You Can Debate Politics Without Making Each Other The Enemy

Division sells, but it doesn’t solve much. We sat down—one progressive Christian, one conservative atheist—and stress-tested whether two people who disagree on faith and politics can talk through fear, foreign policy, and identity without turning each other into enemies. The short answer: yes, if we swap hot takes for honest motives and keep the relationship above the scoreboard.

We start with a spiral: news about Venezuela and saber-rattling around Greenland sparks late-night dread about drafts and war. From there we unpack how negotiation theater, “naked empire” rhetoric, and shifting justifications fuel anxiety, and why history makes it hard to pretend this is all new. We explore restraint in leadership, what bluster sometimes hides, and how much of our outrage is really about signaling who we are to our tribe rather than changing anything in the real world.

The heart of the conversation is cognitive, not partisan. We break down the dance between divergent thinking (opening possibilities, examining assumptions) and convergent thinking (deciding and acting). Wisdom requires both, whether you’re weighing environmental policy or parenting a teenager you fear is headed for pain. We borrow from stoicism to set a practice: prepare for what you control, stop rehearsing disaster, and guard your attention from feeds that mistake repetition for importance.

By the end, we offer a model for disagreement that keeps human dignity intact: name the actual outcome you want, surface everyone’s motives (including your own), and commit to one action in your control this week. If you’re tired of debates that win points but lose people, this one’s for you. If it resonates, subscribe, share with a friend who votes differently than you do, and leave a review telling us where you found common ground.

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:02

Does it feel like every part of your life is divided? Every scenario, every environment, your church, your school, your work, your friends, left, right, conservative, liberal, religious, secular. It seems you always have to take a side. This is a conversation between a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist who happen to be great friends. Welcome to Living on Common Ground. Do you think if we met today, we would still be friends? I don't know.

SPEAKER_04 0:35

But we're friends now.

SPEAKER_01 0:38

A mom is known as a mom because they are living in a dog. Man, so well, we want a few games. Y'all fools think that's something? Man, that ain't nothing, y'all. And you know what else? We ain't nothing either. Yeah, we came together in camp. Cool. But then we're right back here, and the world tells us that they don't want us to be together. We fall apart like we ain't a damn bit of nothing, man.

Marker 4

SPEAKER_03 1:16

Alright, so how you doing? I'm gonna start there because Krista loves when we get a little bit of that in there.

SPEAKER_02 1:24

Yeah, we can talk about um uh our board and our sound engineer. We can talk about our microphones and what a great job our sound engineer does. Yeah, just lots of housekeeping.

SPEAKER_03 1:34

Yeah, it's good. No, uh, okay, so before we start recording, I said this and I wasn't sure I wanted to record because it's gonna be a vulnerable moment for me. And as much as I talk about um everything I talk about, it is there are certain things that become very difficult for me to be um vulnerable to or to be honest about or to show. Does that make sense? Sure. Okay. So one of the things have similar things.

SPEAKER_02 1:59

Okay.

SPEAKER_03 2:00

So one of them is um I struggle with I okay, I talk about um I was about to say I talk a good game, but I talk a lot about being like how do we solve an issue without turning the person who disagrees with me into the enemy that has to be conquered? Right. And I think that's I think to me that's that's the conversation that's gonna really sort of help fix a lot of our communities today. And it's the reason that I'm doing all of the stuff that I'm doing. However, that being said, I do struggle at times with wondering, like, because part of so part of what I'm trying to say is that uh if there's an issue, all right, like let's look at environmentalism. Um I think everyone agrees that it's bad for rivers to burn, for there to be so much pollution that a river catches on fire, like it did in my hometown back in the 70s, Cuyahoga River.

SPEAKER_02 2:57

Unless it is a sign from God.

SPEAKER_03 3:00

Well, that's not where I'm heading today. Okay. Okay. So um but my my primary assumption for what I teach and for what I talk about and what I write about, um, what I create videos about, all that kind of stuff, is that um a person who disagrees with you on a particular issue like environmentalism, they're not your enemy that you have to conquer. Because when that happens, we lose sight of the actual issue, which is taking care of the environment. And the environment then just becomes a weapon. And the discussion about the environment becomes a weapon in order to conquer the other. And when that happens, we're unable to actually deal with the underlying issue of environmentalism. Does that make sense? Okay. Because what happens is I am more worried about beating my enemy than I am about actually solving the issue anymore. Because I because I have confused the fact that if I can destroy my enemy, then that will solve the issue when that actually doesn't do anything. And that the only way that we can actually solve issues is if we are willing to um to hear from multiple perspectives and come up with what we believe is the best solution for something. All right. Now, my assumption, my underlying assumption is is that um is that people actually care about the issues.

unknown 4:26

Okay.

