Avoiding "Friendly Fire"

Today I want to post about something very important that I've been learning in the last year (through the election and with the confederate statues issue, etc)...


"I can't go to bed yet, someone is wrong on the internet"

It's common to decry the anger and lack of civility in arguments online, for politics or theology or anything else. This is partly because the semi-anonymity of online comments tends to bring out the worst in people; also when you aren't face to face with someone, there is a tendency to respond to "wrong ideas" and forget that you are really responding to a person. (I think one could make the argument that someone who has decided to become an avatar or promoting conduit for those ideas deserves to be treated as such, but otherwise not.) Also, people are sinful and many simply have zero interest in treating other people well and enjoy trolling, insulting, and/or disputing, and the internet is a convenient tool doing so.

But one more specific danger of arguing on social media, for those who do it for reasons more or less involving what is true and what is not, and not because they simply enjoy it, is that you don't know the context of error that people live in and are responding against. So they may be coming at the issue from a different angle from you, and may indeed be wrong on some particular aspects which you may be pointing out accurately. But if you were to enter into their context, and see the errors they are confronted with and responding against, you would find you were fighting on the same side as them.

As the graduate of a well-known seminary, I and many of my former classmates have trouble not responding to error when we see it, especially theological error. (Yes, sometimes things are not a matter of perspective, but violate basic truths. If you believe the Bible is true, then you believe it's worth arguing about; for humans, one necessitates the other) We certainly have many issues where we disagree; part of going to seminary is being exposed to the scriptural fountain of theological truth whose water is poured (along with many sweeteners and artificial flavors and dyes) into the giant soda fountain of theological opinion, and we all have our favorite flavors of soda even when we did not come to seminary already possessing deep worldview differences that influence how we approach even that pure fountain.

But on the occasions when I have taken issue online with a fellow seminarian or anyone else either expressing a truth unclearly or expressing what was not true, I have often found that their intent was to combat an error they had seen in some other place. Perhaps they had been reading Genesis 1 and 2 and thinking about God's command to humans to be stewards of the earth, and then, stung by a video they saw of environmental devastation somewhere, posted an article which strayed over into dangerous "climate care is the gospel" territory. It is not wrong to stand against that error, indeed it is necessary to do so, but one needs to understand their motivation for posting to address the errors in a constructive way.

Understand 1, before deciding whether engaging 1 or 2 is better worth spending the time for 3

Attacking the wrong they saw, not the one you see

A vivid ongoing example would be the endless array of opinions possessed by American Christians regarding President Trump: If you live in a context (online and/or offline) where most people react to Trump with visceral hatred as a mascot of everything they despise, moving in the direction of truth requires setting aside those emotions and considering the actual ramifications of his actions as president, at least some of which have been positive and helpful, as was also true for Obama. So this is something it was fair to challenge people to do when Obama was the president they loved to hate, and it's fair now that we have a traditionalist authoritarian narcissist in the White House instead of a progressive ideological narcissist.

On the other hand, if you live in a context where there are a lot of people who consider Trump as God's gift to the Church, and to America, which are considered more or less the same thing, then moving in the direction of truth does require challenging some very erroneous assumptions there. (My own stance is that we must be more pragmatic and recognize that, like Treebeard in LotR, the Church should not be on any politician's "side," because none of them are on our "side," and certainly the political machine and swamp of corruption are hostile and corrosive to even those comparatively good men who find their way into positions of power. It is good to be concerned for the state of one's nation and culture; we do not give up our passports or our hard-won freedoms or stop paying taxes or stop driving across local bridges when we enter God's kingdom, for His kingdom is not of this world. But we also don't need the influence of Washington to get things done, and we greatly weaken ourselves to lean on that splintered staff; for we are the adopted sons and daughters of God Almighty)

With our current social media environment (exacerbated by the desire of companies like Facebook to become a walled garden that you never need to leave, by bringing news and everything else into the FB bubble) these arguments all fall into the same space. So I can see posts praising good actions by the president met with offensive hostility by Trump haters, and posts attacking the conflation of what is Caesar's and what is God's met with defensive hostility by Trump supporters, all on my FB wall on the same day.

