Cognitive Dissidents
Our contentious world of emotional arguments and baseless data and emotionally charged accusations makes it seem impossible to get back to the world of civil discourse and debate. Remember when two intelligent people could disagree about an issue, share their positions, ask each other questions, and then go out for a drink? While those days may seem long gone, I saw a glimmer of hope this week that all is not lost.
I thought of this week’s title yesterday morning after participating in the Coffee Chat led by Nicole Araujo. Why did I think of this title (which I’m sure has been thought of by others long before me)? There was civil and reasoned disagreement on a few topics related to how to manage content on websites and in databases. We also brainstormed a lot of great ideas and referrals.
You might be saying “what the heck”? What does content and data management have to do with cognition or dissidents? Did you mean DISSONANCE?? All great questions about the point, which is that we can disagree and still respect each other. Regarding the title, let’s look at the definition of each word.
Cognition means “the mental action or process of acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought, experience, and the senses.” (Definition from Dictionary.com.) Cognition is what we do when we think, and the supporting actions of gathering data and informing our opinions. A dissident is “someone who strongly and publicly disagrees with and criticizes the government” according to Britannica Dictionary. Dissonance (the word I’m playing off) means “a tension or clash resulting from the combination of two disharmonious or unsuitable elements.” (Thanks again to Dictionary.com for this definition.)
This brings us to the commonly used phrase “cognitive dissonance” which means holding conflicting beliefs. I am having fun with this phrase by saying Cognitive Dissidents. Thinking people who don’t agree! I know, that was the long way around.
We live in contentious times where many people have an attitude that you are either with them or against them, and we are all on guard against misinformation. However, it is possible for two thoughtful professionals to respectfully disagree with each other. The path to civil debate is still there although it is overgrown with the wildness of uninformed statements and baseless data.
By pulling this overgrowth away, we can find our way back to civil debate even though it seems that it is buried deeper than the Lost City of Z. If we can find the Lost City of Z (which we did in 2010!) then we can reclaim the ability to talk, disagree, share our points and data, and walk away without hating each other. Many have despaired over the loss of civil discourse, but how many have made an effort to bring it back? It’s easy to hide our heads in the sand rather than take a stand but if we want to restore respectful debate, it starts with us.
In debates or discussions: Be thoughtful. Be respectful. Be open to other ideas. Be willing to ask questions. Be patient. Be confident in sharing a different perspective. If you want to support civil discourse, model what Mahatma Gandhi said, “Be the change you want to see in the world.”
