Once in a while my husband, Kris, writes about issues he is thinking about. Here’s his most recent submission. Enjoy! 

Martin Luther King Jr said, we are “in an inescapable network of mutuality”. As individuals we interpret, listen to, and speak to those around us from a single perspective, often imagining we can see from a higher ground, but in a world of vast complexity, wise and rational decision making can only be realistically sought as we recognize this network of mutuality. We are prone to numerous errors in our thinking due to our biases, fears, limited insights, and self-focus. How can we resist our natural impulses and errors that only deteriorate our communities and society? We will dwell amongst many communities: our family, our friends, our social networks, our society, our world, how can we be a listener and a voice that enhances the collective wisdom and state of those around us?

We live in a highly complex world. The English Wikipedia that succinctly describes most major ideas, concepts, and identifiable objects in our world, consists of about two and half billion words. That is about the same as the number of seconds in the average lifetime of a human. There are roughly 7000 languages in the world, each with their own unique thoughts. Our world is continuing to grow more complex. Populations are growing, cultures continue to evolve, techonology advances, and new challenges and ideas are encountered.

As humans, we are constantly seeking to interpret the world into discernible patterns that can be understood by our limited intellect and experiences. This means that we are prone to reintrepret the world into our existing simplified patterns. The complexity of the world doesn’t fit into simple patterns, but nonetheless we trudge along trying to make everything fit into our simplified view. I’ve been thinking a lot about how this distorts our perspective and decisions. Recently we began a new series at our church that started with Proverbs (1:22):

“How long will you simple ones love your simple ways? How long will mockers delight in mockery and fools hate knowledge?”

Solomon realized that people are prone to try to simplify complex issues into simple good/bad, left/right, right/wrong patterns. This leads to the problem of creating false dichotomies as we analyze the world around us. The underlying motivation behind this is simply pride. Despite our limited finite nature, we wish to live under the pretense of understanding the world around us. This gives a feeling of superiority, enough that we feel entitled to mock. It is interesting that Solomon, one of the world’s wisest men, saw this issue even in ancient Israel. How much more do we face this issues in our complex world today?

As humans we tend to be very prone to a number of misleading ways of interpreting the world around us and to misleading those around, as we seek to assimilate our experiences into our limited understanding and share with others. To avoid the “love [of] being simple”, and being a “hater of knowledge”, let’s consider some of the misleading techniques of the simple (both for the listener/learner and the speaker):

Knocking Down Strawmen.
This is act of finding a weak point in someone else’s set of arguments, and attacking, or “knocking down” that weak point. Productive, well-intentioned arguments that really oppose another view must address the strongest point, not the weakest. But this entire exercise reveals a more sinister purpose. What is your purpose, what do you seek to accomplish by finding a weak point in a movement and knocking it down? Are you seeking to demonstrate your own superiority to another view, or to learn from it and engage it thus better understanding the issues? Does one who seeks to grow in their wisdom and knowledge generally have a goal to oppose others views or to learn from them? It would be pretty silly to look to the weak points if you are honestly in pursuit of the latter.

False Dichotomies
False dichotomies are when we confine a range of possibilities  into only two possible options. A classic aspect of simple thinking is the creation of false dichotomies, reducing the complex array of multi-dimensional factors, compromises, and ranges into a black and white option. A classic example of this is in economics, where so many people like to think they have a simple answer. Do you buy the false dichotomy that this is nothing but socialism vs capitalism, or are you willing to acknowledge nuances of well-balanced monetary and financial policies, the non-linearities of compensation, effects of foreign trade, the deviation from consumer rationality studied in behavior economics, and more in field that goes beyond what any single person, even with a graduate work in economics can fully understand?
“O simple ones, will you love being simple?”

