There’s a natural and adaptive human tendency to cling to the familiar, to distrust difference. That worked well for millennia to keep us safe, but now it’s an unhelpful relic that fuels groundless fears and keeps [insert favorite fearmongering media villain here] afloat. Most of us are surrounded by friends who think like us, who reinforce our choices and our sense of self, who nod and smile and laugh with us, who put us at ease. Most of us read magazines and watch news channels and listen to talk radio that reinforces our worldview rather than challenging it.
(Those of you busily protesting Not me, not me, I surround myself with ever-so-divergent people and opinions— congratulations on that. It’s very good news, and you can tell us about it at the end.)
Contemporary culture is increasingly willing and able to bend over backwards to assist us in walling ourselves off from difference.
It used to take a bit more effort. Simple example: As a teenager, I listened to radio stations with broad pop formats and would stumble across unfamiliar things all the time—ska, reggae, punk, funk, new wave, R&B, alternative rock, even novelty songs. Once in a while I’d find something new that I liked. Now radio seems to carve out narrow, carefully defined demographic slices. You like alternative rock? Great, I have the station for you. I promise you’ll never have to hear anything else. As a bonus gift, you’ll dodge the risk of encountering anything truly new.
Same with politics, religion, social opinion. You can now find entire TV networks, magazines, talk radio programs, websites, and blogs devoted to reinforcing your opinions and protecting you from any serious risk of developing new ones. And all the while, the science of “behavioral marketing” sniffs behind you, studying what you do so they can profitably feed you more of the same.
As a result, we’re dividing ourselves up into smug, self-satisfied silos, each with everything it needs, including pundits devoted to telling us how very smart we are to be in the silo we’ve chosen.
It’s not good.
This cultural siloing not only shuts us off from our own growth but erodes our ability to communicate with or understand those outside of our own silos. Most of us felt it in the 2008 election—two utterly separate subcultures, one Red, one Blue, each with its own set of “facts,” each with a well-oiled machine of expert opinion and slick presentation designed to reinforce and cherry-pick and coddle and stroke and castigate and denounce as the need arose. Then we all marched into the polls, pretending we were not de facto citizens of two different nations.
This is not a new observation. I know that. But I want to bring it into this series on communication across worldview lines because this cultural siloing is right there at the heart of the problem.
Churches are among the most efficient cultural silos. They tend to bring together likeminded people and reinforce their likemindedness. Sometimes the result is an empowered community that devotes itself to good things like service and social justice. Sometimes it can focus and facilitate hatred and division that would not be possible without the reinforcement of that likeminded community.
Now, thanks in large part to the Internet, the nonreligious are finally finding each other and forming communities—with the same good and bad results. Sometimes we devote ourselves to good things like service and social justice, and sometimes we focus and facilitate a level of hatred and division that would not be possible without the reinforcement of that likeminded community.
So it’s not just a religious thing. It’s a human thing. And the difference between the good and bad result goes right back to comfort and contact with difference.
The more a group shuts off contact with unlike minds, the sloppier it gets. A little less care and thought goes into each statement. You know the room is with you, so you just say it. They’ll laugh at the cheap joke about the other group, they’ll nod at less and less grounded generalizations. Eventually we’re all a self-satisfied mutual admiration society with no remaining ability to communicate outside of our silo.
About ten years ago I became so desperately tired of that self-righteous dynamic among the religious that I stopped attending church. Last year, I became so desperately tired of that same self-righteousness among the nonreligious that I stopped attending humanist/atheist/agnostic meetings and conventions. I simply can’t stand the smugness of the silos—especially when I feel it starting to percolate in myself.
Our siloing has a double effect: One silo loses the ability to speak AND the other loses the ability to hear.
I’ve realized recently that I have a bit of an advantage in all this, which is why I’m writing this series. I’ve spent an unusual amount of time surrounded by and talking to people whose worldview is very different from mine. In addition to 25 years of churchgoing, I worked for a while as assistant music minister at a Methodist church and spent 15 years teaching at a Catholic college. Sometimes I communicated stupidly and ineffectively. Sometimes I did much better. I began to take notes, to work on my approach, to improve my effectiveness at hearing and being heard.
I get comments about this all the time. The most recent was an exchange on Facebook, which is where I’ll go next time.
But first, tell me this, regardless of your perspective: How “siloed” do you feel you are, and how do you think that affects your ability to communicate across lines of difference?
I work and, to a large extent, socialize, in a community that is almost synonymous with this siloing: academia. The ivory tower. I am vividly aware that there are great swathes of viewpoints and perspectives, held by people who live next to me and walk/cycle/drive past me on my way to and from work, which I almost never encounter.
I think one of the best resources I have for breaking out of this tendency – and I take far too little advantage of it – is family. I may choose to read only certain blogs, certain newspapers. I may only befriend people with a certain approach to politics (I don’t, but I could), or a certain taste in music. But I’m stuck with my family. Between blood relatives and in-laws, we really run the gamut – rural to urban, conservative to liberal, uber-green to oil-wealthy, conservative Christian to firm atheists.