SPEAKER_03 4:27

Right. And and for multiple reasons. Like there's there's certain values, there's certain things that we we care about. Like right, uh like for example, maybe we care we care about uh our children, and so we care about like the environment or or we, you know, whatever, whatever it is. It's something that we all there there's something else that we care about that makes this an issue that we care about. Are you still tracking? Yep. Okay. But here is here's this sort of um this uh what's the word I'm looking for? Um a variable that doesn't work into my my worldview or that causes trouble for my worldview. The person who actually doesn't care and their whole purpose is to X. Right? Like like in the movie Batman, um one of the one of the ones with Christian Bale, which I think is The real ones, uh those are great. Um they're not as campy as the ones that came out when I was a kid. And yeah, you know. Um anyway, there's a scene in there where Alfred looks at at um Batman, at uh Bruce Wayne.

SPEAKER_02 5:40

Some men and yes just want to see the world burn.

SPEAKER_03 5:45

Yes. And what do you do like what do you do with that? And so that being said, a lot of my friends, not all of my friends, which I'm proud to say, uh really struggle with our current administration. Right? Okay. Okay. And I am concerned about the um what I'm seeing take place right now with Venezuela. Um, but even that's not so much. Because I can look at like other things that we've done in the Middle East, and I can see that we've done a lot of similar things, right? Like this is not this administration is not setting a precedent with what they've done in Venezuela. Let's just be honest, I think that that I think that's pretty fair to say. Right. Now it's easy for us to to jump all over that. Um, but the thing that does have me the mo like concerned a little bit is I'm also watching sort of the response of other world leaders, especially ones that are our allies. Um, but it's the, it's the current, it's the current um rhetoric that I'm hearing about Greenland. That I'm like, what are we like, is this even like real or what are we doing here? And so um now that being said, I know that some of this is because uh, you know, several months ago, a few months ago, I came back on social media. And so the algorithms are catching up and I'm being fed things that are uh that are increasing my anxiety. So I have um toned down, turned back the amount of engagement I have with social media. Um but anyway, I need you to talk me off. I need you to talk me off the ledge here. Like I'm like I at one point I was even like at night thinking to myself, my son, we just last year in October registered him for selective services. I don't want him to have to go to war with Denmark, be like get drafted because you see where I'm saying, like how I've far I've taken this in my own mind, and I know that that's not healthy, but that's what I can do if I'm not careful. And I took it all the way to I like I will I will help my son move to Canada before I allow him to go to war with Denmark because we want to take Greenland. So, how's that for just showing what a uh dumbass or how I can get really anxious about things? And I and again, and I know I'm rambling here, but again, I like I'm right now I'm I'm reading um the fourth book that I've read by uh Ryan Holliday, who is a um, for those of you that aren't familiar, he is a uh what I would call a neostoic.

SPEAKER_02 8:23

Yeah, that's a good right.

SPEAKER_03 8:25

Um, because he doesn't by the way, side note, neos neo-stoicism does not fully embrace stoicism. It just it just takes the value parts and makes it into becoming a better you. It completely ignores the whole logos thing. All right. Anyway, um, but but the one I'm reading right now has to do with this idea of being able to have it's the temperance part, right? And balance and stuff. So I'm reading it and I'm like, yes, yes, yes. And then I catch portions of the news that I read. I need to stick to 1440. I think that's the end of it. I just need to it just tells me what it what like is happening. But the whole Greenland thing's got me upset. So go ahead, fix me. Because I here's the thing. I want everybody that's listening right now. I asked Lucas to fix me because I believe he can. No, and I think this is really important for our conversation about living on common ground, is I know that you and I don't don't see eye to eye on things, but I so value, and it sounds like I'm just, you know, kissing up here, but I so value your perspectives and and your opinions about things because it balances me. And I need the balance. Well, that's very kind.

SPEAKER_04 9:39

So help me.

SPEAKER_02 9:42

Um gosh, where do we start on that? I mean, I'll start I'll start with um a little bit of common ground. I mean, the um the reason that uh you you mentioned um signing Robbie up uh for selective service because he turned 18, so he's gonna sign for sele selective service, which I did, which you did, I'm sure when you did as well. We'll have to sign uh read up uh this year. Yeah. Um, that was part of the reason that I was pleased that Trump got elected. Um because uh we and Chris and I um uh felt that um even though we didn't vote for him, you know, we'd throw our vote away every year, every four years, um we were far less likely to get involved in um an actual war that would require drafting um under Trump than under the, and I'll just say, under the cabal that whoever it was that was actually running the Biden and then would have been running the Harris administration. It clearly wasn't Biden and it clearly wouldn't have been Harris. So, um, and and the reason for that is because um I think that um we get involved in um wars that get away from us, uh um more likely uh in situations where uh there is confusion between um between states and between the state leaders. If there's confusion about what's happening, why are they doing that? Why would, you know? Um and so you know, uh I think that um you're right in a sense that the Venezuela thing is not unprecedented in terms of toppling, in terms of the United States toppling other countries. Just that we're not, you know, um John Mullaney had a bit during um the the comedian during the first Trump administration. Where it was uh is a whole bit about Trump and about how crazy it was, and it was very funny. And um, he's like, I don't like to be, I don't consider myself a political comedian, but and then he has this whole thing, and then he goes, um, and then some people say, like, why don't you care about that when the last guy was in power? And he's like, get away from here with the facts. I wasn't paying attention back then, you know what I mean? So um, and it's it's very funny, but I think that it it um it illustrates something that is that is that is true.

