This transcript:- Was machine generated.
- Has not been checked for errors.
- May not be entirely accurate.
WEBVTT
00:00.000 --> 00:02.000
Oh
00:30.000 --> 00:45.240
Welcome to the Stone Choir podcast. I am Corey J. Mahler, and I'm still woe. On today's Stone
00:45.240 --> 00:50.280
Choir, we're going to be discussing persuasion. And the last number of months we've tackled
00:50.280 --> 00:56.920
a bunch of different so-called controversial topics, subjects that the world takes a very
00:56.920 --> 01:02.520
different view than we take, and responds to the views that we have shared on Stone Choir,
01:02.520 --> 01:08.560
generally with hysteria. And we tackle those issues specifically because some of them are
01:08.560 --> 01:13.920
hard to hear, some are probably hard for some of you to hear. And the point is that we wanted
01:13.920 --> 01:20.240
to be able to present a calm reasoned case for these things in part to make the point
01:20.240 --> 01:25.400
about the subjects, but also with every episode that we've done, we're trying to demonstrate
01:25.400 --> 01:31.240
that you don't have to be a bomb-throwing madman to agree with us about Scripture being
01:31.240 --> 01:37.480
true, or about history being true, or about science being true. Truth is truth. And when
01:37.480 --> 01:42.440
faithful, honest men talk about the truth, they should be able to do that without getting
01:42.440 --> 01:48.640
worked up about it. So this week, we're talking about persuasion, specifically, because last
01:48.640 --> 01:54.480
week we talked about not wanting people to get sucked down into the tar pit of, oh, Cam
01:54.520 --> 02:00.080
Red Pill, now I want to know all the Red Pill subjects, and I want to engage in every so-called
02:00.080 --> 02:04.680
conspiracy theory. And I know that they lie to me about something, so they must have lied about
02:04.680 --> 02:11.000
everything. This is now my personality. When we tackle these subjects, we don't want people to
02:11.000 --> 02:17.320
feel like talking about race, or the Jews, or Hitler, is your personality, because it's not,
02:17.320 --> 02:22.080
you know, it's the Ryan Gosling meme where the guy watches Drive. And then for the next eight
02:22.080 --> 02:27.120
years, all of his relationships are defined by pretending to be somebody else. That it's
02:27.120 --> 02:33.240
fake. That's not, it's not mature. It's not healthy. And we certainly don't want to be a part of
02:33.240 --> 02:38.200
anyone else going down that path on any of these subjects, because we all have our lives. We're
02:38.200 --> 02:44.080
living in the community. We're doing whatever it is that God put us here to do. And when you
02:44.080 --> 02:49.080
learn about something new, that's great. Today, we're going to talk about persuasion, because on
02:49.080 --> 02:55.360
one hand, we don't want you to fall into a trap of getting obsessed with stuff, which is something
02:55.360 --> 02:59.240
that Corey and I are often accused, like, Oh, those guys are, those are the race guys, those are
02:59.240 --> 03:05.360
the haters. We're not. And when someone listens, they realize that. But if you only listen to the
03:05.360 --> 03:11.400
slander about us, instead of listening to us, you'll believe that, you know, it's only crazy
03:11.400 --> 03:17.400
people who think these things. When you're clear reasoned arguments, like, Okay, well, that makes
03:17.440 --> 03:24.520
sense, even if you disagree. And so today, we want to talk about how to be persuasive. As you're
03:24.520 --> 03:30.320
tackling some of these subjects, you know, Dale Carnegie with winning friends and influencing
03:30.320 --> 03:36.200
people and the Dilbert guy, Scott Adams, he's talked a lot about persuasion, we're not trying to
03:36.200 --> 03:44.280
jump into that sort of big brain TED talk world, where here's how you make people like you more.
03:44.880 --> 03:50.920
The specific point that we hope to get across in today's episode is that, if and when you choose
03:50.920 --> 03:55.920
to engage in some of the subjects that we discuss, there are certain things you can do if you're
03:55.920 --> 04:02.160
not thinking that will turn people off completely to what it is you're trying to convince them of.
04:02.720 --> 04:08.520
And there are certain things you can do that will be persuasive. It's, this is just basic adult
04:08.520 --> 04:13.360
human stuff. There's a good way and there's a bad way to do anything. And there's no particular
04:13.400 --> 04:19.320
script for how to do it well in every single situation. Every individual is different. You're
04:19.320 --> 04:23.400
different than we are. Your family is different than you are. You have more similarities with your
04:23.400 --> 04:27.840
family than probably with us. You have more similarities with us, you know, we have with
04:27.840 --> 04:33.400
someone on the other side of the world. So they're varying degrees of familiarity. And all those
04:33.400 --> 04:40.000
have to be incorporated into how we discuss things. One of the things that made us think about doing
04:40.000 --> 04:44.480
this episode is that when we did last week's, we were talking about conspiracy theories. Somebody
04:44.480 --> 04:48.320
on Twitter replied and said, you know, basically, he was a fan of the show, and he always looked
04:48.320 --> 04:52.960
forward to what we put out. But he said last week's show wasn't our best work. And I appreciated
04:52.960 --> 04:58.400
that comment because it was, it was critical. He wasn't being nasty, but it made me think. It made
04:58.400 --> 05:04.600
me think specifically, why do we select some of the topics that we select? Why would it be that
05:04.840 --> 05:08.320
someone would hear last week's episode and think, yeah, that wasn't really for me. That wasn't
05:08.320 --> 05:12.280
that great. Maybe he's right. Maybe it was a crap episode and it wasn't suitable for anyone.
05:13.400 --> 05:17.680
Almost immediately after we got a ton of feedback from other people saying, thank you so much for
05:17.680 --> 05:23.120
this episode. I loved it. It was really important. And I realized that one of the reasons for that
05:23.120 --> 05:27.720
disparity, it wasn't that like the guy who said that has bad taste or something, he had never
05:27.720 --> 05:32.920
dealt with probably, I didn't ask about, assume he never dealt with the problems that we were
05:32.920 --> 05:37.600
addressing in that episode. There are a lot of people, especially in the dissident right, who
05:37.600 --> 05:43.000
go completely nuts for so-called conspiracy theories. Like I said, it becomes their personality.
05:43.560 --> 05:47.960
And if you talk to one of those guys, you can't help but hearing about that stuff, even if you
05:47.960 --> 05:53.760
want to talk about something completely different. And so I realized that one of the things that
05:53.760 --> 06:00.040
Corey and I do when we tackle subjects is every episode is not for every listener. That's not to
06:00.040 --> 06:04.600
be dismissive. It's just that we're trying to tackle a specific issue in hopes that, you know,
06:04.600 --> 06:08.920
eventually in a perfect world, everyone would get on the same page. So if you hear something,
06:08.920 --> 06:14.440
you're like, that's not really for me. It's fine if you don't like the episode. But I realized
06:14.440 --> 06:18.280
when he said that, that especially in light of all the other people saying, yeah, those are really
06:18.280 --> 06:25.680
value of episode, I realized that there are people that just don't have certain problems. And so
06:25.680 --> 06:32.400
when if we do an episode, and you're like, that doesn't have anything to do with me, I'm not saying
06:32.440 --> 06:39.000
you should just like every episode. If someone says something, and it doesn't make sense to you,
06:39.000 --> 06:44.560
and we're telling you, this is a big problem in the world, like conspiracy theory obsession is a
06:44.560 --> 06:49.760
problem in the world, especially on the right. So when we say, Hey, here's a really important
06:49.760 --> 06:53.920
thing to deal with. And someone's like, that doesn't have anything to do with me. Hey, thank God,
06:53.920 --> 06:58.360
that you've been spared that. But be be aware that there are people who are actually being
06:58.400 --> 07:05.040
significantly burdened by confusion and disorientation and obsession in some cases,
07:05.040 --> 07:09.360
about a subject that thankfully you've been spared. And that's kind of the case with a lot of
07:09.360 --> 07:13.560
reps. As you know, some people, you know, there are some people in certain denominations, when we
07:13.560 --> 07:17.640
talked about slavery, like, yeah, that's fine. You know, maybe it's not exactly what I've heard
07:17.640 --> 07:23.520
in church, but that's consistent with a scriptural approach. And then there are other people who
07:23.520 --> 07:28.960
completely freak out because I've never heard anything except for the modern, strictly moral
07:28.960 --> 07:36.840
anti slavery views that have only existed in the last century and a half. So one of the things
07:36.840 --> 07:43.440
about being persuasive is really knowing your audience. In our case, as podcasters, we have a
07:43.440 --> 07:48.680
generic audience is entirely opt in. But we don't know you, we don't know you personally, we don't
07:48.680 --> 07:53.360
know what your interests are, your concerns are. So obviously, we can't address every episode to
07:53.600 --> 07:59.920
each person listening individually. So when you think that there's a miss on something, just think
07:59.920 --> 08:03.600
about maybe the fact that there are other people out there that are dealing with something that
08:03.600 --> 08:09.040
you've been spared, you know, be thankful for that, but also be aware of it. Because if we take the
08:09.040 --> 08:13.920
time to devote an entire week to something, it's because we see enough in the world, we haven't,
08:13.920 --> 08:18.720
you know, enough people commenting to us DMing us, we've seen enough struggle that we're saying,
08:18.720 --> 08:25.360
this is something affecting others. And when we talk about being persuasive, that's part of it,
08:25.360 --> 08:31.360
knowing that my problems are not necessarily your problems. You know, the worst thing that's ever
08:31.360 --> 08:36.240
happened to me is going to be different in degree than the worst thing that's ever happened to each
08:36.240 --> 08:41.200
person listening. You know, there's some people who maybe you have a horse girl where she has,
08:41.200 --> 08:44.960
she's rich, daddy's rich. And the worst thing that's ever happened to her in her life, she's
08:44.960 --> 08:50.720
never lost friends or family, but her dad had to sell her horse. And she was bereft. That was the
08:50.720 --> 08:56.000
worst thing that ever happened to her. I think we have a tendency to look at someone, you know,
08:56.000 --> 09:01.360
like that in the hypothetical, and be completely unsympathetic and say, Oh, you spoiled little
09:01.360 --> 09:09.040
brat. How dare you complain about this when my problems are XYZ worse than that. The sympathetic
09:09.040 --> 09:14.640
approach is to look at that and to empathize to realize that that was the worst day in that girl's
09:14.720 --> 09:20.240
life. If the horse that she dearly loved got sold, you know, for whatever reason, and that was
09:20.800 --> 09:24.320
cause of heartbreak, she's heartbroken. It's the worst thing that ever happened to her.