Comment: TimMills – 20. October 2009 @ 11:18 am
How should we define our silos? Am I more or less siloed if I read Slacktivist regularly instead of Pharyngula? These are decisions I made based on certain philosophies that I do or do not have in common with the bloggers (well, and also because the comments at Pharyngula are frankly toxic) – I crossed the believer/nonbeliever line in order to find thinking _more_ like my own. At work, I’ve more in common with the younger liberal Christians than the Crusty Old Atheist, but I also avoid discussing politics/religion with the Conservative Christian. Again, I’m crossing believer/nonbeliever lines, but it’s to find people I have more in common with, philosophically.
I am definitely siloed by my academic department, though – I struggle with talking across the humanities/science division.
Comment: Mercredi – 20. October 2009 @ 12:37 pm
Oh Tim, you’re setting me up perfectly. Family is a prominent theme down the road in this series.
And Mercredi, I think reading Slacktivist is line-crossing at its best. It’s very difficult to read that phenomenal blog and still say, or believe, that religious belief and intelligence can’t coexist.
Comment: Dale – 20. October 2009 @ 12:37 pm
[...] http://parentingbeyondbelief.com/blog/?p=2989 a few seconds ago from web [...]
Pingback: Jonathan Blake (stvltvs) 's status on Tuesday, 20-Oct-09 17:39:43 UTC - Identi.ca – 20. October 2009 @ 12:39 pm
Hi Dale – Finally registered to be able to comment on your blog, and since they wouldn’t let me use Kate Miller, I’m Hallucigenia from here on in. Anyway, terrific series!
I am almost completely siloed, and I’m fully aware of it. It’s bad.
BUT I wanted to chime in and say that there’s a tremendous upside to people being able to find likeminded people so easily now. I’m thinking of, say, gay kids living in homophobic areas who can find support, people who have very rare diseases finding each other, people with totally bizarre interests getting together to celebrate them.
I think you recognize this point. I just wanted to stress that IMHO, being able to find likeminded people is an absolute good. It’s being able to tune out non-likeminded people that leads to trouble.
Comment: Hallucigenia – 20. October 2009 @ 1:05 pm
Entirely agreed, Hallu! And good luck figuring out which end is which (inside joke for Charlie’s Playhouse fans).
Comment: Dale – 20. October 2009 @ 1:09 pm
Not terribly siloed with family and friends from all walks of life but I find myself preferring the company of like-minded individuals more than ever. I try to be mindful of the need to respect all people, though not all ideas, but have a hard time being as accepting as I should, knowing, that on the topic of religion specifically, I have done my homework.
Comment: LynneD – 20. October 2009 @ 3:02 pm
One thing that puzzles me about trying to communicate with those of different beliefs is what to do about some of those on the other side who are becoming increasingly unruly and violent. How best to deal with them when they will not accept any kind of olive branch?
Comment: LynneD – 20. October 2009 @ 3:10 pm
Thinking about this most of the afternoon and letting it percolate, I’m now wondering if my experience hasn’t been almost opposite to Dale’s. I’ve talked across the silo effect my whole life with endless effort and some seeming effect at the time but it’s turned out to be like spanking kids. It only seems to work in the short term and long-term things get worse instead of better. What6’s gotten worse, I fear, is my own attitude about it. Mostly I am done. I LONG for some comfort among like minds, just a little.
When my family was in academe, we were southern conservatives and quietly polite. I went through the entire Watergate hearings with two roommates watching on MY tv and rubbing my nose in it, after I had worked for Nixon’s reelection as my first-ever campaign involvement, before I could leglally vote myself even.
I learned and changed and grew and became progressive and a secular humanist. So how have I spent the last 20 years since? Homeschooling among ideological literalists who think despite my doctorate in education, God has made them more knowledgeable than I am about it.
So the best thing for me about Barack Obama was finally feeling I would be in sync with my own nation’s values and people, that we hadn’t become a land of anti-intellectual self-destructive throwbacks to medieval or at least pioneering times after all. And what happened? Politics and public discourse got worse, more virulent and terrifying for me than it was even during Watergate, or the race riots when my southern schools were desegregated by “yankee” court order.
So while I may be in the minority, I don’t think I’m alone. To me public communication has been a nightmare my whole life. Although I have studied and I accept it as a sociological reality, I can’t relate to your silo premise (personally) at all.
Comment: JJ Ross – 20. October 2009 @ 3:29 pm
I think it’s an absurd seesaw between siloing and open communication channels that is actually required with the additional demand to remember to think from time to time. After all, getting new ideas is great because you might stumble upon something really useful. But what if you get a really bad idea? I guess I’d bet people don’t start out with refined ideas so filtering ideas might provide as good an idea as making your own, certainly incorporating different perspectives. But I think it is important to break the silos because I think you have to actively work to prevent tribalistic tendencies that come with siloing. Nice article.
Comment: camoguard – 20. October 2009 @ 3:35 pm
Tom Friedman’s column Sunday was about “people power” and getting it united behind good ideas instead of bad ones, and that the difference between the good and bad means everything . . .and in this example note the “bad idea” was religion-justified:
“Germans showed the world how good ideas about expanding human freedom — amplified by people power — can bring down a wall and an entire autocratic power structure, without a shot. There is now a Dunkin’ Donuts on Paris Square adjacent to the Brandenburg Gate, where all that people power was concentrated. Normally, I am horrified by American fast-food brands near iconic sites, but in the case of this once open sore between East and West, I find it something of a balm. The war over Europe is indeed over. People power won. We can stand down — pass the donuts.
