Tag: Billy Graham

Anger, Argument, and Logic

Anger, Argument, and Logic

by Dedric

As pagans, we are followers of a spiritual path that is considered “fringe” in this country. This means that we can expect those ignorant of paganism occasionally to challenge our beliefs. Are debates with such people a waste of time? For cases where they aren’t, what is the best way to proceed? The first part of this article will be an examination of why people may not wish to learn or reconcile in an argument – a situation in which you can save yourself time by avoiding arguing. The second part will consist of ways to make yourself understood in the type of debates where both participants are listening to each other.

Why would someone purposefully ignore reason? Why would someone dislike those they have never met before? One possibility lies in the biology of anger. Anger produces a set of definite physical responses, one of which is the release of adrenaline. Adrenaline can be exciting; it’s one of the major reasons people choose to go bungee jumping and play football, for example. This is an important point to realize when deciding whether or not to argue with someone upset with the fact you are a pagan. If someone is coming from a space of anger, making peace could mean the end of his or her adrenaline fun. Don’t expect mere reason to stand in the face of this!

There’s power in realizing that provoking such situations can be a biological urge – a game the body plays to get what it wants. But in the face of this, there’s power in realizing that you are not your emotions. Comprehending this lets you come from a space of clarity, experiencing and letting pass these emotions the same way you can any other body function.

As a side note, let me tell you something that just might change your life: You can get high off being angry with yourself as easily as you can get off being angry at someone else. Many segments of our culture teach that hating yourself is “right,” while hating someone else is “wrong.” Give that some thought the next time you decide you are despicable and wrong because of your looks, weight, job or status.

Insofar as it is possible, try to look at the sources for an emotion such as anger when you experience it, and decide how much of it is due to a real issue in present time. For example, many pagans seem to justify their hatred for Christians based on the Burning Times. Are any of the Christians who were alive during the Inquisition alive now? Is it fair to hold people accountable for things their ancestors did? It’s worth a little thought.

I find it helpful to separate what actually happened in any given situation from any interpretations I have made of it. What actually happened is something one can state in physical terms. For example, when I was studying to become a massage therapist last year, I had a practice client who would drop by once a week for a massage and leave me a tip in the form of a contribution to my massage school tuition. One week, he didn’t leave anything. My interpretation, which ran through much of the next week, was “I didn’t do a good job” and “He didn’t like my work.” What actually happened was that he didn’t give me a check. It turns out that he just forgot, and he gave me two checks on his next appointment. Realizing, even in a deeper sense than I’ve suggested with this example, that our interpretations are not reality might save us all a little anguish. This seems to be especially true with regard to interpretations of the actions of parents, the government and other figures of authority. But we do derive enjoyment from making up stories about our lives, so don’t be surprised if you do it too.

So far, we’ve been examining anger and why it can produce situations and arguments that will be unyielding to reason. Now, let us examine arguments of another kind – arguments where anger isn’t the driving factor and where the participants disagree but are still listening to each other. In situations like this, persuasion is indeed possible.

The key to persuasion is listening. This is especially true with issues as sensitive as spirituality. Few members of groups that have been historically at odds have ever had the experience of hearing the “enemy” truly listen to them. If you don’t understand something, ask a question or two; this demonstrates that you are listening in a concrete way.

Very literally, try to see the world from the other person’s point of view. This is your best hope of convincing people about anything, or getting them to see your point of view. After all, people need to see the connections between what they already know and any new information to assimilate the new information. Also, since we most commonly come from spaces of self-interest, we’re most open to new ideas when we can see how they would benefit our lives. Being able to understand and frame issues in the other person’s language is essential for real communication to take place. This sort of active listening forms the bulk of a fruitful debate.

Many people are accustomed to using logically faulty arguments, often without being aware of it. If you are familiar with the most common errors, you will have an easier time mentally dismissing them. This will free you to listen for any real information in what a person has to say. Students of debate, rhetoric and logic refer to such logical errors as fallacies, and books are available that discuss them in detail.

Good luck in all your endeavors, and blessed be!

Common logical fallacies

Argumentum ad antiquitatum

Asserting that something is good just because it is old or traditional: “Billy Graham is a great human being because he’s been around forever.”

Argumentum ad hominem

Attacking the arguer instead of the assertion: “Paganism is not a healthy religion! The fact that you are pagan and smoke cigarettes proves it!”

Argumentum ad ignorantiam

Arguing that something must be true because it has not been proved false: “The Bible is true because nobody has proved otherwise.”

Argumentum ad numerum

Arguing that the more people believe something, the more likely it is to be correct: “Christianity must be more accurate than paganism. More people practice it!”

Non causa pro causa

Identifying something as the cause of an event when it hasn’t been shown to be the cause: “My friend took up paganism and then started having lots of great sex with gorgeous supermodels. Therefore, paganism causes promiscuity.”

Begging the question

Arguing from questionable premises.

Shifting the burden of proof

Putting the burden of proof on the person who questions an assertion. A special case of argumentum ad ignorantiam.

Slippery slope

Stating that should one event occur, so will other harmful events, when there is no proof made that the other harmful events are caused by the first event.

Straw man

Misrepresenting someone’s position so that it can be attacked more easily.