I have written elsewhere of how the two camps and other zero-sum ideological groups could attempt to live together in relative peace by regarding each other as different nations in the same country. But what I'm talking about today is another way, especially for those being pulled to one side or the other but not yet "in the camp." Sometimes protesting the particular errors around them can drive people too far in a particular direction; many historical evils would be less inexplicable (though not less wrong) if we could feel what it was like to be in a particular context, the unfairness, the personal pain, etc. I see a dangerous tendency to use that kind of language now. In the past, violence usually follows, and that's been true for a couple of years now in America.

So while it's as important as ever to engage and combat falsehood, and keep ideological thinking from undermining the truth that changes not, it's also important to recognize that lots of people's worldviews are being pushed to extremes in our crazy fragmenting society, and attacking their ideas without understanding where they come from is not defeating that extreme thinking but is strengthening it and pushing those attacked to double down on those ideas. This is true of theology as well as politics, since we don't necessarily treat those convictions differently.

So, is it necessary to stop arguing about important issues in "the commons" for which social media has become a very poor replacement? It's useless to even try to say that people shouldn't argue online, but actually I don't think it's necessary to say that. We should argue sometimes, it's an important part of discovering and defending truth. But if truth is indeed our motivation, we should try as much as possible to argue constructively.

Avoiding Friendly Fire

So how do we engage error online when we consider it an appropriate situation to do so, yet focus on attacking the untruth while still loving the person? And more specifically for this post, how do we figure out if there is really a point of disagreement worth engaging, or whether the person is responding to their own context and not yours (or since you are part of their context if you can see what they are posting, we could say, responding to a different part of their context) I think we can do so by making use of two questions:


Important Question #1: What do you think the greatest danger/problem here is?

By asking this question, you do two things. You let the other person feel listened to (because you are in fact offering to listen), which tends to diffuse a lot of potential badfeel if constructive disagreement is going to follow. You also identify what really motivates them in the argument. If you were arguing with a robot, you wouldn't need that, but since even INTPs are people too, it's always more helpful to respond to that motivation too and not merely its symptoms.

In asking, you may find that you don't disagree in any fundamental way, you just don't consider the thing they've honed in on to be the primary issue at stake. In that case you can either end the discussion on friendly terms, agreeing that they are right to be concerned about that thing, or you can shift the argument to whether that thing is really the primary issue. In that case you may need to ask some more questions to find out why they are so worried about that particular issue.

One example of this would be the churches that consider drinking any alcohol to be sinful. That is scripturally indefensible, and the attempt to do so leads to convoluted absurdities of interpretation. However, one often finds that when normally sound, bible-loving pastors also preach this extra-scriptural rule, there are usually strong personal reasons for doing so. (A loved one was lost to a drunk driver, or ruined their own life through alcoholism, etc.)
It is right to stand against misuse of scripture even (especially?) when it has good motives, for that is how heresies tend to begin, with the best of motives. But at the same time, when attacking someone's error, it's important to know what the real motivation behind it is. All the arguing about alcohol in scripture may have been useless, where the person in question may have really needed someone to walk through the grief of their loss with them, so that they did not need to deal with it by bringing the authority of scripture to attack the source of their pain.

Important Question #2: If you were in charge, how would you solve this?

This is an invitation to constructive and not destructive thinking. Sometimes people have never thought this far, and it stops them short. Sometimes they have thought about it a great deal, and will be relieved that someone wants to hear them out.

It seems (at least to me) that a reply to this question of "I'm not saying I have all the answers, just that this isn't right" is basically a cop out. They just want to express disapproval, there is no substance to their opinion to argue over. On the other hand, as Sun Tzu teaches us in the Art of War, it's often wise to leave your opponent one line of retreat. Often lines such as the one above are a way of retreating from the artillery of reason offered in good faith with dignity and order intact.