The events of 9/11, by contrast, demonstrated how bad ideas — amplified by a willingness of just a few people to commit suicide — can bring down skyscrapers and tie a great country in knots. “
Comment: JJ Ross – 20. October 2009 @ 3:48 pm
In one sense I’m more “siloed” than ever, in another exactly the opposite! Allow me to illustrate with a joke from one of my favourite comedians, Emo Phillips:
____
I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said “Stop! Don’t do it!” “Why shouldn’t I?” he said. I said, “Well, there’s so much to live for!” He said, “Like what?” I said, “Well…are you religious or atheist?” He said, “Religious.” I said, “Me too! Are you christian or buddhist?” He said, “Christian.” I said, “Me too! Are you catholic or protestant?” He said, “Protestant.” I said, “Me too! Are you episcopalian or baptist?” He said, “Baptist!” I said,”Wow! Me too! Are you baptist church of god or baptist church of the lord?” He said, “Baptist church of god!” I said, “Me too! Are you original baptist church of god, or are you reformed baptist church of god?” He said,”Reformed Baptist church of god!” I said, “Me too! Are you reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?” He said, “Reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915!” I said, “Die, heretic scum”, and pushed him off.
____
Siloed, or not?
As the interwebs and modern communication tools allow us to specialise down to the minutest common denominator, we have the opportunity to define our own identities in so much more, and richer, detail (Harriet Bradley talks about “fractured identities”). With respect to any given “sub-identity”, we can find like-minded enthusiasts or affected persons, regardless of where they are in the world, and form virtual communities around that particular topic, cause, product, team, etc…
However, as the Emo joke illustrates, this can lead to the type of siloed, narrow-minded fanaticism that helped us coin the word “fan”.
On the other hand, linking up with a whole lot of different people across the world on one particular common interest area invariably also means that there is a lot of diversity to be found in that particular group with respect to *other* parts of their various identities. This can lead to a greater appreciation of differences, with the one commonality working as an effective bridge-builder.
Tim’s example of family is a good one. The common interest is the shared heritage, but apart from that, diversity abounds. Same with the Oakland A’s, Apple products and Atheism…
Comment: Theo – 20. October 2009 @ 4:37 pm
Wow, what a great topic…
I know many people who surround themselves with people who agree with them and never seek out a different viewpoint. They stay in their silo because it’s comfortable in there. Sometimes they dig themselves in so deep they become defensive or irrational. A family member, disgusted with the most recent presidential election, told me he was never speaking with any of his liberal friends again. When I laughed he assured me he wasn’t kidding. What a horrible thing to do. I didn’t know how to respond…
I grew up in a moderately religious Catholic family and have been a student of science probably since I was about 4 years old. In my teen years I had some periods of deep spirituality, but I struggled with the religion I grew up with. I was learning about the natural world around me through science and finding it beautiful, amazing, and humbling. I went on to study biology at a Jesuit university. As part of my Bachelor of Science degree program I was required to take 4 semesters of theology classes. Wow, what an interesting time for me… I remember once watching fertilization of a sea urchin egg under a microscope in a lab class and then going on to a discussion on the origins and differences between the Nicene Creed and Apostles’ Creed. I couldn’t get enough of this stuff. Every biology class I took showed me these new wonderful things and every theology class helped me to understand why people believe the things they do. I tacked on an extra 4 theology courses and finished my biology degree with a minor in theology. Learning what I didn’t know about the history of Christianity isn’t what made me an atheist, but having that background made it a lot easier for me to feel confident about having an intelligent and sensitive conversation with anyone on the subject of religion.
I guess my point is that I feel it is unhealthy to always surround yourself with like-minded people who will never challenge you. I’ve learned the most about myself by engaging people who challenge my ideas and worldview in thoughtful and friendly debate. Knowing what you don’t know is always key and you can’t possibly know all the experiences of the person on the other end of the conversation and should respect that fact, especially if you expect that person to respect anything you have to say.
Just over two years ago my wife and I had a kid. That’s why I am here. It’s very encouraging to know that so many others care about their kids growing up asking questions and challenging the norm. It makes me feel better about my little girl’s future. Glad I found you Dale!
Comment: Dean – 20. October 2009 @ 5:32 pm
I don’t feel siloed at all, but that’s because I opted out of organized religion and politics 40 years ago. But this independence creates its own issues, such as learning when to speak my peace and when to smile and nod in the interests of peace, all without tarnishing my integrity. Sometimes I feel sorry for the siloed majority, must most of the time I just shrug and move on.
Comment: DancingFoolVB – 20. October 2009 @ 6:22 pm
Mentally I am very siloed, however in the physical world I am not. I would say that the more I accept my atheism and read blogs, books, and websites on the subject (involvement with the atheist community) the more aggressive or militant my beliefs become. However because of where I currently live, I don’t really have a community of like-minded people I can sit and talk to. I’ve tried the local Humanist group, but it is just getting started and I don’t have much in common with the other members (I’m female in my mid 20’s and the rest of the group are males from mid 40’s-late 60’s). This lack of physical community forces me to interact with people from different silos. This has helped me communicate more politely and effectively with others.
