The Great Divide and Rumi’s Field

The Great Divide is real. It is in action through the media, the church, our groups of friends, and our families unless we can straddle the great divide of issues that polarize us by having deeper, meaningful conversations with each other.

A good friend and I had that kind of conversation recently. It was amazing how we each interpreted events and snippets we'd heard from various sources differently, radically differently. But because we're good friends, we listened to each other, asked questions, challenged each other, and agreed to disagree on some things.

We quickly realized our core disagreements arose from who we heard and how we received information. All our information came from online sources, so we each described what we'd seen and heard. Did the speaker demonstrate their points with real-time clips? Did the clips speak or prove the speaker's points? Was there a bigger issue involved? My friend's answers were yes, yes, and yes. Mine were no, no, and yes. We continued discussing the bigger issue until we both had to continue on with our day.

My heart was heavy and filled with a confusing mix of revulsion, along with a deep sense of grief. Why must some speakers call other people derogatory names to make their points? But what struck me is that the speaker spoke as though there were fundamental truths in play, like those people over there are, in fact, ____, _____, and _____. Choose any unflattering, negative adjective you want to fill in the blanks. The corroborating clip didn't support the negative critique. I was gob-smacked, but I continued and watched the original video the clips came from.

Part of our differences resulted from the sources we watched and my strong aversion to spending that much time watching the news. Do I really want to watch at least three news sources that don't always see eye to eye on various topics per day? Definitely not, but I thought I'd look at the differences between opinion and fact.

An opinion is a statement that expresses a belief, idea, or emotion that is not provable. Any individual can provide evidence to support their opinion and convince someone else to hold the same belief, but this does not mean that the opinion can be proven based on this evidence.

On the other hand, a fact is a statement that can be proven beyond any doubt. Facts are objective, meaning the veracity is independent of anyone's perception or beliefs. They can be verified and supported with indisputable evidence. Facts often rely on ... language with a specific, explicit, or direct meaning.

(From Opinion vs. Fact | Definition & Examples - Lesson | Study.com)

In our conversation, what mattered was how we adjudicated and discerned what we were listening to. What factors should people consider when consuming online information or listening to real-time speakers? I think the first consideration is what type of speech you're listening to:

Informative speakers provide details about a specific topic or issue.

Persuasive speakers seek to sway and alter opinions to either support or oppose the subject.

Motivational speakers deliver compelling speeches that inspire individuals to take a particular action.

Entertaining speakers should be humorous or emotional to match the occasion's mood, avoiding snide remarks to ensure the audience enjoys themselves.

If you're listening to a persuasive or motivational speaker, do you know what they're trying to persuade you to do or think? Did you research the speaker or their speech? Which methods did they use to persuade their audience: putting others down or making fun of them, using fear or urgency tactics, emotional appeals, telling stories, using examples, stating facts, logical reasoning, humour, scarcity, sympathy, social proof? Did they shout or use pauses to emphasize their points? What was their body language, and was it congruent with their message?

Perhaps looking for clues in the way we feel gives us clues, too. If we're listening and getting caught up in the moment by the energy of the speech, how do we really feel when we're alone with our own thoughts? Far from feeling informed or inspired, motivated or entertained, I felt manipulated, angry, and somehow full of grief. My friend heard the speaker's courage and felt inspired.

Discovering the actual video where those clips came from left me feeling extremely let down. Still upset at the name-calling in what I watched, my friend and I continued our conversation the next day, and this time discussed the big picture in more detail. We still disagreed, but cared enough about each other to acknowledge the validity of each other's points and the fact that all humans have biases.

At the end of our discussion, my friend cared enough to ask what made my heart ache so intensely? I couldn't give an answer. I believe I was sharing the speaker's pain even though they didn't look like they were in pain. That's not unusual for me; it's happened before. I dealt with it in my usual way and then downloaded peace. Finally, I could relax and de-stress.

The outcome? There was no winning, comparing, badmouthing, or feeling superior or less than, and the divide did not get wider. What about the Great Divide and Rumi’s field? The test for me was, did we both walk away from our conversation feeling empowered, and did it leave us with more understanding than before our conversation? Yes. We remain good friends and open to what else we might learn from our conversation and my pain, and yes, we began at the Great Divide but we met in Rumi’s field.

“Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing,

there is a field. I'll meet you there.

When the soul lies down in that grass,

the world is too full to talk about.”

Rumi