On "Binary Thinking", Two-Parties and a dream of DU as "Dialectic Underground"

[Bonobo]

This is something I have thought about for a long time and would like to open for discussion.

The issues are deep and my ability to express them are going to be inadequate, I am sure, but I would love to open this up for a discussion.

As in most cases, I have gained a lot of ideas from a cross-cultural perspective. So let me share this:

When my wife, a Japanese person, first came to America, she felt somewhat inadequate because she did not have many "opinions" like she perceived Americans do about various subjects.

Abortion rights, animal cruelty, texting while driving, illegal immigration, the space program, breast-feeding in public, kids in restaurants, guns, snowmobiles in parks, whaling, you name it. Americans have opinions about everything. At times, it seems like Americans feel it is their duty to form strong opinions about everything.

More often than not, they are for something or against something and their positions are well-staked out and rarely very flexible.

I have wondered for a long time if this is influenced by the fact that the USA is a two-party system. It certainly seems that both parties are also aware of this tendency and so, they too, have adopted a position on most things and seem to encourage this staking out of territory,

This tendency to take either a "pro" or "anti" position on everything seems to permeate the culture here on DU and in the greater culture as well. It would seem fair to call this "binary thinking". We all do it and when we open a thread by someone, we seem to approach it with an "I will recommend or I will un-recommend" approach. The very rec system supports a binary approach instead of one that seeks a dialectic resolution through discussion. And yet, we are a discussion board.

So, the issue I would like to throw open to discussion is this one: To what extent do you see this "binary" approach as permeating our DU culture, ourselves and the USA? Which is the chicken? What is the egg?

Should/could/would DU ever become "Dialectic Underground"? Is there room for, a need for, a more open-minded approach? Is this a deep cultural problem that also lies behind our country's war-like stance toward the world?

Please, let me hear your opinion on the subject.

We are, after all, a discussion board.

[Oregone]

1. "it seems like Americans feel it is their duty to form strong opinions about everything"

Totally agree. Its one of the least missed things of mine since moving.

Not only does everyone have an opinion, they think its their duty to shove the black & white thing in your damn face.

[KonaKane]

2. I don't have a problem with the American penchant for brandishing an opinion....

But I do have a big problem with the American penchant for brandishing their ignorance.

[Egnever]

10. oops

wrong place ignore me.

[Cresent City Kid]

3. Some times it seems like there's more cussin' than discussion

I am not making a blanket statement about most people here, but I have noticed a lot of very short emotional fuses lately. Comments about Barak Obama are seen though the lens of "support" or "don't support". Whichever side the comment falls on, the opposite side is quick to pounce. The lines are drawn and the "us and them" feel" permeates.

We shouldn't need a special forum, like a grown-ups table with higher standards of decorum, and I hope it doesn't come to that. I just sort through the posts and find plenty of insight, compassion, and even a few things we all agree on between the sharp biting comments.

[leftstreet]

4. A binary thought a day keeps cognitive dissonance away!

It's a great system for controlling the peon classes

[TheKentuckian]

5. Apparently, binary still leaves too many options so now we are getting rid of 1's and sticking with

O's only in order to foster more polite and orderly unilog.

Why in the world would we want broader discussions? That is chaos, now is the time for "pragmatic" order.

[Fumesucker]

8. OK, you made me literally LOL.. +1..

[Egnever]

9. How silly

this board was never about broad discussion hence certain posters not being allowed to post here. Or are you arguing we should just forget the democratic underground part and invite the freepers to join us?

[TheKentuckian]

13. I always find it funny that those most worried about freepers and running scared from

Republicans are most comfortable with their basic ideals and modes of operation.

[Fumesucker]

16. If by "funny" you mean "peculiar", I agree..

You're on a roll tonight..

[TheKentuckian]

17. Yeah, it's definitely not funny "haha" more funny "Oh no!"

[amborin]

12. that's great!

hilarious, but sadly true

[Berry Cool]

6. We are often told our two-party system is best because it ensures majority rule,

as opposed to a multiparty system under which a winning candidate may actually be highly unpopular with the majority but because he/she got 40% of the vote and the other candidates managed 30% or less, that one is the winner.