The only place my silo is strong is at home and my husband makes sure to keep me in check. Reminding me that I know what it was like to be a believer and I should have more empathy with those in other silos and their beliefs.
Comment: alisonj – 20. October 2009 @ 9:07 pm
I don’t know. In just our homeschooling group alone there are Pagans, a Druid, Atheists, a Cosmic Humanist, Christians, and Buddhists. Mormons are a large part of our homeschooling as well. I’ve had open conversations with all of them and maintained tight bonds. It’s not just religion, I’ve had conversations on every imaginable hot topic there is and haven’t lost any friends.
Put that way, it looks like I am pretty open, but I find myself wanting to stick with only these people that I already know. I don’t generally want to meet *more* people with different worldviews. So I guess I’m in a silo of sorts.
Comment: Sarah – 20. October 2009 @ 11:57 pm
What a great thread. I can identify.
The other night, I got into another argument with my dad. As usual, we didn’t get anywhere. Why?
Because I’m a progressive who listens to NPR and accepts the evidence for climate change and evolution. He’s a conservative who watches Fox and doubts both. I’m an atheist who favors Many Worlds. He believes in God, Jesus, heaven, hell, devils, demons, healings, and tongues.
Why don’t we get anywhere? Be cause we can’t agree on any of our facts.
Comment: Chuck – 21. October 2009 @ 1:00 am
It’s gratifying to stumble on a topic with such apparent relevance. I should have opened this can of worms ages ago. Well no, actually — a lot of what I want to discuss has only recently clicked for me, so I’m glad I waited. Thanks everyone for making it a dialogue.
Comment: Dale – 21. October 2009 @ 7:42 am
TECHNICAL NOTE: The blog was updated to the latest WordPress version last week. Since then, a few readers have described problems registering to comment (though many others have registered without a problem). If you have difficulty registering, please let me know.
Comment: Dale – 21. October 2009 @ 8:47 am
Religious historian Karen Armstrong’s observation in new Foreign Policy Magazine issue:
“Fundamentalism is not conservative. Rather, it is highly innovative — even heretical — because it always develops in response to a perceived crisis.
. . .All fundamentalism — whether Jewish, Christian, or Muslim — is rooted in a profound fear of annihilation. History shows that when these groups are attacked, militarily or verbally, they almost invariably become more extreme.”
Comment: JJ Ross – 21. October 2009 @ 10:59 am
In other words, which came first, the chiding or the egging on?
Comment: JJ Ross – 21. October 2009 @ 11:08 am
I wonder if Karen Armstrong ever gets tired of being exactly right. One of my best arguments against engaging fundamentalism on its chosen terms is that the attack feeds it precisely what it wants and needs.
Re the chiding and the egg, I don’t think it’s an either-or. It’s a feedback loop. O’Reilly Beck and Hannity’s constant declarations that Christianity/Christmas/USA/traditional values are under attack suddenly make perfect sense.
Comment: Dale – 21. October 2009 @ 11:28 am
I’m not much of a joiner, so I don’t really “congregate” with like-minded people, but yes, the people I do hang out have similar views.
There is another interesting aspect of the silo (beside the lack of communication and understanding) that I’ve noticed. When I encounter new people (say people at my kid’s school or parents of their friends, or people tat the local park) I automatically assume that their outlooks are similar to mine. After all, if we tend surround our selves with like-minded people, we start to expect that people around us are like-minded, right? And unless I learn otherwise (say someone starts quoting Rush or offers to help me find Jesus) I’ll go on thinking that everyone around me thinks more or less like me. And I probably notice things that confirm that sense, too (kind of like when my wife was pregnant, suddenly we noticed all those other pregnant women that were previously invisible).
This, of course, completely prevents me from getting a sense of how aligned with the attitudes of my fellows I am. That’s probably why everyone thinks that they reflect the majority opinion – we’re just projecting our views on other people.
Comment: nonplus – 21. October 2009 @ 12:09 pm
i suppose i have to ask: where is the line drawn between having a strong conviction and being siloed, as you say? to me, the distinction seems subtle.
Comment: lneely – 21. October 2009 @ 12:20 pm
@lneely, being siloed simply means that you’re not exposed to other points of view – it doesn’t have implication on whether you have a strong conviction.
You can be siloed with a weak conviction (e.g. someone living in Dallas, surrounded by rabid Dallas Cowboys fans, but not caring about football).
You can have a strong conviction without being siloed (e.g. a rabid Dallas Cowboys fan living in San Francisco among people that don’t care).
It just so happens that being siloed often leads to taking up or sticking with the common conviction (e.g. the non-football fan living in Dallas eventually becomes convinced that the ‘Boys rule the world, or an existing Cowboys fan living in Dallas will never think that any other team might be better).
Comment: nonplus – 21. October 2009 @ 2:16 pm
Lneely, I’m glad you asked that. I can see that they might seem similar, but nonplus nailed it. It’s a question of exposure to many influences and opinions. If you reach a strong conviction after exposure to diverse opinions, that’s not a siloed process.
Put another way: One of my goals as a parent is to remove my kids from their silos as much as possible — but by no means do I want to prevent them from having strong convictions.
