by : lacylit10 Leadership, Politics

Persuasion, Communication, and Our Moral Obligations

What does ancient Greek rhetoric have to do with today? Perhaps we don’t recognize it with its official title, as it is more commonly referred to as the art of persuasion. Often, when we learn or reflect on history, we don’t look at it through a lens of communication. However, different forms of communication and their advancements over time have helped contribute to significant societal downfalls, which makes it worth paying attention to.

In the early democratic cultures of Athens and Rome, citizens were afforded access to information and an open system of debate to prepare them for voting. But true to human nature, deceptive propaganda soon overwhelmed both cities, contributing to their collapse. The printing press allowed for mass production of books and newspapers, leading us to the Age of Enlightenment, and the democratic revolutions of the 18th century. In the 19th century, the penny press and telegraph geographically expanded information reach and stirred political debates, instilling fear and resentment across nations, setting the stage for World War I. Cinema and radio created accessible and essential platforms for European fascists to engulf democracy and turn it into totalitarianism. Television transformed politics, as representatives now had to worry about optics, branding and sound bites. And today, we are in the age of digital communication, on the verge of an artificial intelligence takeover.

In journalism school, we are taught rhetoric to motivate, inform or persuade our audience, which means almost anything we see, hear or read has an agenda (hidden or in plain view). We are also taught to consider our sources, and the validity of information spread.

Although I am educated in journalism, I am not a journalist. I don’t have to be objective in my work. But you should consider my background in what I argue. Since my passion and expertise lies within agriculture, I will (openly or discreetly) educate my audience with facts and data that support my pro-ag beliefs. Likewise, when studies are published or reports are made public, we have to dig deeper than what we see on the surface. Who funded the study? Who funded the organizations that funded the study? What are their beliefs? Background provides context and credibility to help us determine the agenda that may not always be at the forefront of what we read, see, or hear. (They call persuasion an art for a reason.)

Rhetoric originated sometime in the fifth century B.C. For well more than 2,000 years, we have been fighting misinformation, propaganda and the art of persuasion. As a society, I personally do not believe we are any better at filtering through the B.S. now than we were then. If anything, we spend less time thinking for ourselves and more time scanning through headlines, coming up with our own conclusions based on echo chamber inducing and attention-grabbing phrases rather than concrete fact and evidence. And with the sheer volume of information coming at us on a daily basis, who has the time or energy for background research on all of it anyway?

Psychologically speaking, information overload leads to confusion, indecisiveness, stress, anxiety and mental fatigue. Overuse of social media leads to feelings of inadequacy and lower self-worth. When there is excess, people tend to yearn for structure and stability. The same thing happens in democracy. Boundless freedom can degrade a society.

We have a responsibility to uphold moral and ethical behavior. Most people do not rob department stores or punch a stranger on the sidewalk because they have a conscience. Anyone who posts something on the world wide web is an active creator of media, using the platform to spread information, whether it be fact, fiction or opinion. Our failure to take responsibility for what we say or share online has turned the internet into a modern-day Wild West where free speech runs rampant. Seemingly, all conscientious, respectful and dutiful behavior goes out the window with the shields of our screens. 

Looking forward, there are two sayings that come to mind:

  • Those who do not learn from history are bound to repeat it.
  • It’s how you pick yourself up when you fall.

We are on the precipice of revolutionary change. Now more than ever before, normal people like you and I have been active participants in shaping our society via the numerous platforms available to exercise our First Amendment rights, and it has fundamentally transformed the landscape of our democracy. I can’t help but wonder, will we take responsibility for our contribution in the inevitable downfall? And will artificial intelligence be part of the digital age demise or the beginning of a new era of communication?

We may not be able to prevent communication advancements and anticipate their effects on our society and democracy, but we can learn from our past. If William Randolph Hearst could “furnish the war” with Cuba in 1898, then I am pretty confident media today can influence elections in 2024.

As published in Noozhawk.

by : lacylit10 Life Lessons

Biggest Lesson of The Year.

I’ve been seeing a lot of people post about the biggest lessons they’ve learned this year, and I have been mulling over mine for the past several weeks. This has been a very significant year of growth for me, and I’m not sure I can narrow it down to one big lesson. If I had to summarize what I’ve learned into a general theme, I think my biggest lesson would be that courage can take a long time to build. 

The more philosophical definition states: courage is the quality of mind or spirit that enables a person to face difficulty, pain, danger, etc. without fear. I like this definition more than “doing something that frightens one.”

What I find interesting about these definitions of the same word is that one definition says to do it with fear, the other says to do it without. What I find fascinating about the conflicting definitions is that it’s a great example of the complexity of language. Context matters. The courage to jump out of a plane is different from the courage it takes to walk away from a marriage.

The courage I’m referring to is the philosophical kind. To get your mind and spirit into a state of confidence to do something without fear requires identifying and overcoming insecurities and weaknesses. It requires self-reflection and processing. It requires intentional, meaningful, purposeful, and thoughtful consideration. These things definitely do not happen overnight. In fact, it can take years. And I don’t feel like people tell you that. 

We live in such a fast-paced, instant gratification society. We never see the work that goes into building the final product. Singer Lainey Wilson spent over ten years in the country music industry trying to make it before she became an “overnight” success. I’m sure those ten years were a critical time of learning, both personally and professionally, before she was launched into fame. 

God’s timing is perfect.

When I reflect on some of the challenges I’ve faced, I’ve been thinking about those with whom I have confided. They have been so patient and supportive. They’ve known for a long time what I am just coming to terms with. Part of me feels silly for admitting now what they’ve been softly telling me for years. While I logically knew what they were telling me was true, my heart hadn’t caught up. Until now. My mind and spirit are finally aligned. And I’m so grateful for their kindness. They knew I would get there in my own time. They never pushed. They let me feel what I needed to feel, go through the (e)motions, and learn the lessons on my own. 

Philosophical courage comes from deep within your soul, and it takes time to rise to your head and your heart. And that’s okay. To embrace the nature of courage, getting to a place of quality mind and spirit to do something without fear, takes courage in itself. There are so many factors woven into the fabric of who we are. Tugging at one thread, sometimes, unravels several others. It takes focus and patience to mend. We can be hard on ourselves for not getting there in a timeframe others expect of us or we wish of ourselves. And it’s important to recognize, not everyone will choose to repair in the first place. It takes courage to start, courage to endure, and courage to overcome.

by : lacylit10 Leadership, Life Lessons

Precipice.

Awhile back, I was talking to a friend about some things I’m going through. As I’m telling her all of these things, I’m asking, “Why is this my fault? Why do I have to do this? Why is this my problem? Why do I have to be the bigger person?” She flat-out, simply, and calmly replied, “Because you are the problem.”

✋🏼 Wait …….. what?

So many things ran through my brain as I processed, “You are the problem.” In the span of roughly 30 seconds, I felt shock, then anger and defensiveness, followed by a gradual shift to understanding, before accepting and actually feeling calm with this fact resonating. It was amazing how quickly I realized she was right. 🤯

Consider that we operate within systems, whether it be an immediate family system, an extended family system, a work system, department system, friend system, team system, etc. I am not satisfied with the system function. I am not cool with the status quo. I’m not here to settle into complacency. I don’t like how I am being treated. Whatever the situation is, I am the one disrupting the system. Therefore, I am the problem. 😔 

But there’s something strange about understanding this. One one hand, I’m like, of course, I am the problem. 🙄 This is so typical of me to be the one who disrupts the process. The one who challenges. The one who makes light of the issue. I am not one to sit back and keep my mouth shut – which is exactly why I feel I am always faced with the problems. I am the problems! And since I am the problems, I am also the solutions. And there is something empowering about knowing that I have the ability to control the problem. I can influence the system to find a better solution for me.

Easier said than done though. Holy. Shit. Nothing about influencing existing systems to change is easy. While it resonated with me that I am the problems and I am the solutions, the actual doing part is way more complicated.

As the one disrupting the system, I’m taking brunt of the negative reactions from people who are. satisfied. with the system function. It is normal to resist change and push back, so I’m not blaming these people. But I am taking the beating on several different fronts right now. And I get it. I’ve changed. Therefore, the current function of all my systems is being disrupted.

Where I’m at now though is a strange place. You are always most tired before you reach the peak of the mountain. Right now, dealing with the systems dysfunction is making me stronger. I’m building endurance while I take the high road. I am nearing the precipice. And while I am so. very.tired, I am eager and excited to see the view from the top. 🏞

1 Comment
by : lacylit10 Life Lessons

Intent.

Last week, (or whenever it was), I wrote about our ability to learn from our mistakes. When we make a poor decision with no ill intent, it is simply a human error in judgment, and we move on with life.  No harm, no foul. But what happens when there is harm? When there is foul? Why is intent sometimes looked at and not others?

My thoughts on this were prompted a few days ago when a liberal friend of mine posted something about guns on her Facebook page. She essentially said that she doesn’t want to take away guns; she just wants people to get proper instruction and training, so you know how to handle the firearm. Now, I’m not sure the context in which she meant this, and I know she does not condone violence. But my initial reaction was, “The bigger concern is not so much about if you know how to use a firearm; it’s more about what you intend to do with it.” Learning to use a gun specifically for murder is a lot different than learning to use a gun for potential use in self-defense.

But I’m not here to start a gun control debate with you. I’m sure you know how I feel about that. My point is that intent matters.

Following up on my interest in stoicism, Rafał Albiński explores the idea that there are two components to action: 1.) the intent or willingness to act, and 2.) the act itself (doing what was intended to be done). According to psychological theory, creating intent is within our control. Intent is conscious motive. But the action is not always entirely up to us. I may intend to meet my friend for lunch at 11:30, but several things can prevent that from happening:

  1. Someone pulls out in front of me and I get in a car accident (an external condition)
  2. I get focused on a project at work and lose track of time (nonvolitional will – unconscious decision)
  3. I deliberately choose to stand him up (volitional will – conscious decision)

Stoics believe that if something is not fully up to us, then it is not up to us. It’s fate-based. Therefore if action 1 happens, then I was not meant to meet that friend for lunch. My life was fated to take a different path. If action 2 happens, then it is possible that I was late because I was fated to avoid that accident. If action 3 happens, then I’m not really practicing Stoic (or simply kind) behavior and should reconsider my intent.

But this isn’t a lesson in Stoicism, so here’s another angle. Loretta G. Breuning, Ph.D. says:

Intention is the human ability to redirect the electricity in your brain instead of just letting it flow down the path of least resistance. Animals don’t do this. The world reaches their senses and electricity flows into paths paved by past experience. We humans can notice that flow and divert it.

If we go back to the gun issue as an example…this is an emotionally charged debate. But it’s what prompted my thought process, so I’m going to follow through on it.

Pulling the trigger is the second component of the action. The first component is the willingness to pull the trigger. Which means the human consciously diverted their energy into the action. This two component approach is also used in criminal law. The intent (mens rea) must be proven in order to secure a conviction for the actual act (actus reus).

Had I of commented on my friends post with my initial reaction, it likely would have started a gun control debate with her or one of her other FB friends. Her intent on the post was genuinely good. She was extending a Second Amendment olive branch out to her conservative friends, so to speak. My reaction would have blown her comments out of proportion, and created a defensive/divisive environment on our feeds.

As I said in my last post, “just because we can use media as mindless entertainment doesn’t mean we should always consume it as mindless media.” We need to stop receiving everyone’s commentary at face-value and consider the intent of their messages. especially on social media. We subconsciously think that everyone is out to intentionally inflict harm on us, when really, people are just voicing an opinion that they have every right to have.

by : lacylit10 Life Lessons

Politics.

Leadership is about rising above our lower self.  Leaders set aside their own discomfort to make something more bearable for the other person.  This creates the opposite of divide. It creates connection. And that’s been proven in psychology and neuroscience.

I haven’t watched much of the political debates, because I don’t need to – nor do I want to.  All the debates seem to be is a blame and shame game anyway.  We don’t need more of that in our polarized society.  We need leaders who say, “I’m sorry Mr. Presidential Nominee that you feel I haven’t done enough for the American people.  But let me tell you how I plan to help them when I get elected into office.” Blame and shame only adds fuel to the fire.  This answer acknowledges their feelings as legitimate and stifles the negative energy, then shifts the narrative to a hopeful future for the American people. (Where it should be.)

But this is typical politics. 🙄 An unfortunate circumstance is that we watch this unfold and mimic their behavior.  If people in positions of power and influence answer blame with blame and shame with shame, then that must be okay.  Then the people who look up to us see us demonstrating this behavior and assume that it’s okay.  It all filters downward.

I have several friends whose political beliefs firmly oppose my own.  I value these friendships, because they offer me perspective.  We can tease one another, but we never blame and shame.  We understand each other as people with good hearts, who want the best for this country. 

Best is subjective on so many factors in our individual lives.  If I can appreciate all those factors that created this unique human being who brings value to my life on all sorts of other levels, then I need to appreciate that those factors led him or her to their political beliefs too. You can’t have one without the other. We should be accepting of each other whole, perceived flaws and all.

I was once seeing this guy, and we were in that phase where you’re more than just friends but not necessarily boyfriend/girlfriend.  The relationship was kind of at a standstill in this space, so I asked, “Where are we going with this relationship?” And he responded, “What relationship?”

First of all, that answer told me ev.er.y.thing. I needed to know about where he stood (and consequently, where I stood). Needless to say, that ended. 😂

He had such a close-minded view. A relationship exists with every person in which we interact. (Remember intimate, relational, and community?) Relationship itself is a noun. It’s a thing, right? But it requires action to make it a thing. Without connecting, binding, or relating, the relationship doesn’t exist. You’re just left with separate things.

Leadership starts with oneself. We can’t judge our politicians for answering blame with blame and shame with shame when we do the same thing. If we don’t like the polarization within our society, then we need to reflect on how we are contributing to it. There is a reason why people say, “Be the change you wish to see in the world.” But realistically, we can’t do it alone.

In the day-to-day, most of us don’t interact with the Presidential Nominees. Most of us don’t even interact with our local elected officials. A relationship doesn’t really exist, unless you choose to pursue one. (Which I encourage you to do!) But elections do give you an interactive opportunity. And relationships do exist with your peers.

Show up in these relationships. Be an active participant. When there’s a mutual understanding and joint effort, together you make relationships work. And generally speaking, isn’t that just kind of how elections work? You show up to the polls, you communicate via your ballot, and collective voices influence the future of your relationship with government.

So don’t just be a thing! Engage! Be humble, and be kind. 💖

by : lacylit10 Life Lessons

Closure.

Making sense of something we have lost is the acceptance stage of grief.  Seeking closure can stem from any form of loss, not just the loss of a relationship.  An explanation or answer as to why we lost something can provide us with the opportunity to learn something about ourselves or the other person or situation (whatever it may be).

Closure exists on a scale; different personalities may be more prone to seek closure than others.  Not receiving closure for people who need it can lead to psychological distress.  

One study found that people who prefer order and predictability – having a more rigid way of thinking and a low tolerance for ambiguity – struggle when they are unable to find the answers to help them move on. In contrast, people who are more open minded, creative and comfortable with ambiguity are better able to cope with not achieving closure.

(source)

I’m not one way or the other. My personal need for closure is definitely on a scale. While I can logically come to terms with something, it might take me a little longer emotionally.

Remember when I wanted to have a courageous conversation with someone who avoided the conversation altogether? This was a situation where I had to accept ambiguity in closure. I knew that seeking out further closure would not make me feel better. I knew that it had the potential to actually make me feel worse, so I had to accept it for what it was.

Most people need closure most when termination of the event is significant, holding particular value or meaning. And that’s true. This person was important to me. While my head knows his reaction to the situation will have me better off in the long run, my heart is still hurting from the loss of our friendship. I learned something about myself and the other person in this situation, but that hasn’t made accepting it any easier or allowed me to move on from it any quicker.

In terms of COVID, life before pandemic was pretty damn great. And while it didn’t change dramatically, it changed enough. What makes COVID so tough is we are still in the midst of it. We don’t know if there’s going to be another wave in the fall or spring. We don’t know when our economy is going to re-open at full capacity. We don’t know what changes the election will bring. There is so. much. uncertainty. It’s hard to accept what it is, as it is, when it is constantly changing.

I think finding closure is a lot like handling disappointment. When you operate with ethos and logos, closure is a little more tangible. When you you operate with ethos and pathos, closure is a little more ambiguous. But when you’ve lost something of significance, it’s likely that you’ve put your head and your heart on the line. The more you have invested, the more emotional ramifications there will be, and the road to closure may take a little longer than anticipated.