Lighten Up – Helpful Hints For A Nearly Extinct Species

Helpful Hints For A Nearly Extinct Species

by Haragano

Let’s get down to basics. Being the leader of a group is more than just the hard work of raising dust devils in the back yard or zapping a friend’s TV antenna so they can get HBO. Leading a group offers a lot of perks. You get a lot of ego strokes, you get to divide up babies just like Solomon and you even get to keep the leftovers from the potlucks at moon feasts. After all you have put in a lot of long, hard hours and cashed in a lot of empties to win the coveted title of “High Poop-di Ha of the Infinite Invisibility”. And you want to keep it! The bottom line, the final word in keeping your position on top of the heap is spelled P-O-W-E-R. These hints are concerned with helping you keep it.

In the busy modern craft of today there are many ways that your power base can be eroded. The two most likely ways you can end up preaching to an empty circle are through the insidious inroads made by INFORMATION and DISCUSSION. These twin curses have upset more High Poop-di-Has than Carter has little liver pills.

On Information

Information is the worst threat. The more a follower is acquainted with history, anthropology, psychology, socio-dynamics…really, any area that requires an individual to exert himself mentally, you are in for questions you don’t really want to answer. The very best way to deal with this sticky situation is to avoid it. Recruit the immature and the fanatic. They don’t bring really tasty goodies to feasts, but they are good ego boosters. They are expendable and fiercely loyal for no particular reason.

If you find you are being pestered by an “intellect” (they should have never gotten through your screening) you have to quickly learn to manage information more effectively. Don’t worry. Managing information is easier than it seems. Newscasters do it every night. First, Adopt an attitude of “ask me anything”, then make sure you don’t have any answers and don’t know where to get them. Create a vacuum! Yes, nature abhors a vacuum but it is your strongest weapon in the war for ignorance. Second is the wild goose chase, a tried and true method of dealing with anyone who persists in asking questions. Send a troublesome individual on a few of these. Tire them out, and they will go away sooner or later. When they leave, the stage is set for you to shake your head solemnly and expound at length on how they were not ready to learn what you had to offer. This act is very impressive to newcomers.

Reassure your followers that they don’t have to keep up on current thoughts in and about the craft. After all, books and  magazine subscriptions  are expensive. Imply that they will learn all that they need from you by hinting at the “secrets of the craft” that yet await them. If they are adamant about reading, call their attention only to those items that reinforce your point of view (you need all the backup you can get). The Xian (as in Xmas) fundamentalists have developed this sort of information management into an art form. “Information Management is next to Godliness”. I’m sure Mr. Falwell has that embroidered on a pillow slip somewhere. You might want to write him for a needlepoint kit.

On to Discussion…

Discussion with other groups must be limited. If they don’t share your point of view, all contact with them should be eliminated. After all, your immature followers do mature and fanatics mellow out. The free exchange of differing ideas has a justifiably bad reputation for expanding an individuals craft viewpoint. And THAT is deadly to the sacred position of High Poop-di Ha.

There is an effective means of terminating troublesome contacts with other groups, while at the same time confirming your position as the center of attention. It is the practice of the “Fine Art of Self-Righteous Indignation”! The premier example of this was the medieval Church. When it met with a conflicting view, such as a scholar pointing out that the Church was rewriting history or physics, the Church would denounce him as a “minion of Satan”. Usually the scholar was hauled off and put to the Question. What’s the truth, more or less, compared to the self Righteous Indignation of God’s Chosen…right?

Remember, you have to slam the door tightly on any new ideas! This takes dramatic measures. You don’t want conflicting information coming in, and you certainly don’t want your s/h/e/e/p/ followers wandering off.

Pick a public occasion and invade a circle or burst into a study group. Most importantly, make sure your group is around you. After all, the coming performance is really for them. Rant, pound your breast, whatever you need to do, to get across the idea of YOU as the poor, persecuted victim. Make this crystal clear to your group and they will stick to you like you were dipped in crazy glue. If anyone in your group has ever had a course in group dynamics, send them on a wild goose chase that evening. They might tumble to what you are up to, and besides they are probably asking too many questions anyway.

When facing the m/i/n/i/o/n/s/o/f/S/a/t/a/n/ opposing group, be personally offensive if you can. Call them picky, heretical, egotistical, perverse, etc. Anything you can get away with (wailing in the background is a nice touch). To keep your group successfully insulated from differing ideas, you have to clearly label the opposition in the minds of your followers. People just LOVE tags! Now, this next point is important, so listen up! You must make it clear that you want no further contact with the opposing group. Try to affect a tone in your voice that conveys “this is a regrettable decision but it just has to be”, like the tone Billy Graham takes on when he talks about sinners. This gives you a twofold bonus. First, it gets the word to “them” in no uncertain terms and, second, it gets the word to your people that it would not be wise for anyone who wants to remain a part of your group to have any contact with “those” you have just judged unacceptable. This sort of frontal assault generally alienates both groups as well as every individual in them. There will be no information exchange, no open discussion and very little growth. But what do you care, you’re safe.

One warning though; If for any reason you think the other group will simply laugh at your overacting, don’t chance a face-to-face confrontation. Keep the performance within your own group. If you have been a good information manager that should be effective enough.

Although you are one of the last “High Poop-di-Ha’s of the Infinite Invisibility” in the craft, you belong to an ancient society that can be traced through most of the world’s major religions. You exemplify rigidity, closed-mindedness and religious manipulation. You have a lot to be self-righteous about! In order to prevent your kind from dying out completely, you have to remember to stringently restrict the information flow to your group and terminate all open discussions with outsiders holding differing views. If you take to heart these few pointers you won’t go the way of the Great Auk and the Passenger Pigeon.