09:25.040 --> 09:31.040
I think that we can approach things as we're trying to be persuasive and just trying to discuss
09:31.040 --> 09:37.200
things with people to some degree by putting ourselves in their shoes. Because if something
09:37.200 --> 09:42.960
is really hurting someone else and it doesn't bother you at all, you have to keep that in mind
09:43.040 --> 09:47.760
when you're interacting with them and certainly don't dismiss whatever is concerning them. Because
09:47.760 --> 09:53.200
even if their concerns are dumb or wrong, it's still what's concerning them. And you can find
09:53.200 --> 09:57.760
common ground simply in the fact that you yourself have concerns or things that burden you, things
09:57.760 --> 10:02.720
that frighten you, things that confuse you. And so if the only commonality that you have with the
10:02.720 --> 10:08.480
person you're talking to is that you share having had a bad day, that's still a place to begin.
10:08.960 --> 10:13.760
And so I think as we begin talking about persuasion, finding common ground is one of the most
10:13.760 --> 10:20.480
crucial elements. So I think at the outset, it's important to distinguish between two distinct
10:20.480 --> 10:28.320
things that are both really in this area we're discussing in this episode. The first is persuasion,
10:28.320 --> 10:33.520
which is what we are discussing properly. How do you persuade someone of something? What is
10:33.520 --> 10:39.600
persuasion? And the second is manipulation. There's a distinction between these. We are not talking
10:39.600 --> 10:46.080
about manipulation. Some of the psychology or things like that would get into manipulation,
10:46.080 --> 10:50.000
where you're talking about propaganda in the negative sense, and we'll get into that later
10:50.000 --> 10:57.520
in the episode as well. But for our purposes here, persuasion is attempting to convince someone of
10:57.520 --> 11:05.520
something by engaging with that person. So you're engaging that person's reason or emotions. It's
11:05.520 --> 11:11.440
not always wrong to engage the emotions. God gave you emotions for a reason. You don't totally ignore
11:11.440 --> 11:16.080
them. Yes, when you're dealing with something that is a purely logical problem, you set your
11:16.080 --> 11:22.240
emotions aside. It's important to be able to do that, particularly for men. But it's not wrong
11:22.240 --> 11:27.680
to engage the emotions of another person per se. That can be used to manipulate, of course.
11:28.240 --> 11:35.440
But the distinction is that manipulation is an attempt to circumvent or subvert, to take advantage
11:35.440 --> 11:43.120
of the other person in some way. So you're trying to befuddle the person, confuse the person,
11:43.680 --> 11:50.080
engage with emotions that aren't really at issue here in order to manipulate the outcome. So it's
11:50.080 --> 11:56.640
the difference basically in intent. There's some difference in means as well, but largely it's the
11:56.640 --> 12:05.120
intent. Persuasion you want to bring the person to, one would think, your position through convincing
12:05.120 --> 12:11.120
the person, engaging with that person's reason, engaging with that person's emotions, engaging
12:11.120 --> 12:18.480
with that person's thoughts, etc. Whereas with manipulation, again, you are attempting to subvert
12:18.480 --> 12:28.400
or control. Now, manipulation technically is not an inherently negative term. Because manipulation
12:28.400 --> 12:32.320
also has the sense of just doing something skillfully, because it just comes from Latin
12:32.320 --> 12:37.440
manipulus, which is Latin for handful, has to do with the hands. And the hands are obviously
12:38.000 --> 12:45.680
dexterous, as it were. However, in modern English, manipulation has taken off that negative
12:45.680 --> 12:50.160
connotation. So here, we'll just contrast those two. Persuasion being what we are discussing,
12:50.720 --> 12:56.000
manipulation being sort of the shadow version of it, the dark version of it, not what we are
12:56.000 --> 13:01.600
advocating. And as well mentioned, we're not going to get into the psychology of, you know,
13:01.600 --> 13:07.760
if you want to convince someone, do these four things in this order. Yes, we could get into that,
13:07.760 --> 13:16.240
but that's not the point here. The point of the episode is, how do you engage with other people
13:16.240 --> 13:23.120
in a meaningful way on these topics? And how do you choose when to engage? Because that's part of
13:23.120 --> 13:30.800
it. As Will mentioned, you don't just always go 100% on every single one of these issues.
13:31.760 --> 13:38.640
Yes, you've listened to the episodes on race and World War II. That doesn't mean that the first
13:38.640 --> 13:45.440
thing you say when you sit down to have a beer with someone is, so, how about racial IQ? You don't
13:45.440 --> 13:50.320
open that way. I mean, maybe if it's with your friends and it's a joke, fine, but you have to
13:50.320 --> 13:57.200
know your audience. You have to know where you are as well. And how to engage with that audience
13:57.360 --> 14:05.440
in that place. And so, as was mentioned, we don't know our audience personally. Of course,
14:05.440 --> 14:10.800
we know some of you personally, but we generally don't know the overwhelming majority of our audience
14:10.800 --> 14:16.880
personally. So what we are doing here is necessarily more general than what you would be doing with
14:16.880 --> 14:23.280
someone in person or what we would do with someone in person. Woe was just on the myth of the 20th
14:23.280 --> 14:30.320
century. And there, he is engaging personally with someone. So that's different from how you would
14:30.320 --> 14:35.120
engage, say, on this podcast with the audience. With each other, we can engage personally. We
14:35.120 --> 14:40.960
know each other. But with the audience, it has to be more general. So the first thing you want to do
14:40.960 --> 14:47.600
when you're going to persuade someone is just to know the other person. Start with an actual
14:47.600 --> 14:52.640
conversation with the person. You don't have to open up with politics and religion and theology.
14:54.240 --> 15:01.120
You can open with a general discussion. You're building a relationship, building rapport to some
15:01.120 --> 15:07.360
degree, and that is going to count toward whether or not that person will give any weight to what
15:07.360 --> 15:17.360
you say later. If you just open up cold open with so about the world war two, probably not going
15:17.520 --> 15:24.480
to get you anywhere. That's part of why people like the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Mormons,
15:24.480 --> 15:28.800
when they do the cold call at your front door, they typically don't get anywhere with that.
15:30.160 --> 15:37.120
Now, maybe over time, they can wear certain people down. But if you have a relationship with
15:37.120 --> 15:43.600
someone, you have an established rapport, you're going to be more successful in persuading that
15:43.600 --> 15:49.120
person. So that first part is just getting to know your audience, knowing your audience.
15:50.640 --> 15:54.880
And that goes back to something that we've discussed in the past, the basic question,
15:54.880 --> 16:00.320
what problem are you trying to solve? And I think something that I hope that people in our
16:00.320 --> 16:05.120
audience will keep in mind is that if you learn something new, maybe it's from Stone Choir,
16:05.120 --> 16:09.920
maybe it's somewhere else, and it's a really big deal to you, like it revolutionizes some
16:09.920 --> 16:14.720
aspect of how you view the world, you're probably going to be excited about that. Like,
16:14.720 --> 16:19.760
this is cool, like this opens up new horizons. This explains things that I never understood
16:19.760 --> 16:23.760
before. I'm energized, I have this new knowledge, and you want to share it.
16:25.840 --> 16:30.400
The question of what problem are you trying to solve when you're looking to persuade people in
16:30.400 --> 16:37.280
your own life is that I think the mistake that many people make in interpersonal discussions is
16:38.000 --> 16:43.280
suddenly the problem you want to solve with your friends or God forbid your family is,
16:43.280 --> 16:48.160
oh, they're not red-pilled. I need to go lecture them about these things that I know about and
16:48.160 --> 16:55.040
that they're wrong about, and I need to fix them. That is exactly the wrong approach. If you approach
16:55.840 --> 17:02.640
wanting to discuss a subject in terms of I need to fix you, it's revolting. We did an episode,
17:02.640 --> 17:07.920
five-part episode on race, three-part episode on Jews, between those is probably close to 20 hours
17:07.920 --> 17:15.200
of content. As Corey mentioned, people knocking on doors for these cults, if I showed up on your
17:15.200 --> 17:20.320
door and said, hey, I'm here to talk to you about race for three hours, you're going to chase me off.