Comment: Dale – 21. October 2009 @ 2:30 pm
I completely identify with alisonj’s comments. I have found that as I became a non-believer, I have also become more critical of believers, especially people who I feel should “know better.” Intellectually, I know that how people behave is more important than what they believe, and I’m working on being more accepting. I live in a community that is majority conservative Republican, although no single Christian denomination seems predominant. Unlike nonplus, I always assume that other people do not believe as I do. Since I hold minority viewpoints I tend to keep my beliefs to myself or to share them with a select group of people, not always because we think alike, but because I feel safe sharing with them. I am reluctant to openly call myself atheist because of the visceral reaction that I expect people would have. I have only one friend who self-identifies as atheist, and we rarely discuss this shared worldview. On the other hand, I have several friends who are believers in differing degrees, and we’ve had some great conversations. It does disturb me that more than one person has taken the stance of “don’t confuse me with the facts” – stating that they realize that their beliefs would not hold up to critical scrutiny. I suppose that I am partially siloed – not surrounded by like-minded people and trying to find common ground wherever I can.
Comment: codysmom – 21. October 2009 @ 5:22 pm
Yep, I’ve also improved my own ability to accept strange but harmless beliefs over the years. But sometimes it isn’t so easy to disconnect belief from action because beliefs so often do have real consequences. And when an act is malignant, we have to be willing to challenge both the act and the belief that motivated it.
BUT (and here’s the point of this series) I think we often do that in counterproductive ways.
Comment: Dale – 22. October 2009 @ 8:16 am
I am like codysmom – I always now assume that people have differing beliefs than mine. But unlike codysmom, I have found that what may start out as great, open conversations with believers, have usually ended (for me, anyway) with stomach churning discomfort. There is nothing like being told you and your family (young children included) are not going to heaven – but that that’s OK because you wouldn’t want to be there anyway! – to dampen a friendship. (And no, the fact that I believe without a doubt that there is no heaven up there to go to, doesn’t seem to change how the conversation affects me).
My husband and I do feel siloed, but we suspect many Christians around here are doing the siloing. There have been far too many instances of meeting someone, the conversation is going well, the subject turns to what church we attend, and the conversation is over. The funny thing is, I’m not sure I blame them – surely they are just as uncomfortable with me as I am with them.
Regarding communication and your comments about specialty radio, TV, internet sites – you hit the nail on the head. It has been really disheartening to watch the whole health care reform debate – the willingness of people to listen to half-truths and scare-mongering and to shout down any meaningful discussion. Interestingly, this topic seems to have joined religion and politics in the category of “do not discuss.” I recently had a conversation with an uninsured person. I assumed (wrongly) that she would be in favor of reform. When I tried to say something about the Canadian system I was shut down – she believed what she had heard on whatever conservative site she was getting her information and seemed completely unwilling to hear what I, a Canadian, knew of our system.
Comment: canuck – 22. October 2009 @ 8:45 am
We need better ways to get outside our silos and mingle with differing worldviews. I was reading a controversial op-ed column today, and the comments there made my heart hurt. The vitriol, the smug attacks, the complete dismissal of people who disagree — so many of us have completely lost the capacity for civilized discourse. There was very little evidence of an ability consider new ideas or to respectfully disagree. The experience made want to run screaming back into my own safe silo.
Why must it be that breaking free from our silos means dipping ourselves in an acid bath of incivility and nastiness? Why are there so few environments in which we can have meaningful conversations across religious or party lines? The state of discourse, especially in the US right now, fills me with dread. I’m so glad you’re addressing this, Dale!
–Kelly
Comment: kjcwright – 22. October 2009 @ 12:00 pm
@nonplus, @Dale: thanks! that makes sense. so to remove oneself from those silos, one merely needs to be exposed to all sorts of different opinions, and to understand why those people might hold them; empathy, in other words?
if that’s the case, then i suppose i could say that i’m hardly siloed at all. i don’t attend church, nor do i attend freethinkers conventions. i’m also uninterested in what the blowhards on the teevee or the radio have to say about anything whether i agree with them or not. i suppose those things are both strengths and weaknesses, making me more vulnerable to “siloing” in some respects and less in others. however, i do make a concentrated effort to avoid that, and i like to think it serves me well.
Comment: lneely – 22. October 2009 @ 2:02 pm
I’m with Kelly. Many times, I feel my only options are to hide in my little cave/silo or be attacked.
Whether it’s my lack of religion, my choice to homeschool, my desire to limit my kids’ sugar intake or my politics, somebody is always ready to try to tear me down or build themselves up (or both) on one or more counts. IT’S EXHAUSTING!
I find it especially difficult when these things happen in front of my children. It’s one thing to teach them to respect others’ thoughts and opinions and remain open-minded freethinkers. It’s a whole other to prepare them for dealing with other people’s insecure responses.
Comment: Pearl – 22. October 2009 @ 6:22 pm
Am I siloed? That would depend on what definition you’re using…. I have chosen (and refused to leave) a highly diverse neighborhood that is multi-economic class, multi-racial/ethnic, and has the largest gay population in the city. Here, we can be ourselves- there’s no norm for “upward mobility” or a model for what kids and families look like. In fact, it’s quite the trend to find your own unique niche of free-thinking independence, “Oh, you’re free-range children, public-school thinkers? We’re organic, no-vaccinations, home-schoolers, and your neighbors there are local-food, lesbian partners who own a small business down the street. Nice to meet you….”
