I talk a good game sometimes.
Sometimes, I don’t know what I’m talking about.
Progress on The William Tell Show is currently at a standstill. The insight expressed in “Brightening the sparks” has required me to reconceive the whole. I’ve arrived at a crossroads of many paths, and am clueless which way to go. And I may need to wait indefinitely, until my direction becomes clear.
On the one hand, until yesterday or today …
… I had been trying to conduct myself on FaceBook as William Tell would conduct himself on the air; and this has largely been a multi-dimensional failure.
- My FaceBook Friends are not my students. I had been acting as if I had authority over them, which I don’t. They do not have a student-teacher accountability to me; they did not sign up to be accountable to Free Speech Handbook.
- Whether my audience for The William Tell Show will be any different — remains to be seen. Certainly, if I run the show as originally intended, those who are unwilling to be accountable to Free Speech Handbook will turn away.
- A central ambition for The William Tell Show has been to get folk who normally only talk about each other, to talk instead with each other — and at all costs, to keep the conversation going, come hell or high water. Free Speech Handbook is all about dismantling the tactics folk use to end conversations and prevent reconciliation. Some folk, however, don’t want conversation; they merely want to state their beliefs, and not hear any other view.
One Friend in particular has been a tough nut to crack; feel free to construe the word “nut” several ways. He’s been impossible to crack. I conclude that he can’t be reasoned with; for him, it’s ALL about motivated reasoning. Further, he seems unable to grasp the concepts of evidence and proof. I can talk all I want; it seems he CAN’T grasp them.
In a different FaceBook exchange, a few weeks ago, someone else referred to some people as “fact-oriented.” So, some people are that way, and some people are not. I’m at the point of planning a forthcoming post to examine myself, as to WHY I attach so much importance to facts. The individual I’ve been speaking of attaches none.
On the other hand, …
… in recent posts and podcasts, I have repeatedly said that my task as to the Trumpers is to NOT want their minds to change, NOT want to change their minds, NOT want THEM to change, but instead merely love them. Here’s a sample from “What now?:”
I don’t necessarily have to involve myself in [their political turmoil]. I don’t need to defend my beliefs; I do need instead to live them. I don’t need to refute others’ beliefs; I do need instead to love them.
That is What Is.
However, that’s completely inconsistent with the way I dealt with this one individual. I knew enough not to pray that his mind change; but in our exchanges, I sho’ nuff did want his mind, and him, to change.
I’ve got to let that go, completely.
I’ve had a lot to learn.