Mockery
 Once you have distorted a complex reality into simple obvious right and obvious wrong, it is now easy to transition into mockery. Parody can be the source of some fun when everyone is in on it, but often times it combines the worst of irrationality and negativity. But rather me pointing this out, it is worth looking at what King Solomon had to say about it. Solomon employs a remarkably clever bit of irony (the real kind) shortly after vs 22 in Proverbs 1. After warning mockers not to continue in their mockery, he goes to say for that those who continue, wisdom (the anthropomorphization thereof) will “also will laugh at your calamity”. Indeed it is a very ironic retort to mockery, a parody of wisdom, to in turn be mocked by wisdom.

So it might seem that I am suggesting that this verse means we need to have PhD level insights on every subject. This is definitely not the case. There are numerous subjects that I know very little about. I think we need to synchronize the verse from Proverbs with other verses that speak to humility such as:

Mat 18:4 Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

In fact, the warnings against naivety and simplicity, should bring us humility. A humble realization of our limits in most areas of life should drive us to be first and foremost good learners. It should go without saying that wisdom lies with those that are attentive listeners and learners.

Humility can lead us to one of the most assuredly certain insights: our own experiences. There is nothing that we can speak with more authority on than simply our own experience. We may draw false conclusions, misinterpret meanings, but recouting our experiences themselves are something can share with our community that truly bring new insights to those around us.

These fallacies I mentioned can prevent us from clearly understanding issues and prioritizing our values and resources, as we listen to the world around us. However, we should consider not only how we process and filter information we receive, but how we lend our voice in a constructive way to a community. Are our voices weighing down issues with further polarization, over-simplification, or are we adding to our collective understanding by providing nuanced focused insights that can further expands other’s views and perspectives, giving them new ways to see the world?

The web has amplified our ability to pursue each of these paths. We can research and learn amazing amounts about topics from incredible variety voices right from our computer. But on other hand, it has also amplified our ability to insulate our perspectives. In the past, we used to get our news and information from “the media”, but with the death of centralized media, and the proliferation of variety of more niche information sources, it is now incredibly easy to tailor your news and information that is served to you in way that will confirm all of your existing biases, preconceptions, and views. Many have concluded that the Internet has actually probably increased our polarization as a society because we so easily tend towards the latter instead of the former way to approach the web. This tendency to try to confirm our biases is a well-observed, studied, and documented effect in psychology. Based on this natural fault in our psyche, it is not surprising that this is the road we often choose. Do you use the web to read from people that you already agree with, or do you use the web to broaden your perspective?

We tend to be driven to assert our “opinions” in community, regardless of whether it will contribute to the collective well-being of our community. Of course we always think our opinions are right, or we wouldn’t have them, but we continue to hold opinions, and feel equally right to hold to them without consideration to real amount of evidence for them. But our opinions are more than collections of information that we pass on. We hold opinions, to a large degree, because they are a part of asserting our individuality, our uniqueness as a person. We want to stand out, and our opinions help us to do that. To be opinion-less is to fade into the background. At it’s worst, opinions are nothing more than us clamoring for attention, “hey look at me, I have an opinion to share, look how smart I am, look how right I am”.

But opinions don’t need to be just arrogant self-aggrandization. A key part of community is connecting, and really getting to know each other at a deeper level. The humble sharing of opinions can express our true identities by revealing our underlying values, passions, and motives. This can be done without being couched in veneers of superiority, or intellectual “rightness”. If and when you must share opinion, consider this; often what we have to say isn’t adding collective wisdom of your community, and thus your opinion can and often should be shared with humility, not as a force to move others, or a weight to bear on others, but as candid reflection of who you are, what drives and defines you.

I wanted to summarize the difference between naive individualistic thinking and engaged community thinking with a table:

So I want to leave you with the challenge of considering your role in the community as you learn, listen, and speak. Are you willing to be humble listener, recognizing areas that you haven’t a full understanding, and willing to engage in the complexity of issues in areas that you are passionate about? Or will you continue ahead with your ignorance and arrogance, over-simplifying, seeking to confirm your own biases? Will you share your opinions as reflections of your values and characters, or as just as a way to draw attention to yourself? How will you add to the collective wisdom of your community, your friends, your society, your family?