Yet, this too is a silo. During the last election, you had to be pretty brave to put a Republican sign in your yard and there is a bit of a competition to be the most free-thinkingly unique. But compared to the fairly conservative company I work for, it’s nice to have a refuge of crazy, independent liberals who like “collecting” differences.
Comment: downfroggy – 23. October 2009 @ 1:34 pm
I think I have been siloed for most of my life without knowing it. I stupidly thought that everyone else saw religion as I saw it—a mostly cultural identity–and I definitely had blinkers on about moral questions and the way people would think about them.
Yep, thought everyone else thought the same way I did. Of course, I know better now, but I am astonished at how frequently I find myself slipping back into the old assumptions that other people see what I think is “obvious”.
I have found this thread really interesting. I almost hate to post because I feel there is a lot to learn from reading what other people have to say.
I agree with Kelly–I’ve felt intimidated in recent years by the extreme religiosity around me (especially as I moved deeper into the midwest a few years ago—southwest Ohio was one thing–northwest Illinois is a whole other thing!)–I worry constantly about my children growing up encouraged to be free-thinkers in this culture which is so hostile to free thought, agnosticism and atheism.
We have raised our children loosely within our religious cultural tradition (Catholic), while keeping away from fundamentalism and keeping a secular approach and open dialogue in our home. We have a large library with lots of mythology from many cultures, including a Bible, a Koran and many other texts—paganism, Greek, Roman and Norse mythology—wiccan, books on world religions and so forth. We also have hundreds of books on many different subjects, fiction and no-fiction. When they were little, we read to them from all sorts of mythological traditions.
We have at least a dozen excellent books about evolutionary theory, including a gorgeous coffee table picture book. This last was purchased after a neighborhood homeschooling parent decided to lecture one of our sons (who was simply there playing in the yard with his sons) about Creation and told him that he was not saved because he was Catholic. To his credit, our boy (aged 12 at the time) stood his ground and debated the question with this man, but when he came home and told me about it, he asked for a good simple book explaining evolutionary theory so that he could be better prepared if this happened again. I swallowed my outrage and praised him for his courage in debate with an adult challenger and I ordered more books.
Part of trying not to be in a silo, for me, is allowing my kids to still play with kids whose parents do this sort of thing. I am outraged but if I prevent my children from playing with other children, how can I claim to be raising free-thinkers? I can only do my best to arm them with knowledge and resources and an open mind as much as I can.
And, for us, it seems that arming our children includes giving them the basics in the most benign religious culture we can provide–because the first thing they hear out there is “Don’t you know about Jesus Christ?”. We want our kids to be able to say with confidence, “Yes, we do, thanks.” and move on.
But, ultimately, I wonder—while we all strive to be open-minded and not live in a silo, the truth is (for me) that I get so tired and so frustrated and so disheartened when I read things and experience things daily which crush the heart and spirit–here’s an example:
Our beautiful, intelligent and astonishingly honest and open-minded daughter is in college. She is not a partier, but she has a lot of friends. Other kids are perplexed and intrigued by her, because she seems not to need to follow the crowd, doesn’t smoke or drink, yet is not religious nor caught up in any passion except intellectual and sports and personal best passions—so boys pursue her (and she is not easily caught for a date). She won’t lie or simper to please a boy (or other girls). Last fall, a military lad pursued her and finally won her over (she did like him, to her own surprise, because he was so persistent, I think) and she went to a military ball with him. Clearly, though, she was still true to herself. The date fizzled, he didn’t call again and soon after, his Facebook status read “What this country needs is to be rid of all atheists”.
Thats what our children face.
No wonder some of us scurry to the nearest silo.
Some days, darn it, we just need to know that there are people out there who do think like we do and that we are not alone. Because some days, it really feels threatening out there.
Like JJ Ross, I actually feel as if I spend most of my life (and helping my children navigate in their lives) in a world that is very hostile to free-thinking or any person who is not a Christian theist. It’s worse since 9/11, but it was a reality before then.
We have our children enrolled in a non-sectarian private school- our oldest two attend university–one at a public university in Ohio and the other in a large city Jesuit school well-known for its openness to ideas (the progressive Jesuit president hosts the Vagina Monologues each year, and allows diverse opinions on campus, defying the outrage of conservative Catholic groups–love that). We try to stay open to ideas and diversity. Our daughter writes a progressive column in the campus newspaper opposite a conservative writer, and this too is encouraged by the faculty-which I applaud. So, can it be said that one is siloed and not the other? The daughter at the Jesuit university is the one who writes columns which are pro-choice, pro- gay marriage and pro-married clergy in the school paper. The daughter in the public school is the one whose date called for the banishment of all atheists.
My DH and I have been involved in United Way in our community in leadership roles and we both strive constantly to push back our tendency to turn away from what we do not like or agree with. We are eager volunteers and insist on volunteerism from our children. We reward our kids for hitting the books with trips to other countries (which we do using airmiles points from my husband’s business travel) because we believe that travel is an education in itself.
