The subhuman morass of non-engagement...

We need to learn how to reason with one another.  When you don’t have reason, you just collapse into a subhuman morass of non-engagement.  ~N.T. Wright

Here we are, Election Day 2012.  I heard a lecture recently by theologian N.T. Wright, and I couldn't help but think of many applications for the concept he presented—differentiated unity—including the politically polarized nation we have become.

Over the past several months, whenever I've logged onto Facebook I've been taken aback by the certainty in which many of my Facebook friends have expressed their political views.  The word "certainty" can be defined as either perfect knowledge that has total security from error, or the mental state of being without doubt.  Either way, we're stating our views in a way that indicates there is no room for reason because we are "certain."

N.T. Wright would say that we've allowed our diversity to become destructive because of the collapse of discourse.  In discourse, "you use reason to argue from premises [or assumptions] to conclusions so you can see why you disagree with people" says Wright.  The last phrase of that sentence is worth repeating…so you can see why you disagree with people.  He didn't say, so that you can prove why you are right and others are wrong.  Dr. Wright would say that we are not engaged in discourse but in bits and pieces of a shouting match.

Wright also suggests that the 21^st century is not a story of progress but a story of grace.  It's a story of grace because of our rich diversity.  That diversity extends well beyond our political views.  Even as I write this, I can think of several of my social media contacts who are in India and Africa.  These contacts aren't U.S. citizens who've moved to these countries.  These are people I've come in contact with because we really do live in a global society.  That means we can't escape diversity.  We can't go back.  It's here to stay. 

The alternative to these shouting matches is differentiated unity.  This is not a new term, but the concept is probably new to many of us.  The simplest definition is "a community of people who are united in their diversity."  It means we will maintain unity even when faced with cultural differences.  We will still have boundaries, but we will identify the differences that do make a difference and the differences that don't make a difference.

This doesn't stop with our political views, by a long shot.  Destructive diversity has worked its way into our organizations.  Destructive diversity manifests itself in conflict and many times we prefer to avoid conflict and instead we allow destructiveness to fester.  We don't want to "see why we disagree with people."  We want to argue our position and show everyone else why we are right.  Anne Lamott, one of my favorite authors, said "You can either practice being right or practice being kind."

Wright's vivid image of the subhuman morass of non-engagement is one I'd prefer not to emulate.  As leaders, we are challenged to model differentiated unity.  Imagine for a moment what it would look like if within your organization you were able to make the simple (yet difficult) shift from debating to prove who's right, to engaging in reason to see why you disagree with people