This question is also one in which you're more likely to come away with something useful for yourself. It's highly unlikely that you are going to convince anyone of anything online via an argument, even a polite and constructive one, but this means that at least one side gets to be heard, and invites the other side to respond in kind. If you have an audience, asking them how they'd solve it also invites the audience to think in a critical way about your opponents proposed solution. If it's implausible or problematic in other ways, that's usually going to much more obvious to bystanders than when you're arguing about the problem itself.

Potatoes argue from identity. Don't be like a potato. Also the cake is a lie.

So...

In an age of ideological conflict and identity fragmentation, Jesus said it best: "whoever is not against us is for us." When we attack the arguments of people who are addressing problems from their own contexts, we need to at least understand their motives. We might be accidentally engaging in friendly fire, distracting or defeating their efforts to engage people in a different context from ours.

I have done this. As an INTP, for an argument I don't shoot a tiny missile at the other person as in my diagram above. I cease to restrain the hungry attack raptors and they devour anything in the argument that's not rock solid. I am not saying I win every argument, there is much I don't know and many other skilled debaters around, and if it comes down to good-sounding rhetoric or emotionally resonant language I'm okay at best. But I am good at seeing what is inconsistent or weak in an argument and articulately dismantling it. And, due to that, there have been times when everything I said was correct and every issue I raised was legitimate, but it was a misdirection from another real problem that needed dealing with, which I wasn't aware of. That didn't delegitimize my own statements, but it made them less helpful in the overall struggle against falsehood.
So today's post is written as much to myself as to anyone else reading it.

I do think arguing online can be selectively useful, and I also do it much less than I used to, partly from being busier with worthwhile things. I usually approach it from the stance that I want to learn more about what other people think and also demonstrate when a position is logically indefensible. Those have been tricky goals over the past year on many topics, especially when emotions and identity are so commonly involved. So my advice to everyone (most of all myself) is to only go into an argument 1) as much as possible not because you are "triggered" by something that seems indefensibly wrong and know exactly how to reduce it to a pile of shattered inconsistencies (or raptor poop), 2) having pictured what realistically winning the argument or having a profitable discussion as a result would look like and making that your goal, and 3) use the questions above and similar ones as needed to keep ideas and people separate, and show that you are willing to listen and learn, and yet that listening and learning doesn't mean conceding the point.

That's all for this post. Have a Resplendent Reformation Day and Happy Halloween!

An INTP on the Mission Field: Periods of Low Energy

On the mission field, one is continuously exerting social, mental, and often physical energy, not to mention carrying the spiritual burdens of the ministry. This extra strain, brought on by the non-native cultural context and the stressful, no-such-thing-as-finished nature of the work, can sometimes push our natural highs higher, but more often drags the natural lows lower, or makes it more difficult to rise back out of them. In this post, I want to look at the high/low energy phenomenon that INTPs (and everyone else, to varying extents) experience, and what can be done about those lows which can be so damaging for INTPs.

Highs and Lows

A well-known tendency of INTPs is to move through cycles of high-productivity and creativity, then low-energy and depression. In the "high" periods, we are likely to experience what is called Flow-- that channeled focus which results in works of great skill and/or creativity beyond one's normal performance. In the "low" periods that inevitably follow, however, we may sink into a depressed state or general lethargy, in which there can be a sense that more ground is lost than was gained during the productive streak that preceded it.