We try very hard to avoid hiding out in a silo, and frankly, where we live, it is hard to find a silo of like-minded people. we are inundated with religiousity every hour of every day in this community.
So I think we do embrace like-minded people when we find them. It is a little bit sad, actually; first we get a sense that maybe this person is not like the rest–not a fervid religious person–and then we tentatively put out feelers–then the rush of recognition on both sides–and it is drinks all round! It’s like old war buddies finding each other. But this happens so rarely. No wonder religion is so strong and so powerful–the loneliness and ostracism that outliers often experience can be pretty overwhelming. Psychologically, it is amazing that any free-thinkers survive at all!
I am the world’s worst typist, so I hope this will be legible!
Comment: niftywriter – 23. October 2009 @ 11:53 pm
I think I’m becoming less siloed. I do however see some value in siloing to an extent. The reason is that we all need support in some areas…even freethinkers. While I consider myself a freethinker, I don’t know many in my everyday life, and I do find comfort and stimulation from communities such as this. However, I also recognize that the only way to grow is through the challenge of others who are different. So I really don’t consider myself siloed for the most part, but I also don’t think that some siloing is a bad thing. We all pride ourselves on independent thinking, and rightfully so, but notice that we are all also reading and responding to this thread, which is in itself a small form of siloing and confirming each other’s ideas. Make sense?
Comment: Secudad – 24. October 2009 @ 9:22 am
Seems like Dale will want to carefully distinguish in his work, then, between unhealthy insulation FROM the unlike-minded and healthy connections WITH the like-minded. And choice seems to matter a great deal, how much control we feel we have over the balance rather than being forced in or out of the confrontations between groups and ideologies? As a network of diverse homeschool families rather than the evangelical enclaves we’ve been sterotyped as being, we used to talk a LOT about fists and noses, that your fist is free until it approaches my nose and vice versa, and the idea was to stop thinking about hitting each other and find positions and projects we could all freely work toward together rather than against each other in a zero-sum game.
I am remembering Robert Putnam (Bowling Alone) suggesting a correlation of more resentment and less understanding when within close diversity (as in ethnically mixed urban neighborhoods) than in more comfortably distant homogenous neighborhoods. IOW the idea that friction rubs us raw instead of making us more sensitive?
This is not an easy, one-dimensional project –
Comment: JJ Ross – 24. October 2009 @ 10:27 am
I bught a new popular-research book called Sway yesterday, after having read a chapter standing up in the book store. It was about how we perceive fairness in process and that we’re willing to impose an unfair result even to our own detriment, if we feel it will serve justice because the process was unfair all along. Sort of a lose-lose mentality when it seems the other guy just doesn’t deserve to win.
There was a striking example about audience answers for the tv show Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? In America the audience answers corrently 90% of the time, which helps the contestant. But in Russia, the audience purposely sabotages the contestant because their resentments of unfair everything give them a completely different collective psychology than we (up until recently) have had here.
I wonder if these comments show that we’re all feeling more like the Russians these days, exhausted by rebuffed efforts to reach across borders and help each other only to see unfairness and intentional harm being manufactured no matter which silos we tend to prefer? If so, maybe we need to address that unfair-process perception first and get our psychology healed, before any “communications strategy” is likely to work for positive change.
Comment: JJ Ross – 24. October 2009 @ 10:40 am
I have to develop a name for that type of question, since it comes up so often. It’s related to “Isn’t intolerance for intolerance a form of intolerance?” and “By insisting that your kids think for themselves, aren’t you really forcing them to think like you by requiring them to think for themselves?” I can get lost in those circles as easily as the next philosopher, but I don’t think it’s worth the trip.
In this case, I think asking “Isn’t talking to each other about the need to talk to others still a form of talking only to each other?” is healthy self-reflection, but not all that productive in the end. I’m not advocating a swing to the other extreme. Challenging ourselves to break out of our silos is about the healthiest siloing I can think of.
I think there’s something to that — though I’m not convinced there’s been much real effort to reach across borders from either side. Since communicating more effectively and self-healing feed each other, my intention is to address them at the same time. If someone else would like to attend to the healing as a separate step, by all means (paging Dr. JJ to the OR…
)
Comment: Dale – 26. October 2009 @ 5:36 am
Oh, AND I would say, from personal experience, that the feeling of communicating effectively in this area — sometimes for the first time ever — has a remarkable healing power of its own.
Comment: Dale – 26. October 2009 @ 5:43 am
When I was younger I siloed myself by being friends with people who were from the same small town or who I “had” to befriend. (think college roommates and classmates) I moved over 1000 miles away and was forced to make new friends. I found that given the chance to make new friends I chose friends who agree with me philosophically, but who come from all walks of life. Even though most of my friends would agree with me politically or philosophically, I still feel like they came to these conclusions through a wide variety of life experiences and I appreciate that. Now family is another story all together. We all look alike, but we sure do think differently!
Comment: beckyleah – 26. October 2009 @ 6:03 pm
Here’s something I’ve noticed about my circles (note plural) of friends… Whilst I get along famously with all of them individually, this doesn’t always translate to any two of them necessarily getting along with each other! Either I’m a very accommodating, un-siloed person (yay me)… or, more likely, I have something *different* and non-transitive in common with each one individually.
