The world would be a much better place if we could just get that other guy to change his mind!
That’s the heart of most of the conflict I see out there. We complain, we insult, we attack, we guilt, and point out all the falacies and illogic in their arguments, but doggone it, they just don’t change! What is wrong with these people?! Why can’t they just do what they oughta?
The real question, however, is probably why can’t we do what we oughta?
Suppose I don’t like hockey.* Perhaps I even have a negative impression of the game and, by association, anyone who would like to watch it. I may have also had some bad experiences with half-drunk hockey fans who harrassed me and my family one time when we had to get past them on the street. And then I encounter two different representatives.
Fred is a guy I work with. He thinks I’m hyper-critical about hockey, and perhaps even a little dumb for disliking it. He regularly finds opportunities to harrass me about it in the hallways, sometimes even in department meetings. If ever I mess up on an assignment he teases, “Hey, a hockey fan would never make that mistake!” And ever since he found I don’t like hockey it seems he’s hanging up some new bit of hockey memorabilia in his cubicle every day and insisting I check it out when I walk past.
And then there’s Tim. He’s always willing to answer questions, and sometimes pitches in to help if I’m getting behind on stuff. He’s always quick with a smile and a “good morning”, and we often have good conversations about our families. If I mess up on something he sticks up for me in meetings, and is willing to help to set things right. He found out we both like baseball, and we regularly discuss great games we saw recently.
One day the office runs a promotion in which the top people are given two tickets to a hockey game. I don’t enter, of course. But it turns out that both Fred and Tim win and get tickets.
Fred stops by my cubicle first. “Hey, loser!” he says, “I got some free tickets! How about you and me go so I can show you what you’ve been missing? Come on, don’t be a lame-o loser, let’s do it!”
Later in the day Tim stops by. “Hey, I won these tickets. Fred tells me you don’t like hockey, but I thought it might be fun to do something together. We can get dinner first at wherever you choose, and if you don’t like the game we can leave. What do you say? Please?”
Who is more likely to talk me into going to the game? Who is more likely to modify my opinion of hockey and hockey fans? Tim may never convince me to like hockey, but he may at least get me to modify my opinion of hockey fans, because he doesn’t fit the mold I imagine in my mind. Fred, however? I’d rather be pecked to death by hummingbirds than go to a game with him. And he’d never be able to change my opinion of hockey fans because he plays into the very stereotype I’ve built up in my head.
But if I were to ever go to a hockey game, it would be with Tim. If anyone could ever change my mind on hockey it would be him. Why? Because it’s clear to me his friendship is genuine. He isn’t bothered that I don’t like hockey. And he certainly doesn’t seem to base his behavior toward me on my enjoyment of hockey. I have the feeling if I were to go with him and then decide to leave he’d be okay with that. And knowing that, I’d probably be more willing to give it a try–for him.
Now, imagine if Fred could be more like Tim. Having two guys at work that I trust and respect want to take me to a game–heck, I’d probably go. Just knowing they like hockey would probably start to soften my resistance to it. It’s hard to say. But they, at the very least, wouldn’t keep adding to my list of reasons to dislike it.
Unfortunately the Tim method of persuasion is hard, and it takes time. Who wants to wait that long? This issue is just too important to wait any longer!
And therein lies the problem. You’ll never convince anyone your cause or issue is important until they believe that they are more important than your cause. I know someone who is currently struggling to get enough people lined up for two events he is putting together to advance a particular cause. His approach to get more people to come is to harangue them about how lazy and uncommitted they are and how they aren’t worthy of the cause. I really doubt this is going to yield the desired results. I wouldn’t be surprised if they get even less of a turnout to the next–and perhaps even this–set of events because people don’t want to be treated like that.
You’ve heard the expression “You’ll catch more flies with honey than vinegar”, I’m sure. The modern equivalent seems to be, “You may kill more flies with a flamethrower, but you won’t burn your house down in the process with honey.”
If you want to change someone you’ll get better results through love and respect than coersion, intimidation, bribery, or guilt.
Or put another way, live in such a way that your causes and ideas are made better by the association. It’s not quick, and it’s not easy, but it works.
* – I’ve got nothing against hockey. It’s just an example, as I’ve never been to a game.
Update: Along those lines, there’s this:
Morning Thom hope you had a great day, I can’t sleep so got on FB to see all my friends from overseas.
As MJ said, Start with the man in the mirror.
Amen!
To be fair, MJ really did try to change the man in the mirror…
I’d say he rather succeeded…
Not sure if we can credit him or his surgeon.