17:20.320 --> 17:25.600
Even if you happen to like me, you're not going to want to hear it. There's a blessed passivity to
17:26.240 --> 17:30.960
things like podcasts and articles that you can share with other people because it's completely
17:30.960 --> 17:37.120
one-sided. You can pick up an article or maybe a book or a podcast episode and you can listen or
17:37.120 --> 17:42.960
read, engage in your own time on your own terms. If you don't like it, you can just walk away. If
17:43.760 --> 17:48.880
we say something in one of our episodes that rubs you the wrong way, like, I got to put this down,
17:48.880 --> 17:53.680
it's annoying or whatever, you can't. You don't have to chase us off to do it because we don't
17:53.680 --> 18:00.160
know who you are. There's never any mutual engagement there, so we can make a case for
18:00.160 --> 18:05.360
something in this sort of passive teaching environment. There's different fundamentals
18:05.360 --> 18:10.080
than the way you can make a case to someone you know personally. The very thing that we can do
18:10.080 --> 18:15.280
quite successfully on a podcast where take it or leave it, you can listen or not,
18:15.920 --> 18:20.480
it would be virtually impossible to do this in person to strangers, even though virtually all
18:20.480 --> 18:26.400
of you are strangers to us. The fact that we're not coming to you and trying to convince you
18:26.960 --> 18:33.200
is part of what makes it easy for you to listen. I think one of the keys for us to understand as
18:33.200 --> 18:39.360
we're engaging interpersonally is that one of the things that we say all the time, I particularly
18:39.360 --> 18:42.880
say a lot here and I actually said on the midst of the 20th century this past week,
18:42.880 --> 18:48.320
I don't care if anyone agrees with me. Adam on the other show thankfully got me to clarify,
18:48.320 --> 18:52.880
didn't mean that I'm completely indifferent to people believing these things. What I was talking
18:52.880 --> 18:59.760
about and what I'd say on this podcast frequently is I am completely outcome independent to how you
18:59.760 --> 19:05.200
receive this information. Yes, Corey and I are spending probably about 30 hours a week on some
19:05.200 --> 19:11.040
of the easier episodes preparing and delivering this stuff to you. So there's clearly investment,
19:11.040 --> 19:15.280
we wouldn't be doing this if no one were listening and we thought no one cared.
19:16.240 --> 19:20.960
When I say I don't care, what I mean is that if you as an individual who's completely
19:20.960 --> 19:26.960
undone to me don't agree with the thing that we just told you, that's okay. We frequently say
19:26.960 --> 19:32.240
take it or leave it. There are a lot of episodes where we explicitly say don't take our word for it,
19:32.240 --> 19:37.200
don't listen to a couple of podcasters, tell you stuff. It's completely contrary to everything
19:37.200 --> 19:42.880
you've ever heard. That should rightly raise your hackles. I use that phrase frequently. We have a
19:42.880 --> 19:52.400
natural basic animal understanding of something being off and the instinctual response to off is
19:52.960 --> 19:57.520
to be protective and that's fine, that's good. The reason that Corey and I can say it's fine if
19:57.520 --> 20:02.080
you don't believe us, go look for yourself is that we know that we're telling you the truth.
20:02.080 --> 20:06.800
And so our confidence in the subjects that we discuss is based on the fact that we know
20:07.280 --> 20:13.200
we've done all the legwork long before we come to the microphone and deliver one of these episodes.
20:13.920 --> 20:19.520
So when I say I don't care and I say you can take it or leave it, it's not that I don't
20:19.520 --> 20:25.040
want you to believe or I'm indifferent. It's that if you say that's crap, I don't believe any of it.
20:25.840 --> 20:32.800
There's no skin off my nose. It doesn't hurt me if you don't agree. And while that's easy
20:32.880 --> 20:38.560
in an impersonal situation like a podcast, I think the vital thing that one of the key things I hope
20:38.560 --> 20:44.480
people will take away from this episode is that it's okay to have a sense of that same spirit
20:44.480 --> 20:51.120
in person with your friends, with your family. And one of the big turnoffs when you want to
20:51.120 --> 20:54.880
talk about a subject is when it's just the most important thing in the world for you to talk about
20:54.880 --> 21:01.920
it. If you're just brimming with excitement to tell somebody about something, maybe the best
21:01.920 --> 21:06.320
approach, it depends on your relationship, maybe a relationship where your friend is just used to
21:06.320 --> 21:12.800
you getting excited about stuff and they'll humor you. But sometimes for some people, depending
21:12.800 --> 21:17.520
on their personalities and their friends, if you're brimming with excitement to share something you
21:17.520 --> 21:22.880
just learned, maybe the best thing is to wait and to say nothing and to let it naturally come up in
21:22.880 --> 21:27.760
conversation. So you've been informed, you've learned about something, you really want to share
21:27.760 --> 21:34.000
details, but you don't want to be this guy who's just wild eyed about convincing other people.
21:34.800 --> 21:40.720
Sometimes the best way to be convincing is to completely relax and just forget about it.
21:40.720 --> 21:47.360
And then later on, maybe months down the road, some say rice or IQ comes up, you now have
21:47.360 --> 21:51.920
something you can contribute to the conversation that's going to be novel to your circle of friends
21:51.920 --> 21:56.640
because they're not listening, they haven't heard this stuff before. You can drop a few facts in
21:56.640 --> 22:01.520
conversation that are probably going to blow their minds and maybe they'll get really mad at you,
22:01.520 --> 22:06.240
like some people get mad at us, maybe they'll pique their curiosity. The nice thing about
22:06.240 --> 22:11.760
having resources like books and articles and podcasts to point people to is that you don't
22:11.760 --> 22:16.400
have to have the personal investment to say you must believe and listen to this thing right away.
22:16.400 --> 22:20.240
This is the most important thing. You can say, you know what, I heard something really interesting.
22:20.960 --> 22:25.840
Listen to this episode, tell me how you think. I found it curious. I was really interested by
22:25.920 --> 22:30.880
what they have to say. You can be non-committal, but curious, and that doesn't put pressure on
22:30.880 --> 22:35.040
the other person to have to just say, you're absolutely right. Those guys make complete sense.
22:35.040 --> 22:39.920
Maybe they're going to respond very negatively. And so one of the reasons that Corey and I created
22:39.920 --> 22:46.800
Stone Choir is that we can take the heat for you. We can be the crazy men screaming into the void
22:46.800 --> 22:51.040
on the internet. And then if a few people come along in here and say, yeah, that makes sense,
22:51.040 --> 22:56.640
then you can have a conversation with your friend in your own particular context in a way that
22:58.400 --> 23:03.680
we've delivered the scary payload, and then you can work with whatever bits and pieces and add
23:03.680 --> 23:08.720
your own. And say you disagree with something we said and agree with something else, but you can
23:08.720 --> 23:14.240
take the pressure off of yourself and off of your friends and family if you say, hey, here's something
23:14.240 --> 23:18.720
somebody else is doing. We've had a lot of feedback recently. I mentioned it to Adam on
23:18.720 --> 23:22.960
Myth of the 20th Century that a number of people have said wives and girlfriends have started
23:22.960 --> 23:27.600
listening. And I realize that for saying that to individuals who said that, it might seem a little
23:27.600 --> 23:33.280
doxy. Any wives and girlfriends who are listening, I want you to know that we've heard that dozens
23:33.280 --> 23:37.120
of times in the last couple of weeks. So you should assume if you were one of those wives and
23:37.120 --> 23:43.280
girl or girlfriends, hopefully not both that or mothers in some cases, it's not the man in your
23:43.280 --> 23:46.480
life that we're talking about. It's somebody else because there've been a bunch of people. So it's
23:46.480 --> 23:51.840
kind of like a firing squad where there's a blank. Assume that the guy that your boyfriend or husband
23:51.840 --> 23:56.640
who told you to watch, he's not the one who DMed us because we don't people feel like there's a
23:56.640 --> 24:01.840
conspiracy to trick you into believing things. That's precisely the opposite intent of what we
24:01.840 --> 24:07.040
have. Here's some stuff. Take it or leave it. We think there's some value here. That's an approach
24:07.040 --> 24:12.400
that when we take it in personally, it becomes very convincing just because the guys have relaxed.
24:12.400 --> 24:18.880
He's not freaking out. There's inherent skepticism when anyone delivers new information.
24:18.880 --> 24:23.920
And if they deliver it in a way that's wild-eyed and wants to grab you by the lapels and shake
24:23.920 --> 24:29.280
you and say, you must believe this, my first response is no. I want no part of that. So we
24:29.280 --> 24:33.280
want to make sure that we don't come across that way and we don't just naturally. That's not my
24:33.280 --> 24:39.600
personality or Cordy's personality, but the same can also be even more effective in person.
24:39.680 --> 24:43.440
Say, hey, there's this cool thing I learned about. What do you think about it?
24:43.440 --> 24:49.360
And ask that way. Don't say you must believe this. Say, here's an interesting article. Here's an
24:49.360 --> 24:54.640
interesting podcast. What do you think about this? And then use it as a springboard for your own
24:54.640 --> 25:00.720
discussion to think what you think about the thing. It doesn't need to be to mirror what some
25:00.720 --> 25:05.200
stranger on the internet told you. What do you think about the thing? How do you think it affects
25:05.200 --> 25:10.000
your life? That becomes personal. It doesn't become, here's a religious tenant of this new
25:10.560 --> 25:16.960
big red pill discovery I have. It's just, huh, I think this is a fact. And I think it has this
25:16.960 --> 25:22.480
to do with life. And I think that's relevant. What do you think? That can be an interesting
25:22.480 --> 25:29.520
human conversation at a small scale where there's no hard feelings. If they say that's racist,
25:29.520 --> 25:34.080
that's dumb, you can just laugh and say, well, I think everything gets called racist at this point.
25:34.080 --> 25:38.320
So I don't think that matters. Oh, by the way, those guys did an entire episode on the invention
25:38.320 --> 25:44.480
of racism in the 20th century. Maybe find out what the word that you're using actually means.
25:44.480 --> 25:49.360
And then again, you can blame someone else if they disagree. You don't have to fight. We don't
25:49.360 --> 25:55.600
want people fighting with each other or straining relationships for the sake of things that,
25:56.160 --> 26:00.720
even though they do have impact on all of our lives, it's not immediately obvious.