I recently wrote about the priority of international giving, and we started a discussion on how to help without negative impacts. I wanted to give a roundup of some good ways to approach selecting a charitable cause, particularly in the midst of the Christmas season. There is an increasing movement to subvert Christmas consumerism and a great way to do this to give to a charity on behalf of a loved one. Also maximizing itemized deductions at the end of the year is just financially prudent. As I had mentioned before, giving can be done just out of some sort of obligation with little thought for the net result, or it can be done with a true concern and desire to help others. If you are in the latter, I wanted to try to give some suggestions for charities to give to this season.

Charity Navigator is a great site for getting objective information about the numerous charities out there, and they have an excellent best practices article. There is a key points from this article that is worth emphasizing for those that really want to make the best possible impact. Be proactive in your giving! Determine how you want to impact the world, what type of target you feel most passionate and connected to, where you see the biggest need or best opportunity to use your gift and really focus on making a difference in that area. Be focused, lots of small donations have larger administrative overhead for charities. Diversification is important in investments, but those that make a big impact in the world choose a cause and give themselves wholeheartedly to do everything they can to further that cause. Don’t wait for an emotional appeal. Those that give the best speeches aren’t necessarily the most needed causes. And don’t just randomly select a charity. Do your research, be focused. Find the need that really connects with you and allows to make impact. Let’s explore some possibilities.

There are several dimensions to causes. First, we can ask what type of cause do we want to give to. There are a number of possibilities:

• Food – This is an obvious first choice. The number one cause of death due to poverty is malnutrition (about 12 million a year), and is the cause of one third of all deaths. Furthermore, most of the deaths are children under five. The sheer number of deaths make it hard to argue that there is a more pressing need in the world than providing adequate nutrition to the over a billion that are hungry. The American dollar can go a long ways to buy vast amounts of food as well. Most child sponsorship programs allow you to feed, educate, and provide clean water to a child for around a dollar a day, and just providing bare bones food is much cheaper than that. There are numerous charities in this area. Food for the poor and WorldVision are some of the biggest.
• Water – The lack of clean water is also an enormous problem worldwide. Not only does it lead to millions of deaths a year, but it is linked to massive amounts of time spent fetching water, reducing ability to work, and be educated. Lack of clean water can seriously impede the development of entire communities. Again, wells are incredibly affordable for the impact they provide.
• Medical – Providing medical assistance is another critical component of alleviating poverty. Numerous diseases like Malaria wipe out massive numbers of people yet are highly treatable at very low costs. It is not difficult to actually save numerous without massive donations. MAP International is one of the best charities in this area, with incredibly efficient and impeccable finances. Another interesting charity is AmeriCare, which has partnerships with pharmaceutical and medical suppliers that match gifts such that for every $100 donated, $3500 in relief is provided!
• Community Development – One of the great dangers with the first three causes is meeting needs with handouts and creating foreign dependence and crippling the necessary development of local infrastructure. While directly handing out food, water, and medical supplies in disaster relief can be critical to save lives, in most areas, a more development centric approach to meeting needs is necessary to allow communities to develop self-sustaining infrastructure. This is definitely not mutually exclusive with the other causes, this can be the means of achieving the other causes, and many experienced charities are well-aware of this, providing fantastic holistic approaches to equipping people for long-term development. However, this is where you really need to research a charity, and dig into their approaches to make sure they have a solid long-term perspective.
• Microloans – This has recently emerged as one of the most powerful and successful means for equipping people for long-term development. The Grameen bank pioneered the approach of providing very small loans to impoverished people to give them a chance to start a small business. The results are remarkable, often 98% return rates are being seen. It simply amazing that a $500 can literally be reinvested enough times to start almost 50 businesses! This is an incredible empowering tool and a great return on investment.
• Human Rights – By working for human rights, organizations work to address the foundational aspects of society that often lock people into a poverty. Corruption, disregard for laws, racism, trafficking, slavery, and extortion can create insurmountable barriers to financial success. Organizations like the International Justice Mission and Dalit Freedom are working to end slavery and other debilitating issues of society.
• Education – This is another foundational issue for societal development. As the Chinese proverb goes: “If you plan for one year, plant rice. If you plan for 10 years, plant a tree. If you plan for 100 years, educate a child.” Well said.
• Persecuted Church – The Voice of the Martyrs and Open Doors do fantastic work in helping those in haved faced religious persecution for their faith.
• Arts – Sometimes it is hard to consider art as a worthy target of funds when people are dying, yet art has a way of defying our logic. Even in the poorest of communities, art and music are integral to the fabric of life. Somehow it is essential part of the essence of our existenc as a society even when we can’t compute it’s financial value.