If you are not an INTP, think Sherlock Holmes: When he's Up, Sherlock is scintillatingly brilliant, full of restless energy, and everyone else is trying to keep up and being left far behind. But when he's Down, he is irritable, lethargic, and world-weary to the point that in the books (and some screen adaptations) he turns to small doses of cocaine to liven up his unbearable ennui, listlessness, and despondency. (Cocaine was not an illegal controlled substance when the original stories were written, but Watson still advises him to avoid it)

That's a hyperbolic literary example, but a lot of INTPs deal with a similar cycle on a lesser scale. When present, this high-and-lowing is very inconvenient for most adults, with jobs and lives and time that waits for no man's unfortunate tendency to cycle up and down with no real way to predict when the next phase will hit. However, the weaknesses that accompany one's personality are exactly that: weaknesses, which adversely affect our performance, ministry, and even quality of life if left unchecked. For INTPs, it's weakness which can't simply be ignored. (Some have suggested low energy spells are a coping mechanism for draining the excess energy/overstimulation we get from social interaction, but that's more connected to introversion than the up-down cycle which I'm describing)

Sometimes INTPs get stuck here. Hopefully the tips below
will help you get recharged, or stop the draining where it starts

The Downside of being Down

I have observed the up/down tendency in myself repeatedly, and frankly I'm sick of it; I don't see any reason why when normal people are moving along as they generally do, I suddenly go from energetic creativity to blank-brained exhaustion and want to find a rock to hide under and play tower defense games and eat cookies for a few days, avoiding excessive movement and definitely any social interaction.

But I can think whatever I want about it; just as being an INTP comes with unique positives, it also comes with strong downsides, and this is one of them, whether I like it or not. (What I choose to do when confronted with them is another thing; more on that below)

But as a missionary (and as a human being, for that matter), the low energy cycles are not merely inconvenient and undesirable, since they affect my quality of life and ministry as well. In a foreign culture, to be socially engaged always takes more energy. As an introvert, such engagement is already costly in terms of social energy, and doing it in my second language, with only a tenuous grasp of the underlying social mores and structures that lead to the observable behavior, the cost is much higher. This means the efforts I make to get more plugged into the culture, meet more people, expand the scope of our outreach ministries, etc., all begin to slowly lose ground when I can't gather enough social energy to successful continue doing all that. (If that sounds like I'm saying missions is best left to extroverts who will naturally not struggle quite as much with this, I'm not. Both introverts and extroverts have necessary roles to play in global missions, and neither are limited to certain kinds of roles.)

On the other hand, especially as a missionary, social activities are a large part of my ministry. I can't share the gospel with people if I don't meet them. (I've done it online before, but even that was usually preceded by knowing the person through repeated social engagements prior to the conversation) I can't disciple people if I don't spend time with them. I can't practice Chinese effectively if I don't meet with them. The list goes on.

Thus, depleting the energy I draw on for social stuff then leads to a direct diminishing of what I'm able to accomplish in my ministry, which contributes to the feeling that I'm not accomplishing anything (because that's partly true), which feeds back into the depressive thoughts that accompany the low energy state, producing an extended/worsened low which can go on for quite some time, especially if the weather stays gloomy.

Note: If this seems weak or whiny to you, think of it in terms of bench-pressing: if you're already struggling, regardless of what's on the bar, slapping a "harmless little" extra 10lb weight on each side could easily have you dropping it all straight onto your chest. (Especially since INTPs often don't have anyone who "gets it" to spot for them, and are trying to bench on their own, so to speak)
It's the same way when you're already in a low: even a couple days of gloomy weather or the early darkness of the cold months can add to the weight already on one's spirit in a way that wouldn't be a big problem normally.

People are a union of mind, body, and spirit. (I'm not espousing a particular trichotomous or dichotomous view here, just bringing up the mental, physical, and spiritual aspects of life) When one these components of our being is having issues, the other two inevitably are affected. This is true of all people (sadly often acknowledged in the theoretical sense, but practically speaking still ignored). But being so aware of our mental state, INTPs are especially equipped to notice how the one affects the others, though we may forget it works the other way around too.

Lows therefore do not merely cause one to "feel" tired and lethargic, but the symptoms are very real in one's body. Weight gain (possibly loss, for those who also lose their appetite during those times), poor sleep (despite feeling tired all the time), lack of any motivation to work out or even leave the house- all these things are not only symptoms of a low, but can prolong it. The converse may also be true; the mental/emotional low may be caused or encouraged by physical deficiencies.