26:00.720 --> 26:07.520
And so the immediacy of the need is really what this part is about. There's no immediate need
26:07.520 --> 26:11.760
for the person you're talking to to agree with you. Just as there's no immediate need for you to
26:11.760 --> 26:16.800
agree with us, you listen to an episode saying, yeah, I don't get that. That's dumb, or it's crazy,
26:16.800 --> 26:21.520
or whatever. That's fine. Maybe you come back to a later, maybe you completely forget about it and
26:21.520 --> 26:26.880
never care. That's perfectly okay. If you take that approach with your friends and family,
26:26.880 --> 26:33.200
you can still have normal human relationships with them, even while you're incorporating new
26:33.200 --> 26:38.800
things that you've learned into your life and maybe your conversations. But don't make it the
26:38.800 --> 26:43.520
determining factor for whether or not you're going to be friends with your friends, or certainly
26:43.520 --> 26:47.440
whether you're going to have a loving relationship with family. None of these things should ever
26:47.440 --> 26:53.360
undermine those things as far as it depends on you. You touched on a couple of things there that
26:53.360 --> 26:58.400
I want to expand. But first, I guess I really should give an example of manipulation,
26:59.440 --> 27:04.080
not being a negative thing, because I did say that and some maybe have not encountered that.
27:05.440 --> 27:10.480
One of the best and most obvious examples is interacting with a small child, particularly
27:10.480 --> 27:16.560
one who is being cantankerous or uncooperative for some reason, maybe he doesn't want to put on his
27:16.560 --> 27:22.160
shoes. A neat little trick, if you've never done this with children, I highly recommend you use
27:22.160 --> 27:29.200
this, is instead of saying, would you like to do something? Or if you do this, then we'll
27:30.160 --> 27:36.240
give him two options, both of which are acceptable to you. So for instance, if your child is not
27:36.240 --> 27:41.680
picking what he wants to eat for lunch, or he's just being difficult with eating his lunch,
27:41.680 --> 27:47.360
say would you rather have carrots or broccoli? Assuming he'll actually eat either of those.
27:48.160 --> 27:54.480
Most children, when given the option of two things, will pick one. Yes, eventually they get old
27:54.480 --> 28:00.000
enough to figure out your trick and go, no, I want candy. But for a while it works. And that's
28:00.000 --> 28:06.720
manipulation. That's not negative. You're actually being a parent or an uncle or whatever you happen
28:06.720 --> 28:13.200
to be with relation to this child. You're doing your duty. And yes, you're manipulating the child
28:13.200 --> 28:17.120
to do it. But that's a positive. You're doing it for a good reason in a good way.
28:19.360 --> 28:26.480
But then the two things on which I wanted to expand. First, you touch tangentially on the fact
28:27.520 --> 28:35.360
that human beings are hardwired to process things negatively, more so than positively.
28:37.200 --> 28:42.560
This is just an important psychological and biological fact about humanity. And the reason
28:42.640 --> 28:50.080
for it is fairly obvious if you think about it. If you are walking through the woods, and you hear
28:50.080 --> 28:56.720
some strange noise, and you decide, yep, that must be a bear or a wolf, I am going to go the other
28:56.720 --> 29:03.440
direction, you're probably going to survive whatever that encounter is. Unless you're being
29:03.440 --> 29:08.960
actively stalked by something in which case, you're still more aware your odds go up. If on the other
29:08.960 --> 29:13.760
hand you are the person who just says, oh, must be a squirrel, and just keeps walking, you put a
29:13.760 --> 29:20.000
positive spin on it, you are more likely to be eaten by something and not survive. And so,
29:20.880 --> 29:27.200
evolutionarily, and I do mean in the micro sense, the minor sense, not speciation, I'm not talking
29:27.200 --> 29:32.720
about that. And as Christians, yes, we can say that evolution in the micro sense is true. We know
29:32.720 --> 29:37.600
that. That's why we have different breeds of dogs. That's why we have different races of men. But
29:37.600 --> 29:45.840
when it comes down to it, we are hardwired for a negative interpretation of novel information,
29:46.480 --> 29:53.200
unless we have reason, good reason, to put a positive spin on it. So this goes back to that
29:53.200 --> 29:59.760
building of a relationship. If you are speaking with someone whom you trust, and that person gives
29:59.760 --> 30:05.520
you novel information, you don't necessarily have to put the negative spin on it that you
30:05.520 --> 30:12.880
otherwise would because you trust the source. For instance, if we go back to the example of
30:12.880 --> 30:17.280
being out in the woods, if you're wandering through the woods and you find a random mushroom and pick
30:17.280 --> 30:22.800
it up, unless you're a crazy person, you're not going to just eat the random mushroom if you don't
30:22.800 --> 30:28.880
know what it is. However, if you're walking through the woods hiking with your friend who knows
30:28.880 --> 30:33.280
mushrooms really well and he hands you a mushroom, you're more likely to maybe try that.
30:33.600 --> 30:40.080
So it matters that relationship you have, and it's important to bear in mind that we are all,
30:40.800 --> 30:47.360
to various degrees, of course, hardwired to put a negative spin on novel information.
30:49.200 --> 30:53.040
At least if we haven't become completely credulous and we believe everything we hear,
30:53.520 --> 31:01.440
which is the opposite problem. But then I really already touched on the second point I wanted to
31:02.240 --> 31:11.840
expand on the issue of trust, and that's vital to all of this. Whether or not the audience trusts
31:11.840 --> 31:16.960
you, whether or not the person with whom you're speaking can trust the things you say, and that's
31:16.960 --> 31:23.280
built over time. Trust takes time to build. It can be destroyed in seconds, which is always important
31:23.280 --> 31:29.200
to bear in mind, but it takes time to build. And that is fundamentally one of the things
31:29.200 --> 31:36.400
that we are doing on this podcast. It's why we don't mislead on anything. Whether or not you want
31:36.400 --> 31:42.800
to hear it, whether or not it is going to be necessarily good for us to say it, whatever the
31:42.800 --> 31:49.200
consequences may be, if it's true, we're going to say it. Now, we may endeavor to say it in a way
31:49.200 --> 31:55.280
that is persuasive, hence why we are doing this episode, and it wouldn't make much sense if we
31:55.360 --> 32:02.240
deliberately produced episodes in a way that was not persuasive, but we are not going to subvert
32:02.240 --> 32:06.880
the facts or the truth in order to be persuasive, that veers into manipulation,
32:07.920 --> 32:14.400
because part of the reason we can be effective, part of the reason you can share these episodes
32:14.400 --> 32:22.160
with others and actually have people listen and perhaps believe the things we say, is because of
32:22.160 --> 32:28.400
that building of trust, the fact that we are going to tell the truth about every single topic
32:29.040 --> 32:37.680
that comes up on this podcast, because building that trust over time is vitally important,
32:37.680 --> 32:44.560
and all it takes is lying on one topic or about one facet of a topic, and it destroys that trust,
32:44.560 --> 32:49.120
because then people, when they listen to you, if they know in the past you've lied about something,
32:49.120 --> 32:54.000
particularly something important, then they're going to wonder if you're lying every time.
32:55.520 --> 33:01.600
Now, that eventually attenuates to some degree over time, so if you lied to someone 10 years
33:01.600 --> 33:07.360
ago about something, and you have been truthful since, that's largely in the past,
33:08.800 --> 33:16.800
but it can take years, so it is important to maintain that trust you have with others
33:16.800 --> 33:21.200
if you are going to attempt to be persuasive with those others.
33:22.320 --> 33:28.000
And on the subject of lying, it's important again to distinguish between if we were to
33:28.000 --> 33:34.080
deceive for the purpose of advancing one of our points, and if we simply got something factually
33:34.080 --> 33:40.000
wrong, we endeavored gray lengths not to let that happen, we're not perfect, we may miss speak, we
33:40.000 --> 33:46.080
may inadvertently misconstrue something, it's not going to be something that's a key part of a point,
33:46.080 --> 33:50.320
but we're not saying if anyone ever makes any mistakes in their entire life, you write them
33:50.320 --> 33:56.480
off, because that's insane, no one can survive that. But again, it's the deception, we talked last
33:56.480 --> 34:02.080
week about some of the people engaging in some of these clear deceptions, where it's clear that
34:02.080 --> 34:08.480
they're, whether they're grifters or they're just being entertaining, they're willing to
34:08.480 --> 34:14.640
fill people's heads full of lies for the sake of entertainment, and who knows what they get out
34:14.720 --> 34:21.600
of that doesn't matter. That's fundamentally different from just miss speaking or accidentally
34:21.600 --> 34:25.840
mistaking something, you know, for example, when I was on Myth of the 20th century is after I
34:25.840 --> 34:32.560
normally go to sleep, and so when I'm extremely tired, my reason, my faculties are fully intact,
34:32.560 --> 34:37.600
but my recall just goes in the toilet. So a couple times I completely flubbed some timeline stuff,
34:37.600 --> 34:41.920
and like, you know, if you, I practically had Moses landing on the moon, I was getting some
34:41.920 --> 34:47.440
of the timelines still wrong. That doesn't discredit what I said, because like, I acknowledge you at
34:47.440 --> 34:54.480
the time. But the overall point I was making wasn't hinging on that. And I think it's okay for you,
34:54.480 --> 35:00.560
like, try to get things straight before you say them as we do. But if you make a mistake, don't
35:01.120 --> 35:06.480
be terrified of that either. That's, that's human to, to miss speak or to accidentally get something
35:06.480 --> 35:11.840
wrong. If you find that you've made an error in something factually, go back and fix it.
