Is there any contemporary topic that doesn’t incite frenzy?
If there is, it rests in quiet give-and-take civility.
I tried to think of topics that did not engender frenzy. “Can’t be rights of any sort,” I thought. “Can’t be any social issue; can’t be any technological issue; can’t be any environmental issue.” Holy Cow! We’re steeped in frenzy because there are no issues that have calm supporters involved either directly or indirectly to exude civility.
And I tried to imagine a world without frenzy. Drew a blank there. Everywhere my mind went, it saw frenzy in some degree of intensity. Politics? Legislation? Rules for or against a right? You can complete the list—if it is, in fact, possible to reach a finite number of topics. But the topics that cause frenzy are infinite like fractions: Between any two whole numbers lie a half, a quarter, an eighth, a sixteenth, a thrity-second, a sixty-fourth, a one-twenty-eighth, a two-fifty-sixth, and so on in one of Gregor Cantor’s infinities. If the “main issue” isn’t the issue, then some sub-issue is the issue. Clean air seems like a reasonable goal, but then someone says clean air is free of all carcinogens. Then someone introduces the notion of carbon free air as a goal, and that implies no anthropogenic carbon which further implies “green energy” that means eliminating everything from asphalt roads to car tires to cars to the freedom to travel or air condition or cut grass or grow food. Somewhere “out there” is a frenetic mind beating a very loud drum in its interior, the manifestation of which lies in social media and occasional riots, in frenetic pundits and in rabid fandom or idol worship.
It occurred to me that one reason for frenzy is a lack of definition and a dearth of specifics. Most frenzy derives from generalities that support personal or group identities. The frenzy is the animal backed into a corner by a perceived threat. Initial defense turns to wild offense. The turning reveals a mind incapable of finding options. The frenzied mind feels the adjacent walls but fails to see the open space before it. Two walls make an inescapable box for such a mind.
Of course, as finite beings, we find finding a way out difficult. We don’t have time to wait for prolonged rational exchanges among opponents. We take the short cut; we opt for frenzy.
“But that’s other people,” you argue. “Not I.”
Then you appear to be a model of reason, a person who has the patience to seek details both about the subject at hand and about the opponent who proclaims a different position from yours. For that, I praise you.
The “finite” condition that drives frenzy is, however, hard for most people to circumnavigate. Innately impatient, most of us want resolution, want action, now. We know the clock is running. Waiting for the next generation to solve a perceived problem is not an option. It seems that we live backed into corners blinded by frenzy that makes us incapable of seeing any open space.
If there is, it rests in quiet give-and-take civility.
I tried to think of topics that did not engender frenzy. “Can’t be rights of any sort,” I thought. “Can’t be any social issue; can’t be any technological issue; can’t be any environmental issue.” Holy Cow! We’re steeped in frenzy because there are no issues that have calm supporters involved either directly or indirectly to exude civility.
And I tried to imagine a world without frenzy. Drew a blank there. Everywhere my mind went, it saw frenzy in some degree of intensity. Politics? Legislation? Rules for or against a right? You can complete the list—if it is, in fact, possible to reach a finite number of topics. But the topics that cause frenzy are infinite like fractions: Between any two whole numbers lie a half, a quarter, an eighth, a sixteenth, a thrity-second, a sixty-fourth, a one-twenty-eighth, a two-fifty-sixth, and so on in one of Gregor Cantor’s infinities. If the “main issue” isn’t the issue, then some sub-issue is the issue. Clean air seems like a reasonable goal, but then someone says clean air is free of all carcinogens. Then someone introduces the notion of carbon free air as a goal, and that implies no anthropogenic carbon which further implies “green energy” that means eliminating everything from asphalt roads to car tires to cars to the freedom to travel or air condition or cut grass or grow food. Somewhere “out there” is a frenetic mind beating a very loud drum in its interior, the manifestation of which lies in social media and occasional riots, in frenetic pundits and in rabid fandom or idol worship.
It occurred to me that one reason for frenzy is a lack of definition and a dearth of specifics. Most frenzy derives from generalities that support personal or group identities. The frenzy is the animal backed into a corner by a perceived threat. Initial defense turns to wild offense. The turning reveals a mind incapable of finding options. The frenzied mind feels the adjacent walls but fails to see the open space before it. Two walls make an inescapable box for such a mind.
Of course, as finite beings, we find finding a way out difficult. We don’t have time to wait for prolonged rational exchanges among opponents. We take the short cut; we opt for frenzy.
“But that’s other people,” you argue. “Not I.”
Then you appear to be a model of reason, a person who has the patience to seek details both about the subject at hand and about the opponent who proclaims a different position from yours. For that, I praise you.
The “finite” condition that drives frenzy is, however, hard for most people to circumnavigate. Innately impatient, most of us want resolution, want action, now. We know the clock is running. Waiting for the next generation to solve a perceived problem is not an option. It seems that we live backed into corners blinded by frenzy that makes us incapable of seeing any open space.
RSS Feed