How to Have Productive Conversations in a Polarized Culture
Have you seen the internet lately? It’s kind of rowdy out there.
The first half of 2020 brought things like COVID-19, protests over police brutality and racism, and widespread rioting and looting. Oh, and there’s supposed to be a presidential election in November. That should be … interesting.
Every new issue only further exposes how polarized our society is. We’re so sharply divided on everything that we can’t even agree about Aunt Jemima. And when people are polarized, civil conversations are as endangered as the giant panda.
As Christians, is it possible to engage friends, family, and neighbors in productive conversations for the sake of the gospel in 2020?
It depends. You’re only ever half of the equation, but you can certainly try.
“If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all.” - Romans 12:18
Perhaps the most effective way to engage peaceably with others is to ask questions. Here are some valuable practices I picked up from a book called Tactics, by Greg Koukl.
Ask Questions
Questions are the Swiss Army Knife of your conversation gear. Koukl’s basic rule is this: Never make an assertion when a question will do. Consider a few of the benefits to asking questions.
It’s a basic principle that you can’t communicate with someone who is moving away from you. Solution: Ask an engaging question in a friendly way to draw people into meaningful conversations. (Just don’t act like a lawyer cross-examining a witness.)
Many of us avoid jumping into deep or controversial conversations because we feel uneducated or unprepared. The beauty of questions is that you don’t need any prior knowledge to wield them. You only need genuine curiosity.
Speaking of curiosity, questions are flattering because they show interest. And a keen observer once noted that interested people are interesting people.
Asking questions allows you to proactively steer the conversation.
When a conversation hits a roadblock, the right question can get things moving again.
When you use questions, you’ll walk away knowing more than you did before.
Here is a progression of three kinds of questions to use.
1. Gather information by asking, “What do you mean by that?”
Everyone knows what happens when we assume.
“If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame.” - Proverbs 18:13
So avoid misunderstanding and misrepresenting the other person by inviting him to clarify, define, and explain. This also challenges your friend to be more thoughtful and precise.
“Can you give me a few specific examples of the kind of systemic injustice you have in mind?”
Talking about specifics (like lending practices, prison sentences, or economic disparities) will always be more valuable than talking about vague or ambiguous concepts.
Or you might learn something new. I assumed “systemic injustice” had to do with unjust laws that codified injustice (e.g., Jim Crow laws). It turns out that many people using that phrase are not referring to specific unjust laws. They’re actually talking about an entire culture and way of life they consider to be irredeemably racist to its core. So concepts (like objective truth), values (like hard work), and structures (like a two-parent home) all come from white-dominant culture. It’s worth clarifying.
“What do you mean by ‘racism’?”
One reason we are talking past each other today is that people hold one of two very different definitions of racism. Does racism mean any prejudice based on skin color?
Listen to Robin DiAngelo, author of White Fragility:
“For most whites, however, racism is like murder: the concept exists, but someone has to commit it in order for it to happen. This limited view of such a multilayered syndrome cultivates the sinister nature of racism and, in fact, perpetuates racist phenomena rather than eradicates them.”
That’s a very different definition of racism. It goes back to 1970, when Patricia Bidol defined racism as “prejudice plus institutional power.” In other words, minority cultures can never be guilty of racism because they don’t have the power.
Definitions matter.
“What does justice mean to you?”
Just as the architect and contractor should agree on units of measurement, it’s important to clarify the measuring rod we’re using when we talk about justice and injustice. What’s the standard? Says who? Are we talking about equality of outcome or equality of opportunity? To have a conversation about justice, we should define justice.
2. Reverse the burden of proof by asking, “How did you come to that conclusion?”
It’s easy for Christians to get defensive when we hear challenges or objections. Don’t these statements make you feel like you have to prove or defend something?
“There is no god.”
“A fetus is just a blob of cells.”
“America was built on racist hate.”
“The Bible is full of contradictions.”
“You can’t know anything for sure.”
This is why it’s so important to understand the burden of proof and the burden of proof rule.
The burden of proof is the responsibility to support your claims with reasons or evidence. And the rule is simple: whoever makes the claim bears the burden. (That’s another reason it can be helpful to avoid assertions when a question will suffice.)
If your first line of questioning seeks to clarify what your friend believes, your next set of questions should ask him to explain why he believes that. With a simple question, you invite the other person to turn an assertion into an argument (i.e., a conclusion supported by reasons). And since all of the examples above are assertions or claims, the person making them bears the burden to prove them.
“There is no god.”
“Interesting! What brought you to that conclusion?”
“A fetus is just a blob of cells.”
“I’m curious … Do you mind sharing with me the reasons you believe that?”
“America was built on racist hate.”
“What do you find to be the most convincing evidence for that?”
“The Bible is full of contradictions.”
“What makes you say that?”
“You can’t know anything for sure.”
“Do you mind if I ask how you can be so sure?”
3. Graciously challenge by asking, “Can you clear this up for me?”
Once you know what the other person believes and why, you can consider whether or not those reasons support the conclusion. If you notice an inconsistency, a gap, or a fallacy, try using a question to gently point it out.
I’m a little confused … If a fetus is not a person with rights until it can survive out of the womb, what about an infant who can’t survive without its mother?
Can you clear this up for me? If justice is comes from society and not from God, would you say that the slave trade was morally right as long as the majority of people in a society agreed with it?
This step is the most difficult because you have to actually spot a weakness in the argument. (Check out The Amazing Dr. Ransom's Bestiary of Adorable Fallacies, by Doug Wilson and Nate Wilson.)
But even if you have to do some homework before continuing, you engaged your friend a conversation and learned more about what he thinks and why. That will give you a lot to think about and lot to build on next time.