35:13.040 --> 35:16.000
On the related note of, you know, outcome independence and
35:17.200 --> 35:23.680
convincing people over time, I think time is a key part of this. You know, when we do an episode,
35:23.680 --> 35:29.040
we lay it down and then move on. And we'll refer it off into previous episodes and newer ones,
35:29.040 --> 35:34.000
as we're doing in this one. For example, one of the early episodes we did on framing,
35:34.000 --> 35:39.120
this is really a continuation of that. In the framing episode, we focused entirely on
35:39.120 --> 35:44.880
the use of frame in persuasion or deception. So this is kind of a continuation of that
35:45.600 --> 35:50.960
metacognition aspect of things. You know, this is, this is a meta episode where we're talking
35:50.960 --> 35:56.560
about thinking about talking about things, which is most people don't normally approach
35:56.560 --> 36:00.880
things that way. We're willing to do that, even though it's, you know, it's kind of a lull episode
36:00.880 --> 36:05.440
in terms of here's not a ton of new facts. It's just we've been delivering so many facts over
36:05.440 --> 36:10.240
the last number of months that are really hard to swallow. In some cases for some people,
36:10.960 --> 36:15.280
we want to just give people a little bit of time to digest and then figure out how to incorporate
36:15.280 --> 36:20.640
it themselves. I want to give a personal example of this, just kind of demonstrate, like we,
36:20.640 --> 36:25.440
we don't want to make this about us, but on this podcast, we are the frame of reference for everything.
36:25.440 --> 36:30.400
So as you're listening, you know, you can apply what we're saying about ourselves
36:30.400 --> 36:33.840
in your own lives. I don't want you thinking about us when you're thinking about yourself
36:33.840 --> 36:38.960
and how you can live a better Christian life, speaking faithfully in your community. So
36:38.960 --> 36:44.000
just pointing to our example is not intended to be self aggrandizing. It's literally just
36:44.000 --> 36:47.200
here's something that happened and maybe you can learn something from it.
36:48.160 --> 36:55.120
I was on Gab for a year or so. I prior to that, I had engaged before I got on Gab for,
36:55.120 --> 36:58.640
for good, after I finally got expelled from Twitter for the last time,
36:58.640 --> 37:03.040
I had engaged with Andrew Torbund Gab and I eventually gave him a whole rash of crap
37:03.040 --> 37:07.280
because of some of his hiring practices. I was pretty antagonistic about him openly and he
37:07.280 --> 37:13.680
blocked me and like, I don't blame him. I was, I was ankle biting on his timeline. And I was right
37:13.680 --> 37:18.800
incidentally about his hiring practices. He turned out later on to regret some of those people, but
37:20.160 --> 37:24.160
we began with kind of a strange relationship and then I got on Gab and he gave me a second chance
37:24.160 --> 37:28.320
and eventually he started boosting some of the things that I said and I appreciated that because
37:29.040 --> 37:38.080
I had shifted focus more than in 2017 versus 2020. And I can't remember the time. I think it was,
37:38.800 --> 37:46.000
it was either the end of 2019 or 2020 was, I think it's probably 2020 when I was invited by Andrew
37:46.000 --> 37:54.160
to do an essay on Christian nationalism. It was one of the earliest things that news.gab had been.
37:54.160 --> 38:00.000
They'd just begun sort of highlighting writers from the community. Boniface Option was one of
38:00.000 --> 38:05.120
the first guys he had and he had a few others, but I was one of the very first. I was almost the first
38:05.120 --> 38:11.040
to be invited to discuss anything about Christian nationalism. Now, the episode that Cory and I
38:11.040 --> 38:17.120
did on Christian nationalism earlier this year was a much more fully fleshed out version of
38:17.120 --> 38:22.880
what I gave to Andrew. And the reason I'm highlighting this example is that when I was
38:22.880 --> 38:28.160
invited to do that, both Andrew and I knew, like we've never, we've never had private personal
38:28.160 --> 38:32.480
conversations about any of this stuff. I can just help like by reading the room, reading the audience,
38:32.480 --> 38:35.840
even if it's an audience of man, one, if it's another man you're interacting with.
38:36.640 --> 38:41.440
It was clear to both of us at the time that I was further to the right on things like race and
38:41.440 --> 38:47.440
in capital and nationalism than he was. And so when he invited me to write on Christian nationalism,
38:47.440 --> 38:56.320
I knew at that time that if I were to make the fully racialist case for the subject that we
38:56.320 --> 39:01.520
made on Stone Choir, he wasn't going to publish it because at the time, at least those were not
39:01.520 --> 39:06.720
his views. And so I didn't want to be antagonistic. It was an honor to be asked to do anything about
39:06.720 --> 39:10.720
a subject that was important to me. So I think we'll link in the show notes the essay that I did
39:10.720 --> 39:15.600
on Christian nationalism. So you can take a look at it if you're interested and maybe contrast it
39:15.600 --> 39:20.800
with some of the things that we say on this episode. I bring this up because it's an example
39:20.800 --> 39:27.120
of being patient in your persuasion. I could have done a couple different things when Andrew came to
39:27.680 --> 39:32.960
me. I could have fought him and said, well, I'm only going to write for you if I get to make the
39:32.960 --> 39:38.320
completely racial case for what nations are. And I'm going to say that America is a white's only
39:38.320 --> 39:43.520
country. And that's going to be the point. If I had done that, he would have flat out said no.
39:43.520 --> 39:49.200
I knew that. And so I didn't. I wasn't going to be antagonistic. Again, when you look at the essay,
39:49.200 --> 39:55.680
everything that I say is entirely true. I was not being deceptive about what I said. However,
39:55.760 --> 40:00.800
I omitted a big chunk of the argument for Christian nationalism by basically just focusing on the
40:00.800 --> 40:06.880
Christian part. I talked about the history. I talked about the state of the West of Christendom
40:06.880 --> 40:11.680
and then the United States in terms of Christianity and a Christian government.
40:12.640 --> 40:17.920
I almost completely omitted any discussion of race because again, I knew it wouldn't be welcome.
40:17.920 --> 40:24.080
I knew there would be too far at that time. So that was an example in my mind of trying to be
40:24.080 --> 40:29.520
effectively persuasive. I did make the case for Christian nationalism on the Christian side.
40:29.520 --> 40:33.520
And there's absolutely a case to be made there. Here's what Christian
40:34.560 --> 40:39.920
nations look like. I completely omitted any discussion of what nation means, which is,
40:39.920 --> 40:44.720
again, the other half of the conversation. And I did that because I knew it wouldn't be welcome.
40:45.360 --> 40:50.560
A few years on, he's saying many of the same things now publicly that I was saying that.
40:50.880 --> 40:56.480
Again, I haven't talked to him, but just based on the other things going on at the time,
40:56.480 --> 41:00.880
I knew they wouldn't be welcome. And so rather than picking a fight with a guy who might already
41:00.880 --> 41:08.320
fought in the past, we got over it, whatever, I chose to bite my tongue and to make the narrow
41:08.320 --> 41:13.360
case that I could make that we could both agree on. I'm not to say that he endorsed 100% of what
41:13.360 --> 41:18.880
I said, but he was willing to publish it pretty much as is. I didn't push any buttons that were
41:18.880 --> 41:24.960
going to alienate the people he wanted to reach at the time. That's persuasion. You can make part
41:24.960 --> 41:29.920
of the case, even knowing that you have other stuff to say. So what does this have to do with
41:29.920 --> 41:35.680
you personally? You don't have to say it all at once. It's fine to just get one or two things out
41:35.680 --> 41:42.720
on the table and let people digest it. A lot of the things that my friends and I were saying
41:42.720 --> 41:48.320
on Gab at the time are things that now Andrew is much more willing to say in public. I don't think
41:48.320 --> 41:52.480
he believed in them. He's more willing to say them now because he realized that we were right.
41:53.360 --> 41:58.160
I'm certainly not taking personal credit for whatever to whatever degree he was persuaded by
41:58.160 --> 42:03.920
anything. I'm simply pointing out the fact that if instead of doing what I did, if I had been
42:03.920 --> 42:09.520
antagonistic, if I had said, unless we go whole hog and do everything that I want us to say, I don't
42:09.520 --> 42:14.560
want any part of it, if you're an aggravating friend, if you're an aggravating ally to someone,
42:15.040 --> 42:19.920
that's a turn off to whatever it is you're trying to convey. If I have a point to make,
42:19.920 --> 42:25.600
I want to make it as gently and persuasively as possible. It's funny for me to say gently because
42:25.600 --> 42:30.640
I think a lot of people assume that Corey and I are bomb throwers. We're bulls in a china shop
42:30.640 --> 42:36.720
just storming through everything that's going on and just leaving wreckage in our wake. That's not
42:36.720 --> 42:42.640
the case, but if you're not giving us a charitable view, particularly if you're just looking at social
42:42.640 --> 42:48.160
media, some people conclude that most of that frankly is reputational. It's not things that
42:48.160 --> 42:53.840
I've done, it's things that people have said about me. Whatever, if I have to worry about what
42:53.840 --> 42:59.600
people are thinking about me, it's a complete waste of time. I worry about people getting these
42:59.600 --> 43:06.720
subjects right. When I was offered the opportunity to make a case for Christian nationalism, I did
43:06.720 --> 43:11.200
the best I could in the constraints that I had at the time. Then when Corey and I had our own
43:11.200 --> 43:16.960
platform here on Stonequire to make a more fleshed out case, particularly for the nation side,
43:16.960 --> 43:23.920
the racial side of Christian nationalism, we made it here. We made it in public in a way that
43:23.920 --> 43:29.200
people who may be read part of it before they've heard it elsewhere, they can come along at their
43:29.200 --> 43:34.240
own pace. I think that's another key element of this, let people come along at their own pace
43:34.240 --> 43:38.320
because you're not trying to fix them. I wasn't trying to fix Andrew or anyone else,
43:38.320 --> 43:43.040
I was just trying to tell the truth. If there's only a portion of it that they can receive
43:43.040 --> 43:48.560
and absorb, it's important to know that and to leave the rest out because if I can give you
43:49.280 --> 43:53.600
one dish that you're really going to like and another dish that I know you're going to hate,
43:54.320 --> 43:58.160
if the goal is for me to get you to eat a dish, I'll give you the one you're going to like.
43:58.160 --> 44:03.120
I can save the broccoli for later, give you the carrots, that's perfectly fine.
