On Conviction in the Information Age

Have you ever convicted someone for having a conviction?

It could have been a sincere belief, or maybe just an uninformed opinion. Perhaps you debated with the person who held the conviction, or maybe just ridiculed him/her. Or maybe you did nothing at all. Your conviction simmered quietly in your mind underneath your casual and uninvested smile.

We live in an age where it's easier than ever to be convicted. Of course, I mean this in both senses of the word. It is both easier to be wrapped up in beliefs, and to shut them down.

Our vast information technology allows beliefs and ideas to grow at incredible speed. Movements can start overnight. An impression can be compared with the opinions of thousands of other people to give it pseudo factual status. If one is interested in a topic, the information is out there. Blog posts, news articles, videos... you can search to your heart's content. The result of all this is that one can easily form strongly held beliefs with plenty of qualified research with relative ease.

But shutting down these beliefs has also never been easier. With smartphones becoming so ubiquitous, simple factual inconsistencies rarely live past a few minutes before being slain by google. To a certain extent, this mentality has extended to opinions as well. A high opinion of a movie with low review scores for example, can lead another viewer to cite sophisticated reasons as to why said movie was actually terrible.

What does this double edged sword of information ultimately mean for conviction? This is a complex question that has no easy answer. But here are some basic ideas that I have been thinking about lately.

My age group seems to be afraid to have conviction. Because of the depth and ease of access of sophisticated counter beliefs, one's own research and personal experience is rarely enough to convince a person, let alone a person who has an opposing opinion. Information technology also allows opinions to gain support to levels that have never been seen before. One can now invest in opinions that are mostly shared by individuals from all over the nation, or maybe even the world. Opposing such views can be a daunting task indeed.

The result is what many have observed to be a widespread tone of casual disinterest. No matter the subject, we seek the compromise or simply cite some widely held belief with no personal investment in our words. But underneath it all, people are passionate beings. We may hide our passions or deep beliefs, but they are there. But what happens to a conviction untested? Maybe it just sags like a heavy load.

Or does it explode?

On Loving Others

What makes us dislike or even hate others? The level of tolerance varies by person. For some, incorrect manners or social awkwardness can be enough to dissuade further interaction. For others, such actions would be lamentable, yet ultimately excusable so long as the person is honest and kind in their intentions. Perhaps for them, it would take betrayal, or another deeper sort of wronging to incite negative sentiment.

Truly, there are innumerable reasons one could dislike another person. Lately, I've been considering what mine are.

In middle school I was well known among my friends for making grand (often somewhat exaggerated) statements. This habit of mine led me into a few strange, yet ultimately fascinating conversations. One particular day we were discussing people we didn't like in our class. When it came to my turn, my response was: "I have no enemies."

Throughout high school this idea became a playful joke among my friends. If anyone did something that appeared to displease me, my friends would immediately start chanting: "He's your enemy Chris!" Of course, this would always lead to my vigorous denial and some lecturing about why I don't believe in the concept. In retrospect, the latter part is probably why the joke was funny, but I was happy to oblige if I could talk about my "grand philosophies."

All joking aside, I find that to a certain extent, I still believe in this lofty concept, though acknowledging its reality and applying it in life is far more difficult than it was in middle school. Nevertheless, whenever I find myself disliking a person or something with a person behind it, I find myself pondering, "Do I really have a reason to feel this way?"

People are flawed. Our minds could be biologically flawed or scarred by prior experience. We make simple mistakes with huge consequences. We have fears, both irrational and not, that lead to harmful actions. We scheme against rivals and enemies for our own benefit. We're selfish. We don't notice other people's feelings at times. The list goes on and on.

These flaws are a part of being human. Thus the errors and imperfections of others are also a part of me, and to hate them is to hate myself. To not forgive them is to condemn myself and in a sense, humanity as a whole.

I don't mean to suggest that everything is excusable. There are serious evils in the world, and we will make grave mistakes in our lives. This is lamentable, and as a society, we must give justice where it is due.

But forgiveness and justice are not mutually exclusive. After all is said and done, one can always forgive.

The title of this post is "On Loving Others", and yet I've hardly discussed love at all in this post. Love is thrown around a lot in our world today. Its meanings seem to differ for every person, but there are certain aspects of it we can all agree on. When it comes to loving others, I'm suggesting one of those aspects for all of us to sit on. Perhaps the basis of this love is an acknowledgement of flaws, evil, and hate. And perhaps its ultimate form is the ability to forgive, even when the wronging is grave, and it appears impossible. In this, our human love perhaps begins to understand the divine.