SPEAKER_04 12:30

Um you know, Libya is a it's a hellhole now with actual slave markets that exist now.

SPEAKER_02 12:43

We did that. Like the Obama administration did that, Hillary Clinton did that as Secretary of State. Um, she laughed about it afterward. She famously said, We can't we came, we saw he died. You know, like they're very excited about that. Syria, same thing. We're the reason now that al-Qaeda, former uh Al-Qaeda, we supported Al-Qaeda toppling that that um call him a dictator, fine, you know. So we have done these things. However, I will say one of the things that is unprecedented, as far as I can see, is that there's not a whole lot of um like rainbows and roses painted all around it. As if it was just something that would have happened anyway, and we just had to do that, and you know, you know, and then let's look over here, don't, you know. It's pretty naked empire behavior. We've been an empire forever, but it is pretty it is pretty blatant empire behavior.

SPEAKER_03 14:01

Yeah, because because the attempt to make it sound like it's a war on drugs, when you look at like the bigger picture stuff, it's a ridiculous claim.

SPEAKER_02 14:09

It is. The the war on drugs stuff is is dumb. And then um then it was uh not just uh war on drugs, then it was um, well, they're they're violating our oil sanctions, so we've gotta we've gotta take care of and and all of that is look, the last administration put a$25 million bounty on the head of Maduro. Yeah. Like it's very it like the US has been had a had a policy of Maduro must go forever. Nobody's crying over Maduro going, right? Nobody's upset. Yeah. Venezuelans are not upset.

SPEAKER_03 14:47

I mean, some Venezuelans will be that emigrated here from Venezuela because of the whole situation there. Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 14:55

Sure. Yeah. So you, I mean, US-based Venezuelans, I mean, I would wager are like 99 to 1 happy about this, right? Um, in fact, uh, the uh um the guy who does what is his name? I think it's his first name's Jose, but um, I can't remember his last name. I follow him on Facebook. He does the um Spanish calling for UT. He just started it on his own um because there wasn't any um any play calling uh or you know, the color commentary or whatever in Spanish. And he was like, we need to have that. There's like I know a bunch of people who watch it and they'd like to have anyway. So he's the official caller um in in Spanish, and I follow him on Facebook. Turns out he's from Venezuela, um, emigrated here, you know, as a kid like 25 years ago or whatever, and he's super happy about it, right? And I think that's the I think that's probably the case kind of worldwide. Having said that, I mean, like I I don't I am not I don't want us involved in these things personally. I'm no I'm with you. I know, I know. I'm just saying like just to be clear to anybody who's listening, like I am against nation building. I am against these foreign entanglements. I don't want this. Having said that, I mean, it I don't know. There's I was talking last night um about how uh Krista and I were talking about how there's a part of me that's like maybe I was wrong about the it's just a part of me. Maybe I was wrong about the the stage of republic decline that we're in. I've been I've been thinking of us as being in the early stages of the Tiberius Gracchus and the Gaius Gracchus and the fur, you know, I've I've actually compared Trump to Tiberius Gracchus as a um upper class populist for the lower class, right? Um and uh and and there's uh I think that I I think that the analogy goes quite a ways, personally. I mean, there's a lot of um controversy with historians about whether or not Tiberius Gracchus and Gaius, and then the rest of them that came afterward, who were all patricians, who would sometimes give up their patrician status to take the the position of um tribune to the plebs because of the power they gave them. There's controversy over whether they did it because they believed in this, these like land reforms and his redistribution of wealth stuff that they were doing, um, land reforms and and whatever. They believed in it, or it was just a cynical ploy for power. They saw an opportunity and that was how they got power. So anyway, I that's how I've thought of it. I wonder if maybe that was about five decades ago now. And maybe the better analogy is we're in the Marian era where um, you know, we're kind of we kind of have been dropping the facade of this republic thing for a while. And I just I'm not saying that that's what I believe. Right. I'm just saying, like, I've been feeling so it's very long-winded to say I'm I don't like it. I'm not in favor. The Greenland thing is different, it is different. I've heard the arguments around it, and apparently in foreign policy circles, um, that has been an ongoing conversation for a long time. Um because of its military strategic um uh importance. I know that the rhetoric right now is we will do whatever we have to do, including um using the military. I know that that has been said. Okay I I don't know what to make of that for a couple of reasons. One, um one of the things that I maintain with uh when I think about Trump and how he um how he operates in particular, aside from his populism in his in more of his business life, personal life, from everything that I've ever heard from people who have worked with him for a long time, the one thing he's really good at is negotiation. He's just a very good negotiator. And part of that is because he believes that he can be a good negotiator, and negotiators fail sometimes, but this is a pattern. I'm not saying he's playing 4D chess, I'm not one of those you know, I don't I don't worship the guy, you know. There's a lot that I don't like. I can say it again. I have to say it again. I didn't vote for him, I wouldn't vote for him. But I do think that a lot of times the initial uh Um the initial statements that we hear are intentionally super inflammatory, right? They're intentionally made to put the the people on the other side of the table on their back foot. That's the point. Get as much as you can. And so we don't usually freak out about the initial things that, you know. Um that being said, like, you know, obviously I don't want us attacking Greenland, you know, I guess. Uh no, I don't. And and it and the concern about war is a is a concern that, you know, that I have as well. I've got two boys. Um okay. Can I say a little bit more?