Comment: Theo – 27. October 2009 @ 8:52 am
We’re all like Venn diagrams in this regard, I think . . .
Comment: codysmom – 27. October 2009 @ 10:07 am
I think there are ebbs and flows depending very much on your need and your journey. For example, most of us are “siloed” by our parents who want us to learn and be productive parts of our culture (religion). As we mature, some of us stay in our parental silos, while others break away and explore different silos, perhaps returning home, or setting up camp elsewhere on the farm.
And then some of us are simply out standing in the field. (rim shot!)
Dale, you write: “So it’s not just a religious thing. It’s a human thing.” I would add that it’s also an American thing. The well-developed strategies of target marketing have permeated every aspect of our lives. We invent and we classify. It’s what we do. And we are very comfortable with it even as it increases exponentially.
My religious silo adventures are fluid: some days I am a “recovering Catholic”, some weeks I’m happily aligned with the Secular Coalition and I’m so proud to be standing with them. Other times I am so very moved by my Christian friends and our shared history. And most often, I’m what my son calls the “D choice” – none of the above.
I met a man recently who showed me an antique Bible and he couldn’t understand why I wasn’t more emotionally moved. “Aren’t you a Christian?” he asked. When I told him no, he went through the line “jewish?” no. “Hindu?” no. “Islamic?” no. “Buddhist” no.
I stopped him and told him. I’m label-free. None of the above. Non-theist. He simply was dumb-founded. He had sincerely never heard of a such a thing. He was a cute, white-haired man with a thick European accent running an antique shop in NJ. Safe to say, even though he was an expert in his field, and he had emigrated to America, he has clearly never stepped foot out of his silo.
If I were too entrenched in my own silo, or too scared to come out, I wouldn’t have taken the opportunity to give him a brief explanation of Ethical Culture, or write down the web site of the Humanist Association, or encouraged him to go to the library and read a book by Russell. All of which I did. And guess what? He was grateful.
As my 11 year old daughter would say: “Understanding is the best silo, EVER!!!”
Comment: amrezen – 27. October 2009 @ 1:21 pm
This post has given me a lot of thought over the past few days. The most tangible result has been that when a song comes on I don’t like, I don’t immediately change it, lol! Ok, it’s a start
Seriously though, I don’t think I’m overly-silo’d. (siloed?). I live in a very diverse area and have a very diverse family.
But in thinking about it, honestly, religion is the least of my problems. I was a much narrower thinker before I had kids. Being a mom has really changed me. I noticed how many lines are drawn when you’re a mom. What other people call the “mommy wars”. Now, I do take offense at the idea that it’s only moms who do this because it’s most certainly not. But it’s where I first noticed it.
As a new mom, I got caught up in the us vs. them and then after awhile realized how incredibly stupid it is to not be friends with someone because they fed their baby a different way than I did. Or put their baby to sleep in a different place than I did. And then over the years, as the kids got older I started homeschooling and have met homeschooling families who won’t hang out with families who put their kids in school or schooling families who don’t want their kids to play with homeschoolers. And once you’re homeschooling, there are many different styles and some people choose to only hang out with people who do it the same way they do. And back to life in general, let’s not get started on the vegetarians vs. the Nourishing Tradition folk, or the alternative med vs the regular med people (that last one is actually the worst in my personal life).
I’ve had the same experience of someone upthread, where I was having a conversation and it stopped dead when the question of “where do you go to church” came up. But it’s only happened twice so it’s more of a funny story for me than anything else. But overall, I haven’t had this siloing with religion. The diversity of this area has translated well to the diversity of my family and friends (and kid’s friends).
Having said all that, I do get the benefit of going someplace where you can be with like minds (like this blog). If I get this concept right, if you will *only* hang out with people who think the same as you, that’s what we’re talking about here, right?
Just my thoughts on the whole thing
Comment: Shannon – 29. October 2009 @ 8:42 am
(to clarify, in my “where do you go to church” example, it was the *other* person who ended the conversation when I gave the “wrong” answer – wasn’t sure if I was clear on that).
Comment: Shannon – 29. October 2009 @ 8:57 am
YES, that’s the idea. Thanks for saying that so clearly. It’s about getting outside of a single stream of influence, not about suddenly rejecting all association with the likeminded. But because we tend to think in extremes and polar opposites, these discussions are often heard in those whiplashing terms.
Comment: Dale – 29. October 2009 @ 9:01 am
When I saw this statement, “Contemporary culture is increasingly willing and able to bend over backwards to assist us in walling ourselves off from difference,” I immediately thought of one of the scariest things I’ve read lately about technology, which was an article in the “Atlantic Monthly” about “augmented reality.”
Here’s a link, for anyone else who might want to think some scary thoughts – but possibly some positive ones, too:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200911/augmented-reality
Comment: Brad – 03. November 2009 @ 5:41 pm
[...] is what siloing will do to good and smart people. It makes them sloppy, myself included. And they end up looking [...]
Pingback: The Meming of Life » Embiggening humanism Parenting Beyond Belief on secular parenting and other natural wonders – 17. July 2010 @ 1:16 pm