The next question is where to give your money. Again, I defended the priority of international giving over domestic giving due the massively larger needs abroad and the incredible buying power and impact our money can have due to exchange rates. Looking more closely at the world, the majority of malnutrition in the world is in southern Asia. Sub-saharan Africa comes next, and in some measures of poverty, central Africa is the most destitute. As a country, India certainly houses the greatest amount of extreme absolute poverty by just about any calculation (of course the size and ethnic diversity makes India the equivalent of about a dozen African countries). If you are looking to help the poorest of the poor, southern Asia and central Africa should certainly be the first places to look. However, there is plenty of poverty in other areas, and if you have connections with another area, that can certainly be a deciding factor in where your resources goes.

Third, we can ask what type of organization we want to give to in terms of philosophy. Charities range from those primarily focused on spiritual tranformation and gospel communication (Campus Crusade, YWAM, and many others) to those that are completely non-religious. Each of these serve different roles, although if you are not religious, presumably you would prefer the latter. Of course, as Christians, donating to Christian charities makes sense.

However, even as Christians, non-religious organizations can be a very legitimate charitable target. Unfortunately, Christians have often discounted efforts that aren’t linked to the church, as if efforts to alleviate suffering don’t really “count” if “we” don’t get credit for it, or if doesn’t achieve the goal of spreading the gospel. This troubling perspective is seen in other areas, even in politics where many are opposed to efforts to help the poor if comes through the government instead of directly through the church. This is distinct contradiction to the teachings of Jesus that emphasize a holistic perspective on helping the world, without constraints on charity being mediated by the church. Giving to a non-religious charities can help break down this type of uncooperative attitude and demonstrate a willingness to work with others to solve world problems without an posture of being only willing to help others if it helps our particular denomination/club/mission.

Fourth, we can ask what type of resources we want to invest. Of course money is generally the most needed and most frequently donated. For local charities, other physical resources can be valuable (clothing, food, etc.).

Actually going yourself is one the biggest investments you can possibly make, of course. While this is a big commitment, one shouldn’t downplay the importance of our financial giving. In fact many long-term charitable workers and missionaries have tremendous difficulty in maintaining funding for their work, many spend a large percentage of their time raising funds rather than actually doing the work they want to focus on. This demonstrates that finances are every bit as needed as human resources.

There are also political avenues for affecting positive change in the world, such as communicating with leaders that can have an impact in areas of social injustices and corruption. With many critical issues, like the desperate situations in Sudan and Congo at the moment, governmental influence is probably one of the only truly effective means of change.

Anyway, if you are looking for gift for someone, again consider a charitable donation in their name. Many charities are now offing gift cards which actually let’s the recipient participate in the selection of who receives the funds, a fun way them to really get too see what is happening. Also consider what this type of gift says to the ones you love. Would you rather communicate to someone that you really respect their love of justice and integrity so you got them a donation to International Justice Mission, or you admire their compassion and empathy, so you sponsored a child for a year in their name, or on the otherhand, that you really are impressed at how long they can lounge on a couch in front of their TV, so you got them some movies?

Finally, put some thought and research into finding a particular cause that you can really get behind and focus on in 2011. There is little that is more fulfilling that having something bigger than yourself to invest in.

Guest post by Kris Zyp

Humility in regards to our own knowledge is a valuable trait. Unfortunately, the vast majority of us spend the majority of our time confirming our own answers, rather than asking the appropriate questions. Disdain for arrogance is hardly unique, it would seem most of humanity is wired to dislike arrogance to some degree. Know-it-alls don’t usually have many friends. Yet surprisingly we are still terribly prone to overconfidence in our beliefs. Psychologists have repeatedly verified a phenonomen known as confirmation bias. Confirmation bias is the natural human tendency to interpret all information in a way that will confirm what we already believe.