44:04.080 --> 44:07.680
We get so excited about trying to convince people and trying to fix them
44:07.680 --> 44:11.600
that we forget that in many cases we didn't believe this stuff a few years ago,
44:11.600 --> 44:17.440
so just be patient, show some grace and give people a chance to come along at their own pace
44:17.440 --> 44:23.280
and leave them as much room as you can. Tell them a truth where you can find common ground
44:23.280 --> 44:26.640
and push them a little bit, give them a little bit more than they're comfortable with,
44:26.640 --> 44:32.000
give them something to think about, but if you try to just waterboard someone and put it down
44:32.000 --> 44:37.680
their throat all at once, you're going to alienate them even with the truth because the manner in
44:37.680 --> 44:44.080
which it's presented is so much worse that who cares what the content is if you're aggravating,
44:44.080 --> 44:49.280
because people don't want anything to do with you. Be patient, have low time preference. We talk
44:49.280 --> 44:55.920
about this all the time in the racial space. There are certain races that have higher or lower
44:55.920 --> 45:03.040
time preference. They're more focused on the future or the current and we must be patient,
45:03.040 --> 45:08.640
we must be focused on the future and knowing telling something to someone that's hard to hear
45:08.640 --> 45:12.880
is probably going to take some time. It might have taken you time to absorb it, it's going to take
45:12.880 --> 45:18.080
them maybe even more time because you have a certain set of give-ins and experiences,
45:18.080 --> 45:23.440
theirs are different. If it takes them twice as long as you, just let it happen. Give them a
45:23.440 --> 45:29.440
little bit, give them what they can digest and then wait and be willing to answer questions in a way
45:29.440 --> 45:34.400
that's not challenging, that doesn't make them feel like you think there's something wrong with them,
45:34.400 --> 45:38.640
that they don't agree with you, just give it time, be patient.
45:39.760 --> 45:42.320
So you're saying that time preference actually matters?
45:44.400 --> 45:50.320
It matters tremendously and in the same people who think that the whites have super low time
45:50.400 --> 45:55.040
preference and we're just the masters of patience, as soon as we learn something new we go nuts and
45:55.040 --> 45:59.760
like, oh I gotta tell everyone right away. It's good to be excited, it's bad to make other people
45:59.760 --> 46:06.720
regret being in the same room with you. I was actually just discussing something tangentially
46:06.720 --> 46:15.120
related to this with someone last night. When you're building an argument, you may very well
46:15.120 --> 46:22.800
have to build the argument in pieces. And there's a tendency for some when it comes to politics or
46:22.800 --> 46:29.520
religion, these hot button issues as it were, to attempt to get someone to believe everything
46:29.520 --> 46:35.200
all at once. And that's just not how things work, that's particularly not how human beings work.
46:36.800 --> 46:43.280
To some degree beliefs and things like that, very few people are going to turn on a dime and go
46:43.280 --> 46:48.640
from believing one thing to believing the diametrically opposed thing. Usually how it
46:48.640 --> 46:53.360
works is more akin to Bayesian updating, which essentially is just a fancy way of saying that
46:53.360 --> 46:59.920
as additional information comes in, the person slowly moves with regard to what he believes about
46:59.920 --> 47:07.920
the issue. And so over time you may get someone to change his position on something, you're probably
47:07.920 --> 47:14.640
not going to get that in one discussion, in one conversation with most people. Some men, yes,
47:14.640 --> 47:19.040
if you present a strong enough case, they'll say, I was wrong previously, I now believe this.
47:19.680 --> 47:27.280
You may encounter some men like that. Not many. Most people take time to change their views,
47:27.280 --> 47:33.440
particularly on important things. And the context in which I was discussing this
47:33.440 --> 47:40.800
with the aforementioned person was basically apologetics. How do you prove the Christian
47:40.800 --> 47:46.720
God is the true God? I'm not going to go into apologetics in depth in this episode, because
47:46.720 --> 47:51.920
I'm sure eventually we'll get around to probably a series of episodes on apologetics, different
47:51.920 --> 47:58.880
arguments for God and things like that. But the core point that I want to draw out of that
47:59.120 --> 48:07.120
is that when you're building the argument for the Christian God, you don't start by arguing
48:07.120 --> 48:13.120
for the Christian God. Particularly if you're dealing with an atheist or an agnostic, if you're
48:13.120 --> 48:18.800
dealing with someone who doesn't even believe in God, you don't start by saying, Jesus is your Lord
48:18.800 --> 48:24.400
and Savior, period. That's not going to get you anywhere. The person is going to stop listening
48:24.400 --> 48:28.880
and probably walk away and probably also be quite annoyed with you and perhaps not listen to you
48:28.880 --> 48:37.120
again. Instead, if you're building up, you build up to that argument by establishing more basic
48:37.120 --> 48:43.600
facts, by laying the groundwork, building a foundation. And you do that by establishing,
48:44.240 --> 48:50.000
well, there's something other than matter. If there's something other than matter,
48:50.000 --> 48:56.240
the universe is not purely material. It's not a materialistic universe. We have to explain
48:56.240 --> 49:02.160
this thing that isn't matter. And then you can get into proving the necessity of the infinite.
49:02.720 --> 49:08.160
Then you can prove that the infinite is personal. The infinite being personal must be God.
49:09.040 --> 49:15.120
And then you can move on from there and build up and build your argument piece by piece and arrive
49:15.120 --> 49:21.200
at the conclusion that the Christian God is the only explanation for the information presented.
49:22.800 --> 49:28.080
But that takes time. That takes patience. That takes multiple interactions with this person.
49:28.080 --> 49:32.480
You're probably not going to go through all of this in one marathon session. Maybe you will.
49:32.480 --> 49:36.480
Maybe you happen to be the kind of person who enjoys that. And if the other person also does,
49:36.480 --> 49:42.560
then by all means talk about it for six hours. But typically speaking, it is going to take
49:42.960 --> 49:51.840
many interactions over a course of days or weeks, months, even years. I have friends where I have
49:51.840 --> 49:58.400
discussed religion and these issues for years with these people. They've slowly changed their
49:58.400 --> 50:05.520
position, but it takes time. And some are more resistant to change than others. My father has
50:05.680 --> 50:14.320
a friend that he has had for, I want to say 30 years almost, who recently became a Christian
50:16.080 --> 50:24.400
after my father had been discussing religion with him for 30 years. Patience matters. These things,
50:24.400 --> 50:29.120
when they're these very important things, are going to be in large part in God's time. That
50:29.120 --> 50:34.000
doesn't mean don't play your role, do your part. Of course, do that. That's your duty as a Christian.
50:34.160 --> 50:41.520
But be patient. Recognize that a lot of these things are to some degree out of your hand.
50:43.120 --> 50:50.640
We're advising you to be effective and to be wise as a serpent. When it comes to the things
50:50.640 --> 50:55.200
that are in your hands, the things that are in your control, don't worry about the things that aren't.
50:55.840 --> 51:05.120
There was one time when Martin Luther was asked why he wasn't more worried about the state
51:05.760 --> 51:11.440
of Christian knowledge amongst supposed Christians and just the general state of Christendom,
51:12.240 --> 51:19.440
and his response was that he put in the work and the outcome was in God's hands and so he
51:19.440 --> 51:26.000
could enjoy his beer with melanchthon. That's the right perspective to have on these things.
51:28.000 --> 51:31.840
And that's why that outcome independence that was mentioned earlier matters.
51:33.600 --> 51:39.840
Do the thing because it is the thing you should do, not because it guarantees a result, because
51:39.840 --> 51:45.360
when it comes to human beings, the result is almost never guaranteed. Particularly when you're
51:45.360 --> 51:49.920
dealing with persuasion, you're dealing with psychology, you're dealing with things
51:49.920 --> 51:56.160
that are very much beyond your control. You can influence these things. You cannot really control
51:56.160 --> 52:03.600
them. So you can make the persuasive argument. You can properly engage with other people.
52:04.960 --> 52:10.640
But if you become obsessed with the outcome, you're actually going to harm your chances of arriving
52:10.640 --> 52:17.280
there because you're going to be obnoxious. If you're constantly insisting, no, you absolutely must
52:17.280 --> 52:24.560
believe this specific conclusion. And yes, that's sort of what social media and certain
52:25.360 --> 52:32.320
fora tend to encourage, that it brings it out of a certain personality type. I willingly admit that
52:32.320 --> 52:39.120
I engage in some of that sometimes. But there's a time and a place. Engaging on Twitter again,
52:39.120 --> 52:44.400
general audience, you probably don't know most of those people personally. You're going to engage
52:44.400 --> 52:50.720
differently from how you engage with a family member or a close friend or someone you met at a bar.
52:51.760 --> 52:59.440
Stranger, what have you. So know your audience. When you know your audience and you aren't
53:00.560 --> 53:05.600
so hyper focused on the outcome that you can just be a person and have a conversation,
53:06.560 --> 53:15.280
you are going to be so much more effective than if you are just hyper laser focused on that outcome
53:16.240 --> 53:23.440
and driving people away because you're being abrasive. If you're being abrasive or obnoxious,
53:23.440 --> 53:29.760
you are going to be less effective. That's just the fact of the matter. Yes, it's about the truth,
53:29.760 --> 53:36.480
ultimately. The truth matters. But your goal is to get people to believe the truth. Hopefully,
53:36.480 --> 53:40.320
that's your goal. That's not your goal, then it's manipulation and you're doing something you should
53:40.320 --> 53:47.040
stop. But if your goal is to get people to believe the truth, then yes, you are absolutely correct
53:47.760 --> 53:55.440
to say, think and believe that the truth matters. But that's not the end of it. Because you have to
53:55.520 --> 54:01.440
have a way. You have to know how to get people to that truth. And you can't get them to the truth.
54:02.000 --> 54:07.520
If all you do is just keep insisting, this is the truth and you must believe it. You have to
54:07.520 --> 54:12.800
know how to get to the truth. And that's where what we're discussing in this episode comes in.