SPEAKER_03 20:44

Yeah. I'm still listening.

SPEAKER_02 20:46

Okay. So I've got so just so that's all kind of like directly addressing those specific issues, kind of my thoughts on those issues so far. Um but in terms of the kind of the greater principle, what you were talking about, like how do you feel okay? Like what are how you know, it reminds it made me think of when you first started talking about it, it made me think I wrote this down um of amusing ourselves to death. And great book. Yeah, and the and um we've talked about it a bunch of times, but one of the premises that he has in there um is that mass media, and of course this is this is written prior to the internet, much less social media, right? He was talking about TV. But he starts talking about even if you go back prior to TV, mass media allowed um allowed news organizations to hijack a part of our psyche that um that is intended to tell us what's important and what we have to pay attention to. It hijacks that by um by giving us information about areas that would we not be reading or hearing from those mass media outlets, we would never know about. Right. It would, it would never really affect us. Um but once we hear about it enough times, because we have this kind of a mechanism where we can determine what's important for us, what we should be paying attention to by how many people have talked about it with us, right? So you can go back to the whole like you can't go over whatever arbitrary number. You can't go over a hundred in a tribe before it starts like disintegrating or whatever, right? So you've got your hundred people in your tribe. Well, if you know, if two people tell you about some issue, you might think, okay, that's maybe that's a problem, maybe it's not, whatever. But if 50 people tell you, well, it's probably a problem. You should pay attention to that. So now we have media sources that are coming into us that can come from literally billions of people. So it can hijack that, and it's impossible for you to feel like this is, I don't have to think about this. Do you know what I mean? And it, but and as soon as I say that, there is the um, I can hear the immediate response, well, Lucas, of course it has to be important because it will affect him. If his kid gets drafted, then it does affect him. And that's a trump card, no pun intended. That's a trump card that can't be it, it can't be argued with on a on a rational basis, right? Um, what I'm saying is I think prior to that, there's a whole bunch of world issues that get handed to us every single moment that if we didn't you experience it when you went off social media for like a couple years, you didn't know that you were supposed to be upset about it, and then here two years later, probably it didn't have any effect on your life, and you didn't know that that it was supposed that you were supposed to think that it had that it was going to have an effect on your life.

unknown 24:30

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 24:31

Um so and and I will say also um that I think my perspective, maybe this is helpful, maybe it's not. I don't know. My perspective does come from kind of my, you know, you want to go back to the Enneagram 5 um thing. Where I always do kind of have a default position of I'm not really sure issues ever get solved. I'm not convinced that we can solve issues. Um you know, I'm I'm married to a one, and she is very um she she's she's staked her life on the idea that she can solve issues. There are issues, there are better ways to that that things can be done, and we can push them forward. We might fail, but we can push them forward and we should, right? And um, I always come from it just skeptical of that. Um, and so when I hear things like, you know, when I hear about topics like environmentalism and things like that, um, you know, I no, I don't want rivers burning. No, I don't. I uh my study of history, and again, this is because of my own personal prejudices, but my study of history does not convince me that anything can be fixed. But that I know how that strikes people, and I think it's legitimate if it strikes people as um uh pessimistic and cowardly. I think that's a I think that would be a legitimate complaint about my position. I'm just saying that is kind of where I where I approach it, uh, from where I approach it. Um so there you go. Those are my those are my hopefully helpful hints.

SPEAKER_03 26:31

Yeah. No, it it is. The keep the perspective.

