” See the leaps here? See the careless attribution of values to actions? Our eyes are covered, tucked in layers of unneeded loss. Just a microscopic gap being filled would lessen or even untie this association, extinguishing the attribution. If only they could see it. I feel disappointed knowing all of the loss. Catastrophic.
I can’t help but empathize with the negligence. Some may have had traumatic experiences with certain lenses. Some have been hurt by either political party, or close family members have. They cannot even glance in the direction. Filling gaps would take away that which keeps them safe. Unfair to expect them to not have a tendency to follow — it’d go against their deepest instincts.
There are other forces at play. We all seem skewed towards certain types of perspectives. Personally, I tend to put myself in situations, debates, conversations, that I know I do well in. I tidy up my perspectives into one I know I can defend well. The draw can be so strong it can block other angles, leaving one deep but not wide. I attempt to fight this tendency.
If you are strong, convincing, in your perspectives, you might block perspectives for those around as well. They can resonate with you and your language so strongly, they cannot imagine otherwise. It’s terrifying. Risking this blocking seems unavoidable in some dimension, if you are one to speak. I risk it even in writing this! I hope you can hold what I am saying as itself a shade of truth and a perspective. Shoot, that still asserts a perspective. I suppose there is no hope in avoiding this…
Gaps
It truly is scary to attempt to broaden one’s perspective. So much misunderstanding and misapplication to risk. Yet I feel compelled to try to fill the emerging gaps I see. Approaching I consider what form, tone, ideas, language, or connectivity might support those around to understand further. There often is more overlap amongst parties than I expect. They sometimes require a widely different presentation. Often it’s different than the one that feels sensuous, empirical to me. Sometimes I must fight my intuition. Wholehearted attempts to bridge lenses (for me) start through attempts at thorough understanding of the other.
Not always is progress made when attempting to get others to broaden their perceptions. If you do succeed, I’d like to note a few risks. I believe if you (miraculously) can help others see more angles, you should be careful about your confidence to fully grasp your holding of the truth, while not sacrificing yourself. In other words, be cautious if you notice those around you listen. Watch that you are as aware, clear-eyed, in your own beliefs as you think you are. Balance this caution with not losing your perspective in timidity. I also believe you should be cautious that the meta-truthful — above immediate truth and overall aligned with self — action would be to speak what you believe to be a fuller picture of the truth. Consider if getting those around to see would actually move their understanding further. Consider the directionality it might push their perspective (adjusted to their propensities) if you get them to understand. Would it do well for them? Where would it place them?
Understanding
I believe that the goal of trying to converge on perceptions of truth (and it’s exhausting distinctions) is to fight for a shared and individual closer-to-understanding grasp of it. This can widen the frames we have no choice but to hold others in. When breakthroughs bridge together, we can highlight our imperfect threads and subsequent imperfect pulls on our perspectives.
I hope this perspective is helpful. I try to keep myself to it in times like this. Often, I fail.