54:13.520 --> 54:21.040
That's where persuasion matters. How do you get from where you are to where you need to be?
54:21.840 --> 54:27.360
How do you get other people to join you in going to where they need to be?
54:28.080 --> 54:34.720
Where is the truth? How do we get there? Another big part of persuasion is having
54:34.720 --> 54:42.640
that degree of confidence, not necessarily in yourself, but in your beliefs. We did the episode
54:42.640 --> 54:47.920
on the fear of the Lord I talked about when I had a stroke and my confidence in God and the fact
54:47.920 --> 54:55.040
that that's not me, that's not my faith doing something because I chose it for it to do that.
54:55.040 --> 55:01.680
That was God giving me a gift and taking care of me when I needed it. And I only mention it then,
55:01.680 --> 55:08.160
I only mention it now because it's an example of how when we have genuine confidence in the promises
55:08.160 --> 55:14.560
of the one true God, it's something from outside us that doesn't, it gives us a sort of supreme
55:14.640 --> 55:20.720
confidence that in the liturgy it's described as the peace of God which passes all understanding.
55:21.440 --> 55:28.240
That sort of absolute assurance in a belief. And I'm not saying that everything that you
55:28.240 --> 55:33.200
believe about all these material things should have the same degree of confidence as your
55:33.200 --> 55:38.000
confidence in your faith. Our faith should be paramount. And so there are a lot of aspects
55:38.000 --> 55:44.400
of this episode that go to sharing the gospel, but they also equally apply to sharing other things.
55:45.040 --> 55:50.640
Regardless of what we're sharing, when we're confident in what we're saying, that comes across.
55:50.640 --> 55:56.000
And there's a mixture of, there's a balancing act between the confidence in what we have to say
55:56.720 --> 56:02.560
and the desire for others to believe it. Corey's father's friend, after 30 years,
56:03.360 --> 56:09.280
regardless of the arguments that his dad made to him, the fact that he still cared enough and
56:09.280 --> 56:17.360
loved him enough and didn't give an inch of ground on the subject, all by itself was a testimony to
56:17.360 --> 56:22.800
his faith to the fact that there was something real there. Because that sort of persistence
56:23.440 --> 56:29.520
is rarely found where falsehood is found. People don't die with the lie, not in real life.
56:30.160 --> 56:34.080
You know, if you're trying to trick someone, you might try to go down with a ship for
56:34.080 --> 56:40.720
something to gain some advantage, but only if you actually believe something will you stick to it
56:40.720 --> 56:48.000
when you have nothing else left to cling to. And so as we look to be persuasive, it's not about
56:48.800 --> 56:52.320
winning arguments. I think that's one of the key things. It's not about winning arguments on the
56:52.320 --> 56:58.320
internet or in person or anything else. It's not about winning. It's about if you have the truth,
56:58.960 --> 57:03.760
any truth, and someone else is missing it. The problem you're trying to solve
57:03.760 --> 57:09.120
is to convey that truth to them in a way that they'll actually receive it. And again,
57:09.120 --> 57:14.320
that may take patience. It may take a particularly rational argument. It depends on whom you're
57:14.320 --> 57:19.440
speaking with. Different men will respond differently to different types of arguments.
57:19.440 --> 57:25.680
And so in some cases for some individuals, maybe you're not up to it. And that's fine. You know,
57:25.680 --> 57:32.640
a lot of people are not equipped to make the fully sound convincing argument for something
57:32.640 --> 57:40.400
to any random man. You know, if there's a blue collar guy who's a machinist in his spare time,
57:40.400 --> 57:46.320
he does small engine repair. He probably doesn't worry about any of this crap. And God bless him
57:46.320 --> 57:52.880
for it. I wish the more people didn't have to worry about these things. The reason that a man like
57:52.880 --> 57:58.800
that becomes the battle space is that while he is blessed by not paying attention to any of this
57:58.800 --> 58:04.800
stuff, many of the subjects that we've discussed in the past episodes are still floating around in
58:04.800 --> 58:11.280
the ambient world. And so he's absorbing bits of pieces. And some of those things have been
58:11.280 --> 58:17.120
deliberately inserted into the world that he's only barely paying attention to in order to
58:17.120 --> 58:23.760
encircle him and limit the options for his kids, his community, his schools, whatever.
58:24.400 --> 58:30.240
He has fewer options. He has fewer legitimate moral choices in the world's morality,
58:30.240 --> 58:34.640
because of the things that we talk about. So while he's not paying attention to it,
58:36.000 --> 58:39.760
maybe there's a time and a place where you would have a small piece of the discussion
58:39.760 --> 58:46.880
with such a man and say, Hey, did you care about X, Y, and Z in the news? I think that this is what's
58:46.880 --> 58:51.440
going on. I learned this other bit. I think we connect A to B. There's a picture there.
58:52.000 --> 58:55.200
The guy who's not going to pay much attention, maybe you can make a case to him. And maybe
58:55.200 --> 59:00.640
that's all you do. Maybe all he's worried about is the local schools where his kids go and he wants
59:00.640 --> 59:07.840
his kids to turn out as decent human beings as everyone does. You don't need to make a full case
59:07.840 --> 59:12.560
to every single person. You need to make the necessary case to make sure that they can't be
59:13.200 --> 59:18.720
used against you. They can't be weaponized to harm what's around them. And for some people,
59:18.720 --> 59:22.000
that's the whole hog. There are some people that are sufficiently engaged. They're
59:22.720 --> 59:27.680
sufficiently persuasive to others that if they're missing out on something,
59:28.400 --> 59:34.240
it's important for someone to reach them. When I was on Myth of the 20th Century,
59:34.240 --> 59:38.080
one of the questions that Hans asked me was if I could recommend any books on Christian nationalism.
59:38.640 --> 59:43.600
And I mentioned Torba and Boniface Options' book and Stephen Wolf's book. And I said,
59:43.600 --> 59:48.880
I hadn't read them. And I think maybe I was a bit uncharitable to those books. Because I hadn't
59:48.880 --> 59:53.680
read them, the only impressions I had of them were of the things that those men have said
59:54.240 --> 01:00:00.240
since they came out over the last year or so. And my impression was that the arguments that
01:00:00.240 --> 01:00:05.200
they were making were essentially civic nationalist arguments, arguments that
01:00:06.160 --> 01:00:11.920
blood doesn't matter, that nations are countries, and therefore it's a legal entity. That was the
01:00:11.920 --> 01:00:17.360
impression I had. If that was wrong, I apologize. Certainly lately, some of their comments are
01:00:17.360 --> 01:00:24.000
much closer to the things that we're saying. I'm thankful for that. Again, I highlight that to say
01:00:24.000 --> 01:00:30.720
that I think that when those books came out, they were making another part of the argument for
01:00:30.800 --> 01:00:34.800
Christian nationalism. Just as I did in the original essay, there was a lot more to say than
01:00:34.800 --> 01:00:40.320
what I said. It's perfectly legitimate to make part of the argument if it's part that you can
01:00:41.040 --> 01:00:46.800
gain credibility with and you can make credibly. The reason that I highlighted the distinction
01:00:46.800 --> 01:00:53.280
between my overtly racial view of Christian nationalism on Myth of the 20th Century with
01:00:53.280 --> 01:00:59.920
Adam was that I know that much of his audience is not Christian or not particularly engaged.
01:01:00.480 --> 01:01:07.120
What they see coming from within the church is a completely pan-nationalist, essentially
01:01:07.120 --> 01:01:12.800
universalism, that all human beings are completely interchangeable, borders are evil,
01:01:13.520 --> 01:01:20.880
countries should be subsumed by basically NGOs, just unifying us as one human mass of
01:01:22.400 --> 01:01:28.000
charity cases. It's just all the horrors that Soros is producing, especially in Europe, because
01:01:28.640 --> 01:01:33.600
guys can walk or take a boat from Africa into Europe. It's harder to get them here. They have
01:01:33.600 --> 01:01:40.320
to walk up from Mexico. I wanted to specifically highlight to his audience that there's an
01:01:40.320 --> 01:01:47.040
explicitly racial case that is a fundamental case, in my view, of the Christian nationalist argument,
01:01:47.040 --> 01:01:53.200
because I don't want people to think the only way to be Christian is to say that all states must
01:01:53.200 --> 01:02:00.080
collapse, that all borders must be destroyed, that all people must be wiped out by virtue of
01:02:00.080 --> 01:02:04.880
interbreeding, that you take every race, you mix it with every other race until we're all the same
01:02:04.880 --> 01:02:10.080
color, we have no differentiating features whatsoever. There are a lot of people in the church
01:02:10.080 --> 01:02:15.680
saying precisely that. If I was uncharitable or if I was inaccurate, I apologize to them.
01:02:16.320 --> 01:02:19.440
I was trying to specifically make the case that there's absolutely
01:02:20.400 --> 01:02:27.200
a racial view in Scripture of nations. It's synonymous. It's synonymous in the law,
01:02:27.200 --> 01:02:32.960
in the 1790s in this country. It's synonymous 2000 years earlier in Scripture. The reason that
01:02:32.960 --> 01:02:39.120
there's not much discussion of race and Christian history is it was so obvious. There's no theology
01:02:39.120 --> 01:02:43.760
for us to go back to and borrow from the past when men were more intelligent about making these
01:02:43.760 --> 01:02:50.240
arguments, because this wasn't the fight. The fight in previous centuries was about other doctrines.