Yet I think it encourages a very unhealthy form of binary political thought in which I see even supposed progressives forgetting what the true goal of government is all about--making life better for people--and caring only that "our side wins." No concern for WHO on "our side" wins. No concern for whether the person on "our side" shares our values. No concern for the means by which we secure victory--moral or immoral. It's all about making sure the guys in the blue shirts beat the guys in the red shirts, and why? Because we're in the blue shirts. Period.

I have also found that people who think this way place as high a value on blind loyalty as conservatives, to the point of foolishness. It's one thing to be frustrated with the job of herding our fellow cats; it's entirely another to say "We must present a united front," "You're either for us or against us" and "We can't support any dissent, because it will make us look weak to our enemies and provide them with a means of attacking us by saying we are not all in agreement." Lately it seems all too many DU'ers don't know how to express disagreement with progressives with whom they disagree without utterly rejecting and renouncing those individuals as if they were minions of Satan. That's ridiculous.

When our need to be "the winning side" makes us forget our core values, including toleration of dissent, we are in trouble. And I think binary thinking does just that.

[kgnu_fan]

7. I think any culture contains many different level of context and dimensions.

So here is what I observe.

Some culture are more mature than others. A younger culture tends to see things in a simpler black and white diad mode to define self and others. Some may grow up and develop perception of triad in relationships. Still higher consciousness may be able to distinguish multiple facets of things and relationships, shade of color and texture and patterns.

For instance, some old culture can identify different kinds of snow and has multiple names for each. They can see difference in how fast or slow they fall or how small or how big the flakes are, how cold or warm, how dry or wet they are etc and are able to identify different kind of manifestation, and different kind of weather pattern. Very sensitive and observant for details. Because they know where they live, they know consequences of each manifestation within the whole environment...

Or another culture has many different names for color green, while we may only see one color.

American culture's tendency to see things in "Good and Evil" "Black and White" "Friend or Foe" type of simpler way of thinking is a sign of childishness. It does not understand the complexity of the world. Temper tantrum is only way it knows how to get what it wants and needs.

But this simplistic culture is not all about America. There are people who live from deeper places. We find each other and create and nourish a better, more mature, sophisticated and enjoyable and peaceful culture. It takes time and effort to develop a culture into a higher level....

[Egnever]

11. No we should not

Everything in the end is yes or no the world is binary there is always an opinion.

The Internet has a plethora of opportunity to join a chaotic free for all. This was never meant to be that place,you have been here long enough to know why and when this place was started it was never about broad discussion it was a place of refuge where the idiot side of the discussion was verboten.

[Fumesucker]

15. Given that "the idiot side" is not prone to "discussion" anyway..

Indeed, "the idiot side" is all about squelching any opinion which deviates from their narrow weltanschauung.

I have to respectfully disagree with you.

DU may not be as chaotic as a lot of places on teh Intertubez but it has its own rowdy charm.

If the Democratic party really and truly wants to be the "big tent" then there has to be room for disagreement, even vigorous disagreement.

[G_j]

14. "The Argument Culture"

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/gergen/march98/tannen_3-27.html

THE ARGUMENT CULTURE

March 27, 1998
The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer Transcript

David Gergen, editor-at-large of U.S. News & World Report, engages Deborah Tannen, author of The Argument Culture: Moving from Dialogue to Debate, in a discussion about the way we approach problems.

DAVID GERGEN: Deborah, the argument culture, what is it?

DEBORAH TANNEN, Author, "The Argument Culture:" It's our tendency to approach every problem as if it were a fight between two sides. We see it in headlines that are always using metaphors for war. We see it in our public conversations, which are always debates, get the most polarized extremes, put them on, let them slug it out. And we see it in an attack culture where journalists, intellectuals of all sorts think unless you're attacking and criticizing, you're not really thinking. It's a general atmosphere of animosity and contention that has taken over our public discourse.

DAVID GERGEN: Do you think that's changed over the last few years?

