Confessions of an Information Wonk

image1 Confessions of an Information WonkTuesday’s Realty Check
Something More than Talking Points

Talking Point – In debate or discourse, a succinct statement designed to persuasively support one side taken on an issue. Such statements can either be free standing or created as retorts to the opposition’s talking points. (Wikipedia)

Hi, my name is Tim and I am an information wonk. Maybe it was my formative years as the only child left at home with books as my best friends that made me that way. Or perhaps I just think I have to know something about everything. Whatever the cause, I know I am not a former information junkie but rather a current one who is beginning to learn to make it through each 24 hour period without the need to have an opinion (or at least share it unless asked).

It always gets harder to fight the urge to tell other people how stupid they are around election time. Surely they have access to the same information I do. Surely, they aren’t so mentally challenged they can’t connect dot A with dot B and at least see the big picture. But alas, to my utter amazement, not everyone sees things the way I do.

I’ve made a peace with this conundrum. But what I can’t accept is people I know that are smarter than I am resorting to talking points, whether it comes to politics or theology, to explain the decisions they make. Merriam-Webster defines a talking point as “something that lends support to an argument” but that comes short of defining the term by modern day standards. To explain why talking points get under my skin, I first offer an illustration.

  Since she follows my Facebook Page and I think she is a great individual, I will leave this person nameless. She already knows that I can have an extended adult conversation with someone I differ with because we had just that recently. But when she indicated she could not vote for Mitt Romney the other day, I asked her what bothered her about the man as a candidate. Without hesitation her first two reasons were talking points:

Reason One – Because he bullied a gay person in high school.

Reason Two – Because he made his dog ride in a cage on top of his car one time.

I challenged her on this, not because we disagreed on politics (which we did), but because I was amazed a person with her intelligence and profession found it so easy to pull out those two talking points to buttress her argument. No mention of anything about the man now. No mention of his policies, record as governor of Massachusetts, or current campaign statements. Just a disputable incident from 40 some odd years ago and his dog. Talking points.

In defense of this person, as we talked further, she slowly began to offer more thoughtful and obviously logical reasons for her stand. I still didn’t agree with her but at least she threw off the talking points and told me what SHE believed. Not SOMEONE else! We ceased being people talking at each other and became two people talking to each other.

Not only is it no secret that I’m opinionated, it’s also no secret that I am a Christian. So let me address this talking point issue directly at believers. How much of what you say to others is little more than talking points? It isn’t so much that what you believe is false as that it isn’t yours. Truth is truth whether you thought it through or not. But truth expressed as talking points has the same effect as bringing up that dog on Mitt Romney’s car. It comes across as forced, canned, memorized, and even fabricated. In other words speaking in talking points can even take things that are true and make them sound bogus.

Are you ever guilty of giving the quick answer about something without thinking through the impact of those words? When you have a conversation with someone you know differs with you do you throw out talking points or do you speak from genuine conviction and careful consideration?

Are you Persperistent?

Bradbury Are you Persperistent?Tuesday’s Reality Check
When Trying Hard Isn’t Cutting It

Ray Bradbury, a great in the world of speculative and Science Fiction died a few weeks ago after living a long and full life dedicated to writing and reading. Among other things he wrote The Illustrated Man, Something Wicked this Way Comes, and the classic Fahrenheit 411.

One might attribute his success to luck, or perhaps even the ability to confidently appear on camera barefoot in shorts, sweater and tie. But that would be way off the mark. In this video clip from a few years ago, he talked candidly about his path to writing success.

Bradbury was a writing success because of what another writer, Steve Ramey, calls persperistence. Like fellow Science Fiction great, Isaac Asimov, Bradbury just couldn’t keep his hands of a typewriter (he never trusted many modern machines). He wrote constantly, undeterred by rejection.

There is no doubt Ray Bradbury had persperistence. But what is this illusive quality available to all but realized by only rare few? Ramey helps us understand the term by first making sure we understand what it is not.

