Have you ever been listening to someone and thought that they need to get over whatever it is that they are talking about?
Well what else did you think they were trying to do by talking with you about it?
Monthly Archives: December 2018
Remaining Curious
Before we learn anything about someone, there is only one part to them:
- The part we don’t know about them
As we learn things about them, they break into three parts:
- The part we don’t know about them
- The part we know and understand (the ways in which they make sense to us)
- The part we know and DON’T understand (the ways in which they don’t make sense to us)
As we consider the second and third parts, we have a natural tendency to shift toward labeling those parts “right” and “wrong.”
- The part we don’t know about them
- The part we understand –becomes–> The part that’s right with them
- The part we don’t understand –becomes–> The part that’s wrong with them
This is called “being judgmental.”
What if instead of shifting the part we don’t understand toward a judgment of “wrong” we leave it as it is? It’s simply the part of a person that we don’t understand.
This is called “being curious.”
Curiosity allows us to learn and grow. Judgments close the door on those things.
This isn’t to say that we don’t understand anything; that we can’t know anything; that nothing is right or wrong. I feel very confident about my stance on many controversial topics, like climate change, the supernatural, and whether or not allowing split-tunnel VPN connections is a security risk; and I view these things as having “right” and “wrong” components.
Even so, are people right or wrong? Or do they hold a belief or idea which we see as being right or wrong? Are they those beliefs and ideas? Or are beliefs more like clothing that people wear? The clothing people wear might say things about them. The beliefs people hold might say things about them. But are they really those beliefs? Or would it be more accurate to say that their beliefs are a separate thing from them?
I think it’s important to make corrections to inaccurate information, erroneous beliefs, and harmful ideas. But I find much more value (and success) in viewing those THINGS as right or wrong, and not the PEOPLE who carry them around. When we criticize or correct information, ideas, and beliefs, it becomes a data- and evidence-based assessment and discussion. What’s accurate or inaccurate? It’s not personal. When we criticize or correct people, it becomes a value-based competition. Who’s right or wrong? It is personal.
When I find someone who disagrees with me on a topic, I don’t have to label them as being wrong. I can sternly disagree with the idea, belief, or information, while politely retaining my curiosity about the person, and simply viewing that part of them, the part which believes those things, as a part of them which I do not understand.
To be clear, I also find great value in remaining curious about ideas, beliefs, and information, but I find it more immediately helpful to indemnify the people who carry them.
Try it sometime. The next time you think (or say), “you’re wrong,” try exchanging that thought for “I don’t understand why you believe that idea, which I believe is wrong.” Remain curious about the person. Talk about the idea.