From time to time, because I keep my primary e-mail address listed here, people send me helpful information, services, and websites. At some time within the last two years, I was signed up by some unknown soul for Quora. For those not in the know, Quora is largely a question and answer service where users can submit interrogatives on almost every conceivable topic, in the hopes that they will be answered by individual members of the community. When I feel I can contribute and further someone’s comprehension, I do. When I’m out of my depths, I usually take a pass. If someone is clearly trying to get someone else to do their homework for them, I always decline.
What I have been noticing once again, using Quora as an example, are the drawbacks of internet debate and discourse. Out of much frustration, I have felt a compulsion to answer the same critical points continually. It’s gotten to the point that I keep a Word document packed full of very basic, but crucial points of fact and pieces of information that multiple people keep making. It’s a Sisyphean task, and I find I have to rely on my notes constantly.
The vast amount of disinformation out there is overwhelming, and I feel an obligation to put out fires left and right. This is particularly true as we as a society unpack the events of the past year. I have seen many respectful comments, but have also been sad to see very hurtful, childish, and immature barbs embedded in comment threads, penned by people who a) don’t get it and b) simply go too far. To some extent, trolls are as old as the Internet itself, but they have taken on a prominence in recent months that makes every decent part of me cry out for swift, accurate correction.
The irony is that the progressive desire to aggressively educate and inform other people sometimes backfires, especially when people take cutting edge and current activism, by itself a good thing—designed to enlighten and enrich—and unfortunately elongate it out of proportion. I call it “indignation by rote.” Being taught anything by rote means that very often such tactics take it the form of an unfortunate union of memorized sloganeering and soundbyte logic, not critical thinking and a desire to see the multiple sides of any argument or debate. We learn our multiplication tables by rote. We learn spelling by rote. But when we take on very complicated issues and histories (plural), forming our stances cannot be achieved by rote discourse alone. If we do so, we shortchange ourselves in the process and will never be liberated from any of our chains.
In the minds of many these days, they feel they should be angry, so they take patent hostility and extend it to a nonsensical and unhelpful degree. If I were speaking in a Quaker context, I’d classify this behavior by using the phrase “outrunning one’s guide.” Speaking from a strictly religious standpoint, if a person outruns his or her guide while providing vocal ministry during Worship, one’s misguided zeal, sense of self-importance, and ego eventually overtake genuine (Holy) Spirit-led messages. We begin, quite often, with the best intentions. We begin by serving as God’s mouthpiece, enriching the whole gathering in the process, but we make a mistake if we end our message with our own concerns, prejudices, and biases.
Avoiding the temptation to outrun one’s guide is a discipline. Americans particularly are an opinionated people, and we often feel that we have a right to say exactly what we think whenever we want to say it. But this attitude can make me feel us look very foolish if we take it to an extreme. I support Black Lives Matter and anti-racist direct action, but I am always cautious of how quickly activist movements of any shape or size can take unhelpful twists and turns. Historical precedents are not always kind. And I am aware of many people, like the ones on Quora, who are entirely off base in their pronouncements, especially the ones they spout off without bothering to think through what they are saying first.
Using my own life as an example, I could be more militant about how others choose to use my gendered pronouns. But I don’t think that’s always the best way to properly educate people. Sometimes I feel inclined to educate; sometimes there’s a part of me who feels that allies need to do their own research and that it shouldn’t be my obligation. Sometimes I’m just tired and I don’t really want to take the extra effort, one more time. There really is no right or wrong answer to that issue. And how I choose to enlighten others, in my mind, often depends on the individual and the situation. These are certainly not decision I make lightly, and they are particularly not decisions I make by rote alone.
What we can have, however, is civil discourse, not cruelty and small-mindedness, no matter how justified we think we are. I really do feel for teachers of any sort, at any level, of any subject, enforcing and reinforcing for years the same basic ideas: the same texts, the same themes, the same philosophical points. I don’t think I’d have the patience to teach the same course for years at a time. I’m not sure how my mother did it as long as she did. And yet, there must be a part of me who follows her lead, as this entire post is all about responsible, effective teaching strategies and communication. If we want to be change agents, I would argue, once more, then we have to use our heads and our hearts.