Persperistence is not Insistence

Writing the same kind of story over and over while making the same mistakes is a cheap knock off of persperistence. Plowing on ahead in life, refusing to learn from the wisdom of others and one’s own mistake expends a lot of energy but offers a pitiful return on the investment.

Persperistence is not Resistance

Writing a different kind of story every week but making the same fundamental mistakes is egoism disguised as hard work. Most of us are guilty of this at one time or another. “I know what the problem is,” I say. “I just need to work hard at something else then I will succeed.” But if I carry the same basic resistance to learning from my mistakes I am doomed to sweat a lot and accomplish little.

Persperistence is not Perfection

Writing a different story each week and then refusing to submit until it’s perfect is, to put it bluntly, stupid. Allow me to let everyone in on a secret. Is everyone listening?

YOU WILL NEVER DO ANYTHING PERFECT!

Now let’s translate all of this for daily life. What is persperistence? Oh sure, you can visit Mr. Ramey’s blog and see the acronym that defines the word. If you are a writer it wouldn’t be a bad idea to print it out and tape it to your wall. But for all of us, writers or not, here are the basic things you have to do to be persperistent:

  • Put your butt in the chair, hand to the plow, or whatever cliché you need to understand everything begins with someone doing something.
  • Learn to embrace rejection. The only people that have never been rejected are those who have never tried anything.
  • Don’t quit!Rest sometimes yes. Allow yourself a day of doing nothing but staring at the ocean, or mountains, or a good book (mine preferably when I get published). But just don’t quit.
  • Live today. It has been said that too often our todays are lost between the cross of tomorrow (worries about what might happen) and the cross of yesterday (regrets for what already happened).  Have dreams, plan for the future, work hard for a calling but for goodness sakes don’t waste the gift of today.

So even though you still don’t have a definition for persperistence do you think you have it? Are you willing to learn from your own mistakes and the mistakes of others? Can you embrace rejection, learn from it, and move on?

And most importantly can you learn to be cool enough that you don’t mind appearing on camera like Ray Bradbury for the entire world to see?

Monkeying Around With the Future of America

image4 Monkeying Around With the Future of AmericaTuesday’s Reality Check
Who’s Aping Who in Washington?

 

Mark Twain once said, “Congress may be America’s only distinct criminal class” and that still holds true. Consider these findings from Capitol Hill Blue about members of the United States Congress a couple of years ago. A cursory search found among sitting members of congress:

•    29 accused of spousal abuse.
•    7 arrested for fraud.
•    19 accused of writing bad checks.
•    117 bankrupted at least two businesses.
•    3 arrested for assault.
•    71 with credit reports so bad they can’t qualify for a credit card.
•    14 arrested on drug-related charges.
•    8 arrested for shoplifting.
•    21 defendants in lawsuits.
•    84 stopped for drunk driving, but released after claiming Congressional immunity.

So the question rises, if Congress as a body continues to have abysmal approval ratings why do voters keep reelecting their own Congressman term after term? Why do we rail about corruption in Washington but then turn around and reelect serial law breakers? I think in some ways because at our collective core we have been corrupted along with them.

This was illustrated to years ago when the late Jamie Whitten of north Mississippi was running to keep his seat in Congress after over 50 years in Washington. He served in about as conservative a corner of a conservative state as one could hold office in. So sure was he of the vote of yellow dog Democrats that he didn’t even bother to campaign any more. Though his constituents gave lip service to conservative stands on social issues and offered loud amens when their pastors preached against such things, come election down he could count on the vast majority of them to ignore their conscience and cast their vote for him.

“Why do you keep on voting for him?” I asked a man I knew was not pleased with the Democrat’s stance on things like abortion and other social issues. The old farmer thought a moment and replied without blinking, “Because we would lose our dairy subsides without him.”