The same is true of our spiritual selves as well; we can't always be "on fire," and will go through dark valleys and quietly restful periods as well, but a prolonged low can lead to listlessness, numbness, and dry periods in our spiritual lives too.

Tactics for Low Energy Periods:

So if these low energy periods are a natural tendency of our personality type, but also very problematic, how best to proceed in mitigating the damage? Can we overcome them entirely?

I suspect we can never overcome the tendency itself, as it's rooted in the strength and liveliness of the world in our minds, but we can go a long way towards shoring up this weakness, to the extent that it becomes a nuisance to be guarded against rather than a continual ongoing problem we're stuck inside.

I can begin with an example from my experience here: In learning Chinese over the longer term, I have found that the best time to understand my progress is not the occasional high points: throwing out a chengyu (4 character idiom) at exactly the right time and getting praise from my local coworkers, but rather, on those days when I didn't sleep well or have caught whatever 24-hour virus is going around the metro system and don't seem to have two brain cells to spare for speaking more than my baseline Chinese. On those days, has my worst Chinese improved over my worst Chinese a month ago? If so, then I have improved. Measuring from the lows gives you a far better sense of how much your baseline has improved than measuring the peaks, which are heavily dependent on circumstances.

So it's the same for low energy days. When I first arrived here long term, just making it through the day and feeling like I was still okay with life in Taiwan and how the ministry was going (as opposed to visions of impending failure--don't laugh, I suspect church planters all have those, and INTPs are especially plagued with them) seemed like a minor victory, as I was going through longer-term culture shock and the more stressful adjustment period. Now, into my second year here, I demand at least some level of productivity from myself even on the lowest days. If I can't run towards a goal I walk towards it, or maybe even trudge, but at least by the end of the day I've gotten closer. A paragraph of my novel is not much compared to the rare days I sit down and crank out a chapter or more, but it's a paragraph closer to being finished that wasn't there before.

Staying Productive

Since church-planting is a 24/7 but not strictly 9-5 occupation (there are mostly-free days and also 18-hours-of-constant-work days, like a lot of other non-desk-job occupations), to-do lists are helpful for me on those days that aren't busy with ministry. Lists are not for everyone, but I have been compiling them more consistently lately and making a goal of getting at least a few boxes checked off each day makes the day not feel wasted if I do rest more than usual. Last year I seemed to need a lot of extra rest as my brain tried to process all the cultural newness at INTP levels of multilayered depth, comparing it to all my previously assimilated information about our world and updating lots of things as necessary. (It's been better this year.)

Regardless of your occupational schedule, Perfectionism and Procrastination are a lethal duo, and both can raise their ugly heads on low energy days, preventing you from starting anything because you don't feel able to finish it "properly." For me, dividing up the responsibilities into chunks that I can tackle is like traction on the wheels of productivity, it gets me started again. It also helps avoid the situation where a day feels busy and productive but by the end of the day you mysteriously don't seem to have accomplished much; keeping track of what you actually did reveals that sometimes restful days are actually more productive.

Sleep

Overall, recognizing the exhaustion, mental and physical, is there, but that at the same time you got some good work done, can pull you right out of a low energy spell and back at least into the normal swing of things. Normal tiredness from work you got done or even a good workout is one of your best friends in this situation, both for shaking off the weary spell and also for healthy sleep.

