Don’t Argue The Leaves, Argue The Roots
Posted in Uncategorized on August 28th, 2010 by Scott Weaver – Be the first to comment
A tree.
People argue. A lot.
Many times they argue over things that already have answers. But they also like to argue over things that can not be answered. This is a problem.
If people are arguing over things that have no answers, why are they arguing at all? I think I may have an answer. They argue at the leaves. Let me explain.
Every belief you hold at this point in your life has a basis on some other, more solid idea … to a point. Consider the tree on the left. It has roots, a trunk, large branches, smaller branches, even smaller branches and at one point, it had leaves. Beliefs are a lot like trees in that there are leaves of ideas that are based on tiny branches of belief, which are based on other branches of belief all the way down to a rooted belief.
Often the larger branches of belief are largely unquestioned and someone might not even be aware that smaller beliefs are perched atop them, but they are. And going a bit further down the tree, the trunk and roots are often the foundation for a whole host of ideas and beliefs about the world.
When we consider this analogy in terms of how people argue, you’ll notice people are usually arguing at the leaf level. Once the leaves don’t hold, they move down to the branches for support, then down to the larger branches but typically at this point is when people give up and have gotten no where, instead holding on to the bitter feelings and anger that go along with any heated debate.
This is why I believe it’s important to skip the leaf arguments, and even the branch arguments. Instead, we should start at the roots and work our way up.
A tree with dead branches.
The reason for this is simple: if, at any point in arguing the “tree,” the part you’re arguing does not hold up to scrutiny, then everything it supports is no longer stable. If the foundation for anything is questionable, then it stands to reason than the beliefs and ideas resting on the foundation are unstable as well (picture on the right).
Of course, this is not to say that the ideas and notions represented by the smaller branches are absolutely false. It is to say that their existing foundation is unstable, but these ideas could (perhaps) become supported by separate foundations.
To be continued.