So I ask you, what bothers you more – A spoiled rich girl like Lindsay Lohan getting herself in trouble or someone who knows better but places his own profit above the greater good? As much as it feels good for a moment to rail against the “bums in Washington” maybe it’s time to look at the resident bum in our own soul.

They say “monkey see, monkey do” but perhaps we don’t realize they are aping us as much as we are them.

On Facebook, Food, and Sex

image thumb5 On Facebook, Food, and SexTuesday’s Reality Check
How Social Are We?

Social networks such as Facebook and Twitter encourage the idea that we live in a world in which people are getting to know each other better every day. But are we?

Since I make my living as a freelance writer and social media consultant, allow me to be the first to say, “Are you kidding?” In spite of my opinion, there are a host of people who sincerely believe social media is making them, well, more social.

To add fuel to the fire of that viewpoint, we now have a recent study from Harvard University that seemingly supports it. According to researchers at the University, “the reward given by a person’s brain when a Facebook posting of theirs is viewed, liked, and commented on has proven to be comparable in pleasure to the response from food and sex.” The reason given for this response to social media is what the researchers call a drive for self-disclosure. Or, as the study put it:

“Just as monkeys are willing to forgo juicy rewards to view dominant group-mates and college students are willing to give up money to view attractive members of the opposite sex, our participants were willing to forgo money to think and talk about themselves.”

So does this Harvard Study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences make its case that our basic drive is toward self-disclosure? Only if we can set the rules as to what is disclosed and what is not; which is why if you think you are seeing much of the real person from Facebook postings or Tweets, you’re deluding yourself. Social media allows me to set all the rules of what is disclosed: how often I post, who I allowed on my friends list, what I allow them to see, whether I am really even who I say I am. In the end, virtual disclosure is a shadow of the real thing.

The Ghost in the Machine

Ultimately, we were created to live in total transparency with God and each other. But Genesis 2-3 reveals that sin became the “Ghost in the Machine” that makes it ultimately impossible to be completely transparent with anyone including, at times, ourselves. When Adam and Eve sinned, what should have been the most natural thing for a man and his wife became the focal point of what had gone wrong in their hearts.

The Drive to Conceal

Though created for relationship, the first couple hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden (Gen 3:8). Contrary to those who believe mankind is evolving away from its basic impulse to live in concealment, freedom from this impulse to hide one’s inner self will only happen when sin is eradicated (1 Corinthians 13:12).

The irony of this drive to conceal is that it rarely shows itself in isolation. In fact, more often than not, anonymity is much easier to find in a crowd.Some hide behind cliques, family, social and economic status, and even religion. Others hide behind their accomplishments, deluding themselves into believing their self-effort has overcome their inner nature.

Fear of Interaction

The first thing Adam and Eve did after their feeble attempt to conceal their true nature was to hide in fear (Genesis 3:9-10). Our problem is that sin leads us to distrust God, others, and even ourselves. The one sure way to protect ourselves is by limiting interaction with others. “Not so in our social media age”, you might say, “people are more connected than ever.” In his groundbreaking book, Future Minds, Richard Watson points to some disturbing trends that show our culture is actually becoming more isolationists rather than truly connected.

  • In our multitasking world we do more than one thing at once, but we rarely do more than one thing at once well.
  • Bite-size information leads to thinking in the lowest common denominator. Such thinking tends to be devoid of context or real personal interaction.
  • We live faster than we think.
  • We are finding it more difficult to focus on one thing, one idea, or one person.

Watson believes there is about to be a backlash against pseudo-relationships. At the core of our being we might fear interaction but we also yearn for it. And true, meaningful interaction is seldom a group activity.

When we quit looking to pop-culture to fill the empty places of our mind and pop-psychology to fill the empty places of our heart, we can then see ourselves and others as we all really are. There are no magic fixes for this drive to conceal. Instead, there has to be a certain looking to Christ for the power to overcome, and sometimes, simply to faithfully endure the tensions that will always exist between us until Christ returns.

%d bloggers like this: