Paradigm Shift Requested. Read This.

"...Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free." John 8:32.

Yep. We all know it. We all quote it. We all expect the truth as we see it IS THE truth and exert our will behind it. Every post on LinkedIn. Every Tweet ever posted. Reasonably close to every utterance, I expect, ever made to another, hinges on and depends on this quote's inherent 'truth.' Even this one.

But I am not here to help you with or suggest a statement of dogma, philosophy, or debate. I merely ask a question for which I demand a rational answer.

Who listens anymore?

I read a lot. When I do, I try to grasp the speaker's point of view so I can comprehend the thoughts that went into the opinion the writer espoused. In my youth, I believed that was the way communication worked. Call me naive, but the very concept of what communication meant depended on that principle.

Message sent. Message received. Message considered and interpreted, and response created. Just so you know – communication, or at least the first part, is now completed.

But, at least in those days, that was only half of the process.

Response sent. Response received. You have considered the response and hopefully understood and accepted. Not perhaps agreed to, but at least acknowledged in the same measure with which the initial message was sent, received, and considered.

Yet, in the past two decades at least, the rate at which Messages have been created, espoused and broadcasted has destroyed the second half of what I thought was kind, proper, and appropriate.

I'm sorry, but this has to stop. Folks, we HAVE to rediscover the value of rhetoric. I know most of us have come to think that 'rhetorical statements' and 'rhetorical questions' are straw dogs, mechanical and insensitive tools to push forward an agenda, make a hyperbolic position defensible, or divert the opposition.

News Flash: Opposition does not have to mean Enemies, Trolls, or Adversaries.

If you are reading any message, post, or position paper precisely, quickly, and exclusively to counter alternate voices, you are doing it wrong. I'm not sorry for this judgment, but I must explain it. The evidence has become increasingly clear that humans have stopped communicating in most common forums, venues, and platforms. Dear reader, I am afraid this includes most of you. Most of us.

The world view now seems that anyone who does not immediately agree with our position ON ANY SUBJECT must, by their very nature and disposition, be stupid, arrogant, and willfully and woefully bereft of intelligence, compassion, and kindness.

My grandfather held a differing view, and I hope you are listening, reading this with at least the tiniest bit of humility and curiosity. In other words, I hope you are hearing this with my grandfather's ears.

"Jonny, if you want to earn the world's attention, you have to treat everyone like they already know what you want to say and that they want to agree with you. If you run into a conflict, it isn't that they are stupid, mean, or cruel. You have to know instead that, at least at some point, they are mistaken.

Since, in the beginning, you don't know where the mistakes lie, either in your presentation or their understanding, you cannot make assumptions about what those errors may be.

You have to offer them a gift until you understand where the confusion lies."

"You have to Give them the Benefit of the Doubt."

Doubt. On my part. Doubt? Yes. that another has a different viewpoint only means they have walked another road. Seen different perspectives and made different choices.

Grandfather said that the certainty of a position is correct, or maybe it isn't. The same MUST hold for those who SEEM to be in opposition. That means they MIGHT be wrong, too. To communicate with others, we must hold BOTH our position under a microscope. And BOTH have to look at, hear, and analyze the works without assumption, prejudice, or bias. Each must grant the other just such 'benefit of the doubt' so that we can agree at some point, or perhaps many points, even if that agreement is to disagree.

If you have followed this piece this far, we have but a little more to go ahead. I'd like you to hear me out.

Whether conservative or progressive, Republican or Democrat, and independent of color, creed, and all the other topical headers that divide us, WE ARE HUMAN. MORTAL. ERRANT. No one in centuries has walked in perfection. We are all flawed and may be wrong in one area or perhaps in many. We may be right and win the point. But we all deserve the respect of others, and we all deserve to receive this communication gift, this Benefit of Doubt. Imagine if we listened to each other and measured the merit of each other's pathway and perspective. Our perspective may win the day, or it won't. But at least we will be able, finally, to begin to do what Grandfather was talking about.

Finally, we might begin to COMMUNICATE.