SPEAKER_02 26:35

I do think that there is, I just just again, I do think there's an aspect of this, which is especially with the Greenland thing. You you know, you ask for you ask for your salary to be 650,000 because what you really want is 500. Or whatever, you know, whatever. Right. You want you ask for um the house to be sold to you for 200,000 because you will buy it for 350, you know, or whatever. Um, so you you say, obviously, you say we might use force. And by the way, check out Maduro when in reality what you really want is naval bases. And you know what I mean? Like I sure I'm not saying that that is the case. Again, I do not subscribe to this whole like, you know, Trump is uh 4D chess genius all the time. But I do think I I do think there's evidence to support the idea that he's um at least um um a skilled negotiator, and that's what he's trying to do. But anyway.

SPEAKER_03 27:44

I do think that um he uh he has a tendency to um to say things that are outlandish and and then gauge the response. Yes. Absolutely. And if everybody's okay with what he just said, and we go for it. Then there we are. Yeah. Right. And and so then I guess the the next layer to that is, and again, perspective. There's nothing I I gotta figure out like what can I do? What is my response within my sphere of influence and things like that, right? Very stoic of me. Um but um but what makes me nervous is if you or I do that, right? We have friends who will come behind us and be like, hey, come, come on. We have people who call us out on it, right? Who's who's the person or who are the people that are gonna call them out on this? It's like are they afraid? Do they realize like some I I don't know. I just think about again, I've been, you know, I think about like uh world leaders and and again, history. You know, I've been thinking about um like uh okay, let's look at um for a second, um oh shoot, his name just went right out of my head.

SPEAKER_04 29:03

I hate that. Um I uh Eisenhower.

SPEAKER_03 29:09

Right? So uh general becomes president.

SPEAKER_02 29:13

Powerful general leading the military comes in get during his reign as a Some people saw the presidency as a demotion, which makes sense because he was running the military for all of the Western Yeah for all of Europe, Western Europe.

SPEAKER_03 29:30

Yeah, when you see pictures of him sitting there with other generals from Russia, the Soviet Union, yeah, and from Britain and from he's in charge, yeah, right. And now he so he becomes president of the United States. And at the time you have a growing uh nuclear arsenal at his disposal. The only time he deploys the military is to help uh black children get into public schools in the South. Um that's because I think there is a little bit of a yeah, go ahead.

SPEAKER_02 30:01

Because he threatened nuclear war over and over and over again. Sure. He kind he, I mean, when we were the only ones with the bomb, he threatened it. I uh from what I remember, at least three times said we will go nuclear until other people got the bomb, and then he was like, oh, maybe we're not.

SPEAKER_03 30:21

Maybe we won't do that. Because we don't want that to happen. But my point is like part of being a good leader is also having restraint. Sure. Right? It's not always just doing what you can do, it's it's learning to do what you should do. That being said, what determines what we should do is based on our own values. And so I don't know. I'm I'm starting to get into a different topic, I think.

SPEAKER_02 30:45

Well, there's a couple things that I'd say. So one of the other things that I um that I wrote down in terms of like the principle of the thing, is that I do think that these large amorphous issues really are used as proxies individual, individually, as proxies for number one, our own identity, and number two, people that we kind of don't like anyway, or that we're annoyed by.

SPEAKER_04 31:17

So that I mean really for real, what would what would I do to to change um our geopolitical policy on Greenland? Really, like literally nothing.

SPEAKER_02 31:42

Um but what I can do is I can have the right position on it, I can have the right feeling about it and let other people know that. And so then I can I I can um bolster my identity and I can bolster the status. Yeah. And then I know again, I can hear the voices. I hear a lot of voices when I'm topic for another episode. When we're recording, I hear a lot of countervoices in my mind saying, Well, you can do a lot. You can protest, you can okay, fine. That's okay. I still think the vast majority of the time when we're protesting, that is also what we're we're doing like 90% of that for our own identity. And again, I know I'm a five, fine, you know, whatever. Um, so I I think that that's a uh a trap that I don't want to fall into. Um also. I'm sure I do. I'm sure I do. Um uh the the other thing too though is and again, this is this is where I'm like I'm kind of a five, and maybe this is kind of blackpilled, you know, I'm I'm kind of blackpilled on this. Um but I just I I really don't see Trump as the problem. I see him as the symptom of an inevitable expected progression through a republic's life that becomes the world empire. I do still think he's a populist. I don't know that I have in my life uh seen any president that could make it to that position that um that I really believed had um anybody who was giving them who is um uh helping them with restraint. I really don't. I don't see that about W, about Obama. Biden, I don't I don't think Biden was running the show. Um I've been on record with that. So I understand your point that if if you or I were doing, but we have different motives too, you know?

SPEAKER_03 34:05

Yeah, that was kind of what I was getting to when I talked about like um like doing things for the right reasons. Well, our motives are different, so we might view the reasons uh we might view what the right reasons are for what we do differently, right? And so you can look at what I'm doing and disagree with my like you not have the same motivations, and so then you disagree with my actions.

SPEAKER_02 34:32

Yeah. Well, and and you one of your motives might be like a really strong motive might be to keep your friend group together. You love your friends, you feel affection toward them. You don't think this consciously, I'm going to do this thing so that I keep my friends. Maybe sometimes you do. Most of the time, probably not. Most of the time, it's probably a feeling, an in an instinct, kind of an impulse, you know. Where do motivations come from? I don't know. I don't think anybody knows. I think that they really they're pre-cognitive and they drive us. That's why I don't believe in choice, but whatever. Um and so, well, here's here's here's an example. Here's a direct example.

SPEAKER_04 35:12

I'm in um you can call it sales.

SPEAKER_02 35:16

I'm in sales, okay. Um I um bought a long time ago, and I think I've mentioned this to you before. Um, I bought a um a program that was um called rejection therapy. And the whole thing was these little cards that would tell you to do things. You had to do these little things, random things, that were almost guaranteed to get you a no out in the world. Okay. Out in the world. So for instance, I would go to a um uh like a gas station and I'd get a a bar or something, like something to eat. I'd take it to the front and ask him if I can have it for free and stare out him in his face. And you did this? I did it, yeah, for a while. Yeah. I still have them actually. I've always told myself I was gonna do it again. It's great because it puts cali if it's great if you have the motivation to I mean, I'll just say it blatantly, to sell more. Because it's about putting calluses on the part of your instincts that that keep you from doing that. Did you get the bar for free? I just gotta know. I 100% did not. Okay. No, absolutely not.

unknown 36:27

No.

SPEAKER_02 36:27

I was hoping you did. I know. I I mean, uh I'm sure there are stories of people who do get it. And I and here's the here's the reality that I absolutely do believe. If you did that, I think I probably it would take less than this. If you did that a hundred times, there's some times when you would get it for free. That's how, and to me, that's kind of like that's what science is. It's like taking the the data and pulling it out of the anecdote, the story, and putting it over here and going, what do you see from that? Right. But nobody's gonna do that because we all have a motivation to fit in with the crowd, to not be a problem. We know what the rules are, we we don't even have to be told, right? So you have motivations to be a part of a group of people, to be looked at a particular way, to, you know, we just like all of us. If you could do things, you could have results that you can't imagine, if you could get yourself to strip away some of those motivations and be singular in your motivation. Like if you said, my motivation is my the the thing I'm gonna do is I'm going to compete in a PGA golf tournament. I truly think probably you could do it, but you would have to strip away a lot of other stuff in order to do that. You have to be singular. And I do think that someone who gets into that gets through the gauntlet that you have to go through in order to get to the presidency. I think they're uh I don't know that I would say that they're a sociopath, like um, like without empathy. Uh, but I do think that they've had to strip away so many of their motivations that we would find that we find normal that we wouldn't really recognize them as a as a person.

SPEAKER_03 38:42

So I wanna I want to point something out that uh I think is really so I was hesitant about bringing up this topic, right? Because um I wasn't sure how it would go. And um but here's what I want to because um I I get uh I don't want to uh even with President Trump, I don't want to attack him as an enemy. Right? I want to be able to have conversations about what's happening without having to identify who the enemy is.

SPEAKER_02 39:22

Yeah.

SPEAKER_03 39:22

And I think that in this our our time here, um, we I think we've actually modeled, listen to me, I sounds like I'm I'm congratulating ourselves, but I think this is the point of the entire podcast. I think uh by bringing up this topic, we've been able to model what it looks like to have a conversation about issues and situations in the world, political situations. Um, these are global political situations right now. Um, and uh and share real concerns coming at it from different perspectives. And neither one of us um we didn't we didn't uh lift any one particular person up on a pedestal, but we also Also didn't turn around and and and demonize any one particular person. And I think it's a good model for how we can engage with people in conversations about things that we disagree with, maybe, and um and not and not turn the other person, even if it's two people, like you get together with two people who maybe do agree, but and have a conversation without having to turn the other person into a vile, evil enemy. Right. So like if if let's just say that um that uh you're with a friend and uh you are I you know brought up environmentalists, right? And and you are you you're in complete agreement about the use of electric vehicles. All right. Um the the c the the trick is in my mind, the the healthier way is to have a conversation about in the environment and about electric vehicles and and whatever else you want to talk about without then turning around and talking about how so-and-so who disagrees with you or whatever is the problem. Because once you do that, I think you've actually lost sight of what the real maybe issue is. And so, and and I don't think it ends as um productive as maybe this conversation has been for me.

SPEAKER_02 41:18

So um anyway, that's it's I mean, it's really hard.

SPEAKER_03 41:22

I it it is hard.

SPEAKER_02 41:24

I sympathize with anyone who maybe tries and feels like it didn't it didn't work out. I completely sympathize because it's it's not um it is not reasonable, in my opinion, to expect people to have those conversations. Yeah it's more reasonable to expect the conversations um to be uh well to be community building, right? To be bonding, which it requires uh an us and a them. That's how you build a group. Sure. Know that you're part of this group because you're not out there. Right. And you're in here. And and um so I think that's understandable, reasonable. I don't, I don't um I I like I said, I get I get it. Yeah, I do it. I do it.

SPEAKER_03 42:23

Yeah, but for full for full disclosure, uh I can easily fall back into it. Sure. Um and uh it's the primary position of a human, I think. It's yeah, because you want to and I guess what I'm trying to do is say that there's actually a third way that could be another community.

SPEAKER_02 42:41

Yeah, I uh obviously I believe in it. I believe in this. I mean, we've been doing this for two years now, and I um I I want to me, this is what you were just talking about. To me, this is a workout. Not like not like talking to you, Jeff, is like a workout.

SPEAKER_03 42:58

It it can feel like it. But the way that would leave these con these type of conversations exhausted.

SPEAKER_02 43:02

Yeah. Well, the way that we are trying to do it, I think, is a workout.

SPEAKER_03 43:06

So I um one last thing, because we're we're kind of running up against what we've tried to set as our time.

SPEAKER_02 43:11

Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_03 43:12

Um so I keep trying to come at the same topic from different ways, right? So like I've been I've been talking a lot about certainty and yeah and breaking down certainty. And and like I mentioned, um it looks like I'm gonna have an opportunity to go to the University of Cincinnati and talk about uh the trap of certainty and how it leads to so then that led me into the conversation fundamentalism.

SPEAKER_02 43:30

It's really cool that it'll be like a uh non-religious um uh environment.

SPEAKER_03 43:36

Yeah, well, I've I've intentionally done that because I'm trying to break out of sort of the own like my my community is within the Christian community, right? But I but I feel like the message goes beyond that. And if we're really gonna make change, we have to figure out how to communicate to the larger culture around us. That being said, uh recently I um also have started thinking in terms of divergent and convergent thinking.

SPEAKER_02 44:00

Yeah, I saw your post on that. Yeah. What did you think of that? I thought that it was really interesting because um uh your take was that you've got to have both, and that was not where I thought you were going with it, which I was I was um pleasantly surprised. Good. I thought that it was I I liked it. So go ahead. Especially if you're gonna tell me about how good I am. Yeah, well, I think that um, you know, I have um I've brought up the the um concept of Chesterton's fence or Chesterton's gate on this podcast before, which is just the thought experiment of if you're walking through a field and you come across a fence, before you tear and it blocks your way, it's an impediment. Before you tear it down, you should know exactly why it was put up and what the ramifications might be if you tear it down.

SPEAKER_03 44:52

Which is divergent thinking.

SPEAKER_02 44:54

Okay. I would I would say that's convergent thinking.

SPEAKER_03 44:57

Uh but I think it's the expansion of your mind. Okay. So because because convergent thinking is let's tear the fence down.

unknown 45:04

Okay.

SPEAKER_02 45:05

I see what you're saying.

SPEAKER_03 45:06

I've come up with a conclusion on what I'm going to do. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Divergent thinking is being able to open up to all the possibilities of why and what.

SPEAKER_02 45:15

Yeah, yeah. Okay. So yeah. So I I guess my I guess my point in bringing that up is that um, you know, it it's no surprise or it's no, you know, it's no revelation that that I tend to be as a just kind of a person with a conservative temperament, I tend to be someone who goes, don't try to fix it. Don't try to fix it. Let it be if you can, while recognizing that a lot of the things that I see as being fixed, as being fine, are things that had to be fixed.

unknown 45:49

Right.

SPEAKER_02 45:49

So I recognize that we are not, we have not come to the pinnacle of human development.

SPEAKER_03 45:54

Oh god, I hope not.

SPEAKER_02 45:55

We are just a roller coaster, up and down and up and down and up and down and around and around, and we just change things. So I I get that. But I liked your the the idea of like these two have to work together. These two types. I don't want to try to say like one is conservative, one's liberal. That's not what I'm saying, but just that there is wisdom in in trying to synthesize um both, you know, both ways of thinking.

SPEAKER_03 46:23

Well, what I uh what I've done is I'm getting ready to put out um um well, there's gonna be one long video on my Substack page. It's gonna be about 22, 25 minutes long, and I'm gonna talk, really sort of dive into this idea of convergent and divergent thinking and how wisdom is holding both. And then um, and then on YouTube, my YouTube page, I'm gonna have shorter videos. So if you don't want to sit and watch a whole 22 to 25 minute video, you can you can check it out on the YouTube page. But basically, uh, can I share what I'm gonna start? Yes, please. Okay, so uh the video is gonna just begin with let me ask you something. Your teenage daughter wants to pursue a path you believe will end in pain. You can see it clearly. You've lived long enough to recognize the patterns. Every instinct in you wants to intervene, to protect, to use whatever authority you have to stop her from making this mistake. But you also know she needs to find her own way, that your fears aren't facts, that controlling her choices now might damage something more important than avoiding this particular pain. So what do you do? This is the tension we live in constantly, not just as parents, but in nearly every area of life that matters. We need to stay open to complexity, to multiple perspectives, to the possibility that we're wrong. But we also need to make decisions, take stands, act on what we believe, even when we're not certain. Most of us have been taught to pick one, either stay endlessly open and get accused of fence sitting, moral relativism, failing to stand for anything, or commit decisively and get accused of rigidity, closed-mindedness, and fundamentalism. But what if that's a false choice? What if wisdom requires something harder that than picking a side? What if it requires learning to move fluidly between two essential modes of thinking? And so then from there, I'm going to go into on a deeper dive the um the two modes of thinking. And then uh and then what I have done too is I created some um tests to see if this is actually like this if this actually works. And I've run scenarios. Right. So like the first one is thought experiments? Yeah, absolutely. So one of them is a ri uh, what would happen if there's a uh family rift over politics? How does this work? And I kind of play that one out. Um, and then another one is a workplace decision that you have to make, right? Um, and then the third one is going back to the parenting, a teenager's risky choice. And so I I work through those three uh situations and see if what I'm suggesting actually works. And um and then uh from there we go into the how to practice it like literally. So anyway, that's what the video is gonna be about.

SPEAKER_02 49:11

But uh Yeah, the teenager thing really um that that hits home.

SPEAKER_03 49:16

It it does. I wrote a parable about it that came out this week on Substack. Um, you know this the three witnesses? Mm-hmm.

SPEAKER_02 49:23

Have you ever read any of them? I've read a little bit, yeah.

SPEAKER_03 49:25

Okay. So the one this week um is is totally that, but it was me learning because I have an 18-year-old right who's getting ready to go to college, and um and it looks like where he would prefer to go, it would be my last choice for him. Yeah. And so um, so it was interesting because as I was writing it, it um I learned from one of the characters that I freaking created, which is so weird. That's great. Isn't that weird though? Like I created the character, I give the character the voice. Yeah, I s I'm writing what the character is saying, yeah. And in the process, I learned from the character.

SPEAKER_02 50:05

Yeah, that's really cool.

SPEAKER_03 50:06

I was like, I guess it's a case of not taking my own advice.

SPEAKER_02 50:11

It's real meta.

SPEAKER_03 50:12

Yeah, it's crazy. All right. Did we find I think what what about common ground? Where are we?

SPEAKER_02 50:18

Did do do you feel any less anxious? You don't have to say yes. You can say no.

SPEAKER_03 50:29

Yeah, no, I I do. Um I do. I I I think where I where I've landed here is um and again, I I'm actually falling back into stoicism um because as you were talking, I was hearing all the stoics in my head. Yeah. But um be prepared for what comes, but don't be worried about it. Um and then in being prepared, you can deal with it when it happens. Yeah. Because I haven't solved anything by being worried about it.

SPEAKER_02 51:00

That is just all misery that you're giving yourself.

SPEAKER_04 51:04

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 51:05

Um also, and this is, I mean, uh this is something both of us have talked about forever, and that I have mentioned over and over and over again that I probably need to do again for like the eight billionth time, and that is that um uh social media fills my cup. It fills my attention and um uh stimulation cup. All the it and it fills all the cracks, just all through, you know, in terms of chronologically throughout the day, it does, because it can it can be picked up every moment of every day, so it fills up all of that.

SPEAKER_04 51:46

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 51:47

And so then there's no, there's so much less space for me to uh be able to be in a kind of a stoic place when when the issues present themselves. Not only am I getting presented with issues that I maybe I need to be anxious about or think about, maybe I don't need to think about, whatever, not only that, but just all the stuff that's mundane in social media, it just fills that cup all the way to the top. It is uh, you know, completely to the brim. And so there's there's nowhere for it to go but to be constantly anxious. And so that's that's to me. I need to I need to stop again. I haven't been on Twitter, but so that's good. Yeah.

SPEAKER_03 52:32

Yeah, the the uh Ryan Holiday book I'm reading right now is about discipline. Yeah. And um and how discipline also means knowing when to rest, the discipline of sleep. Yeah, sure. So all right. Thanks, Lucas. See ya.

SPEAKER_00 52:50

Thank you for listening to Living on Common Ground. Please follow wherever you listen to your podcasts and share it with your friends. You can also find a link to our social in the description. The more people we have living on common ground, the better the world will be.