DEBORAH TANNEN: It has gotten worse. We have--this goes back really to Aristotle, the idea that opposition is the best way to think about anything. But it has certainly gotten worse, where we feel that only debate is acceptable as a form of discourse, that only war metaphors work; otherwise, everybody will be bored and go away. Every news story is about conflict. There's a fear that the audiences will be lost, and we see this as well in politics. We have a two-party system. We always have had that, and that's been one of our strengths. But what people referred to as gridlock, now we have a campaign that goes on forever, so the people not only attack each other during the campaign season but even during what should be a season of governing. We find the parties just trying to do what they can to oppose the other party, to make sure that they won't win in the next election. We have some politicians who would rather prevent anything from getting done than have something good get done and have the other party get credit for it. So that's they way it's gotten worse.

<snip>


http://www.amazon.com/Argument-Culture-Stopping-Americas-Words/dp/0345407512

The Argument Culture: Stopping America's War of Words
Deborah Tannen

Amazon.com Review
Do Americans argue too much? Deborah Tannen, author of You Just Don't Understand and That's Not What I Meant!, is an expert on miscommunication. In The Argument Culture she posits that misunderstanding is endemic in our culture because we tend to believe that the best way to a common goal is by thrashing out all our differences as loudly as possible along the way. Thus we are treated to a whole array of confrontational public forums, from congressional partisan politics to media circuses à la Jerry Springer and Jenny Jones, all based on a metaphor of war. What gets lost in all the shouting, Tannen says, is thoughtful debate and real understanding. Perhaps it's time to consider other methods of communication, she suggests. In addition to outlining what she considers the worst excesses of our argument culture, Tannen revisits some of the territory covered in You Just Don't Understand as she discusses the different ways in which young boys and girls express disagreement or aggression. Finally, she offers a survey of other, mostly non-Western ways of dealing with conflict, including the use of intermediaries and rituals. After reading The Argument Culture you might never again look at the evening news in the same way.

[Bonobo]

18. Thanks for the link.

I am disappointed this subject has not stirred up more discussion. I really think it is a major operating force.

[notesdev]

19. Depends on who you discuss things with

There are unfortunately many who assume that the failure to agree with their opinion automatically means that the worst things their fevered imaginations can conjure about those who disagree are axiomatically true.

And there are unfortunately many who don't - and I might even go as far as say "can't" - think past whatever approved party line got sent down the P.R. chain.

The Democratic coalition does contain a lot of single-issue-uber-alles types who are perfectly willing to throw anybody - even other coalition groups and members - under the bus. These folks are so single minded about a particular issue that all sense of perspective and sometimes even decency get thrown out the window.

One thing I have learned here is that the dishonest disagreers - you can spot them by the instant resort to strawmen, ad hominem, etc. - don't even warrant a response. There are those who seem to really enjoy deliberately wasting peoples' time, demanding links and proofs and what have you (that they could easily find themselves, were the interest sincere) when they never have any intention of changing their opinion regardless of what new information comes by.

Then there are the refreshing few who actually have principles that they stand by, and will modify an opinion in light of new information in order to adhere to those principles. They will generally have thoughtful responses to questions or concerns, and be able to carry a discussion without diversion through many iterations of responses. Those are the folks I like most, whether I agree with them or not.

[WCGreen]

20. Nuance, my kingdom for a little nuance...

That is sorely lacking in almost every aspect of modern American life.

It's like we have little time for consideration.

[Ramulux]

21. You make an interesting point

I believe that the ability to make rational and reasonable decisions about the various issues that arise in our lives is as important a characteristic as any. We live in a world of things, some of them good and some of them bad and sometimes it is hard to tell which is which. Part of being human is educating oneself to a level in which you are capable of making sound decisions.

The sometimes complex and complicated issues that we come across require us to stake out positions in order to create a coherent worldview. Many issues are interconnected and as such your position on those issues must remain in line with each other.

The left - right paradigm that exists in this country has everything to do with the dualistic nature that exists in this country today. The reason it is so strong is because the right in this country has taken insane positions on issues in which their should be no disagreement between the two ideologies. They make statements that go completely against basic fundamental truths and force us to live in a society in which one side refuses to acknowledge reality. This creates the hypersensitive nature of our political discourse. Also, because each political party is representative of their respective ideology, any position taken by the democrats is a lefty position and any by a republican is a rightie position. This further widens the gap between the two ideologies by creating conflict over inconsequential issues.