If you are in a low energy period and therefore took a day to rest, you may not be tired by the time night rolls around either, and will almost certainly have trouble sleeping. (Or you're like me, an inveterate night owl who perks up once the sun sets)

Though it's never a good idea to skip a night's sleep, I would almost recommend doing that if you find yourself stuck in a poor sleeping pattern, in order to reset it. I've done it before and it works for me. It probably doesn't work at all for some people, or your career may be such that missing a night's sleep would make the next day unsafe. I'm certainly not advising that, but a cycle of poor sleep can contribute to getting stuck in a low energy pattern and can certainly prolong it by days, so ending it one way or another should be a priority unless you are one of those cool people who don't need as much sleep as the rest of us. (Or you might think you are, until the long term health effects set in)

Hot > Cold

Sometimes a kind of righteous anger can be helpful in dispelling or even preventing low spells as well. Anger has been treated like an inherent sin by a lot of people lately, but I think we need to look closely at what scripture says about anger. Anger is an emotional reaction just like happiness or sadness. None of those are sinful. What we do with all of them can be sinful, however, and a look at scripture suggests that anger is a more "dangerous" emotion and we don't want to be in the habit of stirring it up in ourselves, or being an "angry person." Happiness may lead to flippancy, sadness can lead to wallowing, but anger leads to rage rather naturally. That's why it's often depicted as a fire; once it catches, it tends to spread.

So the Bible says to avoid anger and malice, Galatians 5 lists "fits of anger" as one of the works of the flesh, and wrath is one of the seven deadly sins. But Jesus is reported as feeling anger on various occasions as well. He did not sin in His anger, and neither should we. His anger was directed towards the proper objects as well, as should ours. I don't want to derail this post on a discussion of anger, but personally I think an anger problem is like a drinking problem. It can be cultivated, encouraged, and become addictive, until the person stirs up anger in themselves just to get that feeling. But if you can be filled with the love of Christ and at the same time feel anger towards sin or wrongness, in yourself or others, and not sin in the way you express that anger, then the anger may in some cases be the only appropriate reaction. We should be angry at the things that anger God. (Remembering that He reserves wrathful judgment for Himself only, that's not ours to dish out on those we personally deem deserving)

So when I feel despair and listlessness seeping in like cold fog, a flare of righteous anger can sometimes dispel it immediately. I know my own tendency to sink into depression well enough that I recognize it coming. Whereas in the past I may have said "well, here we go again," and let the icy tendrils sink in, lately I find myself saying "you know what, not today. Shove off." (This has become increasingly doable the more I focus on eating well and getting into shape, going back to what I mentioned before about the mind-body-spirit connection we can't ignore as rational, spiritual, but physical creatures)

Various

Other suggestions I found around the web were mostly diet/lifestyle related:
1. Eat less carbs, more protein  (I've already been doing this and it does help.)
2. Get in shape (Yes)
3. Focus on sleep consistency more than just how many hours (this is nearly impossible for me)
4. Eat well in general (plentiful nutrients, not junk food)
5. Get in shape (Seriously)
6. Reduce overstimulating factors in your daily environment (This one is interesting. A lot of INTPs have a comparatively low toleration for external stimulation, so if you are getting consistently overstimulated by things around you (loud noises you can't control, etc) this can lead to feeling drained and having low energy as well)
7. Get in shape (No really, do it) This was the most common thing cited by people who overcame their low energy problem. As I mentioned above, it helped me too. If you are an INTP reading this, and you're out of shape, the best thing you can do for your mind and everything else is to get your physical machine in better working order. It will help everything else, even depression, though it won't change overnight. If you don't have friends to work out with, I recommend a workout routine you can do quickly in your own place to start out, because otherwise going out to workout at a gym or somewhere else may be just another social burden which you'll keep talking yourself out of. For INTPs, getting into better shape is probably one of those "just do it" things. Don't overthink it, act on it, and keep acting on it until the results speak for themselves and it becomes only rational to continue.

I hope something in here was helpful for anyone out there struggling with low energy and the guilt that might accompany them. It helps me to remember something I heard a Taiwanese pastor share in a sermon: "To be, is more important than to do." We must do, as well, but if we work on who we are, we'll find the doing comes more naturally. With a healthy mind, body, and spirit, fatigue or exhaustion should pass naturally with adequate rest, and well-earned rest pleases the God who designated a day specifically for it.