The Importance of Difference - Quareness Series 159th "Lecture".
It seems that any society dominated by fear and suspicion and the hegemony of one official truth necessarily must come to regard any attempt to stop and think for oneself as the subversive action of a "creative outsider". Of course daring to think for oneself in any society (whether free or not) necessarily involves living by one's own rules whilst always maintaining a critical and reflective distance from the pressures of group identity, the tyranny of doctrine and the grip of any intellectual or political coterie. Free individuals tend to be in dialogue both with themselves and with others and to pay full attention to the complex particularities of situations and people, time and tendencies. For them there's always a diverse and plural reality opposed to any ideological policies and prejudices denoting the tyranny of an idea, image, theory or preconception that blinds us to that reality.
The totalitarian mindset with its tendency not only to regard some ideas and truths as self-evident but also to seek to impose such on others as the norm and only correct way of seeing the world, has to be inherently corrosive of a fundamental feature of the human condition - plurality and our ability to critically examine concepts and ideas so as to keep at bay both the dogmatism of one true opinion and the scepticism of no truths or values. With such an open-minded mindset we can more readily grasp the meaning and importance of heterodoxy...of the other opinion and of difference in general. This understanding appears to be crucial for any real progress, and particularly so today given the growing polarisation in much of society and the tendency for every side to regard its own ideas as the truth to be imposed on others. Unfortunately it's becoming quite apparent that the first impulse now for many is to try to "correct" difference through coercion, thereby rejecting another opinion's truth potential. Such is hardly a helpful stance in an increasingly globalised world where we're living more and more in close interactive proximity with those whose cultures and worldviews are different from our own...a situation which may urgently require a renewed assessment of the meaning and role of difference in human life.
Perhaps to be alive and to think are one and the same? This may be a powerful notion because it implies that the work of thinking defies any final conclusions and absolute truths...just like life itself. The work is always renewing, inspiring and able to outgrow linguistic, social, political and ideological confinement. In this view thinking means never to release the inherent, original duality of the individual self. Difference and otherness are intrinsic to the self, in the form of the dialogue I have with myself, where I become my own partner of conversation and the witness of my acts. Only those who know how to speak with themselves know how to speak with others. And only those who know how to speak with others who do not share their world assumptions and views know how to think i.e. know how to speak with themselves in their solitude. We might say it's only through honouring difference and plurality and keeping such ever in mind that we can really know how to live and avoid the death of becoming prisoners of dogma.
In a sense our position in the world can be compared with that of several individuals sitting around a table which both brings us together (where we can see and talk with each other) and separates us (since each occupies a different position and sees the whole of the table from a unique perspective). Here we can see that complex reality of commonality and plurality which characterises all truly human affairs and wherein we are free to speak with one another. And the crucial aspect of such freedom is to speak in such a way that the truth of one's opinion reveals itself to oneself and to others.
Authentic social and political engagement tends to see this very dialogue as central to the formation of opinions. We don't really have opinions...we form them. It's the process that's important i.e. the activity of thinking and speaking with others in knowing how to encounter and engage with them rather than possessing the "correct" opinions. The formation of opinions requires constant conversation and attempts to articulate one's difference to others as well as the ongoing effort to understand their difference and taking such into one's own considerations. Underlying this line of reasoning is a genuine appreciation of plurality along with an acute awareness of the potential for it to be devalued and even destroyed by any increasing tendency to succumb to dogmatism. As the late German-Jewish-American political theorist Hannah Arendt pointed out..."no formation of opinion is ever possible where all opinions have become the same".
In the real social world which is shared between all of our different opinions and perspectives, we can choose to see differences as complementing rather than opposing each other. But this shared reality exists only to the extent that those who hold different opinions and perspectives know how to converse with and listen to each other. Sadly within the growing illiberal tendency to divide the world between "us" and "them", "good" and "bad", "black" and "white", etc. being different is now increasingly perceived as being an adversary...as someone who is not worth talking with or listening to. Judgment precedes encounter and the prevailing assumption is that the other has nothing to contribute to the way the world opens to me from where I am.
Hopefully we will come to understand, sooner rather than later, that in order to preserve a common world of our reality and humanity it is essential to preserve the plurality of opinions and to remain open and able to converse with each other across and despite our differences. An attitude of humility coming from the sense that my worldview is incomplete and needs to stay open to and grateful for other perspectives, would help us to reach such understanding. A genuine attitude of consideration and respect for others would also be helpful here i.e. the sense that without their opinion/difference I would not be myself and the world's reality, truth and meaning would be truncated and poorer.
An Orwellian argument for an "intolerance of intolerance" appears to be gaining traction in recent times and reshaping commitments to free speech and academic freedom as well as basic democratic norms. And this has been happening alongside intolerance itself being reclassified as a social good. However, it's also the case that
listening to viewpoints contradicting our own tends to make us more tolerant and facilitates countering an environment that values anger and orthodoxy over inquiry and communication. We'll do well to remember this truth.
Final word to the late French-Bulgarian philosopher and historian of ideas Tzvetan Todorov - “for dialogue to be possible, one would have to believe in the legitimacy of the shared search for truth.”
Sean.
Dean of Quareness.
January, 2022.