This is a major stumbling block to honest pursuit of knowledge. One that only regards one perspective is like a jury that only hears the plantiff’s or defense’s arguments. Obviously such a jury can not reach any well founded conclusion. How are we likely to reach an objective conclusion unless we resist the urges of confirmation bias?

Ironically, the things we feel most certain about, are the beliefs that we are most prone to be wrong about. Why? Quite simply these are beliefs that we are least likely to seek multiple, balanced perspectives about. Politically, are you conservative? Do you primarily watch Fox news. Are you liberal? Do you primarily read liberal blogs? If you are Christian have you spent anytime seeking to understand Islam or Athiestic apologetics? If you believe in pre-tribulation, do you understand the Biblical basis for amillennialism? Or do you, like most people, simply watch news, read books and blogs that already align with your current thoughts? Do you feed yourself a steady stream of ideas that affirm your own, or do you ever look to challenge your own ideas? And if so, how are you actually moving any closer to a multiple perspectives necessary to properly evaluate conflicting arguments?

To put it bluntly, if you have taken a position on an issue, and can’t provide a well articulated defense of the opposing position, your opinion isn’t worth any more than a jury’s after only hearing the plantiff’s arguments.

This type of narrow mindedness is commonplace in politics. In fact research on confirmation bias has often point to politics as the quintessential area where individuals became so entrenched as to completely ignore facts (much less consider) that contradict their views. This has become increasingly evident in the currently highly partisan of politics. Partly lines are drawn, and people manage to be believe that their party is right on every single issue and the opposing party is wrong on every issue by feeding themselves a constant stream of one sided rhetoric, despite the absurdity of such a notion.

Confirmation bias is also particularly problematic in the church, where faith and certainty are frequently confused. Hebrews 11:1 delineates these. Certainty is a claim of knowledge that dismisses alternate possibilities. Faith is a reaction to a belief that alters ones actions (James clearly articulates this, dismissing faith without accompanying action as dead). These are orthogonal concepts. Unfortunately American Christians seem to demonstrate more (disenguous) certainty than faith.

A common criticism of acknowleding uncertainty is that we would end up in a sea of questions without any real truths to guide us. Without truths, there is nothing to act on. Life is empty of meaning, just filled with questions. Again this argument is based on the inability to differentiate between faith and certainty. Living with uncertainty and questions is not an excuse for inaction. In fact the most noble of actions are often those performed without guarantees. The most momentous heroic actions and decisions in history were never made without risk, without facing at least some level of possible loss.

Certainty itself is not a bad thing as long as it is genuine. I am rather certain that I am sitting in front of my computer right now. However disingenous certainty is quite ugly. In a church that does not distinguish faith from certainty, a pressure towards greater faith can quickly push people into claims to certainty that are not in line with the actual evidence or encounters that person has truly experienced or observed. There are certainly those with experiences with God that give them greater certainty. However there is nothing inherently holy about having great certainty. On the otherhand, there is nothing worse than manufactered certainty. Furthermore, Vince Eccles has a great post on how mystery and hiddenness are key attributes of God according to scripture, not just God’s inability to reveal himself.

We truly need to have humility in our perspective on God. A key lesson from anthropology is the incredible extent to which we process information through a cultural lense. This is further analyzed in epistemology (the study of knowledge and how we acquire it) which demonstrates the various means by which we sort out information, all quite fallible.

This humility is crucial in combating our natural tendency towards confirmation bias. Our innate feelings of being right obstruct our ability to pursue truth and objectivity, generate arrogance, and create a dishonest sense of certainty in our beliefs. Humility in knowledge, on the otherhand, gives the opportunity to continually move forward in our knowledge, portrays an honest sense of the limits of our knowledge and aligns properly with a right view of our mysterious God, beyond our comprehension.