01:02:51.120 --> 01:02:59.040
Today, when Satan moves the fight to being about race, about genes, about borders,
01:02:59.040 --> 01:03:05.840
about the created body, male and female, two sexes, not infinite sexes, disparate races,
01:03:05.840 --> 01:03:12.400
distinct races, not some just sea of humanity that's indistinguishable, those are the two sides
01:03:12.480 --> 01:03:19.600
that they're the most important for me to defend. Back to my point earlier about Andrew,
01:03:19.600 --> 01:03:23.600
if I had attacked him at the time and said, no, we must make the racialist case,
01:03:23.600 --> 01:03:28.480
or there's no case at all, I don't think that he would necessarily be where he is today.
01:03:28.480 --> 01:03:32.480
Again, I'm not taking credit for that. I'm just saying I could have very easily done harm
01:03:33.040 --> 01:03:39.040
to my views by being a jerk about it. If I had argued and picked a fight, in fact,
01:03:39.040 --> 01:03:44.720
I left Gab about a year later, or maybe not too long after. For unrelated reasons,
01:03:44.720 --> 01:03:49.680
I was very frustrated with some business choices he had made, some moderation choices,
01:03:49.680 --> 01:03:58.480
some culture choices on Gab. I made a strategic decision about persuasion not to fling mud at him,
01:03:58.480 --> 01:04:02.480
because although I disagreed with the things that he was doing on his platform,
01:04:02.480 --> 01:04:07.040
not mine, he's the boss, he owns it, he can do what he wants with it. I strongly disagreed with
01:04:07.040 --> 01:04:11.360
some of the things that he did and I kept my mouth shut. The reason I did that,
01:04:11.360 --> 01:04:15.280
the reason I didn't go after him when I was pissed off and I was disappointed, was that
01:04:16.000 --> 01:04:20.480
despite my differences with him about how he was running his business and some of those strategic
01:04:20.480 --> 01:04:26.480
decisions, he was still doing very good work and things that mattered to me. I knew that alienating
01:04:26.480 --> 01:04:32.800
him and being a jerk, being the guy who's sniping at someone, would make anything that I'm saying
01:04:32.880 --> 01:04:39.680
elsewhere a turn off to him. I highly am in particular because he has influence,
01:04:39.680 --> 01:04:46.320
he has much more influence than we have. We're not ankle biters and we're not trying to ride
01:04:46.320 --> 01:04:51.280
coattails, but if there are people, there are certain people in the world who have bully
01:04:51.280 --> 01:04:57.600
pulpits, there are people who have influence over more people than you do. If you're in a position
01:04:57.600 --> 01:05:02.240
where you can influence someone who's more influential than you, it's really important to
01:05:02.240 --> 01:05:07.600
get it right and part of that is not making them regret listening to you. I didn't go after him
01:05:07.600 --> 01:05:12.160
despite the fact that I was frustrated at the time. I pretty much kept my mouth shut publicly
01:05:12.160 --> 01:05:16.640
other than saying a couple things that were limited to the scope of that because he's doing
01:05:16.640 --> 01:05:22.160
really good work. I saw the trajectory and I hope that he would continue to, for lack of a better
01:05:22.160 --> 01:05:28.400
term, move to the right and he has. He's saying a lot of the things today on Twitter and on Gab
01:05:28.400 --> 01:05:34.320
that were on the verge of getting people banned from Gab a few years ago. People change, people's
01:05:34.320 --> 01:05:41.680
views change and sometimes being persuasive is just biting your tongue. One of the most persuasive
01:05:41.680 --> 01:05:47.520
things that I did in that particular situation was not to be antagonistic about something that
01:05:47.520 --> 01:05:52.560
wasn't a big ticket item. They had to do with this platform, but it didn't have to do with the
01:05:52.560 --> 01:06:00.560
larger project that I saw as allies. I want this to be a Christian nation. I want his kids to grow
01:06:00.560 --> 01:06:04.800
up in a place where they're not going to be persecuted for the fact that they're white.
01:06:05.440 --> 01:06:10.400
That's important to me. I don't have kids on my own. I never will. The only thing that I can do
01:06:10.400 --> 01:06:15.600
is effectively to fight for other people's kids in their world. I don't get anything out of any of
01:06:15.600 --> 01:06:21.280
this. One of the things that Adam mentioned to me after doing the podcast was that he sees the
01:06:21.360 --> 01:06:26.080
treatment that Corey and I have received at the hands of the church as part of our persuasion to
01:06:26.080 --> 01:06:32.400
him. He can tell that we are sincere because we're being treated like crap by some of the people he
01:06:32.400 --> 01:06:38.560
sees as being detrimental to the world. I apologize if I'm speaking out of turn by saying something
01:06:38.560 --> 01:06:43.920
he said to me private, but that is a common view that I think a lot of people have. Corey and I
01:06:43.920 --> 01:06:49.440
understand that instinctively. We also understand it explicitly from all the conversations we've had
01:06:49.440 --> 01:06:55.520
with these men. There are a lot of men on the right who don't have a church. They don't know God.
01:06:55.520 --> 01:07:02.240
They see ontological evil in the world and they're looking for where people talk about ontological
01:07:02.240 --> 01:07:07.280
good. That should be the church. It is the church. Yet Corey and I are two of the only men in the
01:07:07.280 --> 01:07:13.200
world who can speak to men like Adam and say, look, there's a Christian case to be made for not
01:07:13.200 --> 01:07:18.160
destroying your race in your nation, in your country. There's a Christian case for that.
01:07:18.160 --> 01:07:22.960
There's a moral case. There's a secular case too. I want there to be a Christian voice in those
01:07:23.840 --> 01:07:30.160
conversations. If you're persuasive in a way that makes you, someone people are willing to listen to,
01:07:30.160 --> 01:07:35.040
you're given the opportunities to say more than maybe you would have just said on your own.
01:07:36.480 --> 01:07:40.800
If we were the bomb throwers that people say we are, he wouldn't want to talk to me. I'd just be
01:07:40.800 --> 01:07:48.400
another crazy guy on the internet. If you can seem calm and persuasive and relaxed and not worry
01:07:48.400 --> 01:07:54.960
about what people think, people care more about what you think. It's one of the many ironies of
01:07:54.960 --> 01:08:01.120
the way the human psychology works. We're convinced by people who don't care if they're convincing,
01:08:01.120 --> 01:08:05.280
more than we're convinced by people who really want to be convincing. It's not an act on the
01:08:05.280 --> 01:08:11.520
part of Cory and myself. I want you to believe because it's true. I frequently say if we never
01:08:11.520 --> 01:08:16.720
get any credit, fine, whatever. We never wanted to do this in the first place. We didn't want to
01:08:16.720 --> 01:08:21.600
start a podcast. We did it because we felt that no one else was speaking to these matters.
01:08:22.400 --> 01:08:27.840
The subject of credibility, if you go back and look at the arc of episodes on Stone Choir,
01:08:27.840 --> 01:08:31.920
we waited until we were six, eight months in until we got into some of the really
01:08:32.720 --> 01:08:37.440
controversial so-called subjects. That was conscious. That was deliberate on our part.
01:08:37.440 --> 01:08:43.120
If we had begun on episode one talking about Africans and Jews and these other things that
01:08:43.120 --> 01:08:47.920
get people so angry, we would have just been the podcast that talks about really angering,
01:08:47.920 --> 01:08:54.080
controversial subjects. That's not us. There's a lot of things to talk about. It's fine to tailor
01:08:54.080 --> 01:09:00.000
the message, narrow it down, and make your point, and then wait. Let the point do its work. Then
01:09:00.080 --> 01:09:04.880
you come back later and see if anything's growing and find out if it was rocky soil
01:09:04.880 --> 01:09:11.920
or if it was fertile soil. You never know. It's the truth that gives the growth to the message.
01:09:13.760 --> 01:09:17.600
It's ultimately not how persuasive you are. Really, a lot of persuasion is just
01:09:17.600 --> 01:09:23.360
not getting in the way by your own stumbling and getting in the way of the truth that you're trying
01:09:23.360 --> 01:09:31.840
to convey to others. When it comes to making these arguments, particularly about complex or
01:09:32.560 --> 01:09:39.360
central, very important subjects, you should always bear in mind that you may not be the person
01:09:40.160 --> 01:09:45.760
who actually makes the final part of the argument. You may even not make the majority
01:09:45.760 --> 01:09:51.600
of the argument. You may just put one brick in place. You may add one building block.
01:09:52.240 --> 01:09:58.320
You may be the one who lays part of the foundation. You're building part of the argument for that
01:09:58.320 --> 01:10:05.120
person. Don't necessarily feel that you have to be the one to make the entirety of the argument.
01:10:05.120 --> 01:10:09.600
Now, if it's a family member or a close friend, maybe you will be the person who makes
01:10:09.600 --> 01:10:15.120
the rest of the argument as well, but you may be discussing something with
01:10:15.120 --> 01:10:20.240
someone you met at a coffee shop and you may lay the foundation for someone else to come in and
01:10:20.240 --> 01:10:24.960
make the rest of that argument in the future. So don't think that necessarily just because you
01:10:24.960 --> 01:10:30.160
didn't get to whatever ultimate conclusion you think you should have been able to make that
01:10:30.160 --> 01:10:39.040
what you did was ineffective or useless. It probably was not. Human beings work by building up
01:10:39.120 --> 01:10:43.520
information over the course of a lifetime. So all of those interactions matter.
01:10:44.640 --> 01:10:51.280
It may be that your role is just to add that one brick. Don't necessarily feel that that's
01:10:51.280 --> 01:10:57.440
unimportant. Go ahead and find a wall if you're so inclined and start pulling random bricks out
01:10:57.440 --> 01:11:03.680
and see what happens. They all matter. Every little piece matters. I'm not actually telling you to go
01:11:03.680 --> 01:11:10.240
pick apart your neighbor's wall. Don't do that. Only your own wall. But there's another point
01:11:11.600 --> 01:11:16.640
in all of this that I feel it's important to make explicit. We've sort of implied it throughout the
01:11:16.640 --> 01:11:23.760
episode so far, but fundamentally, you will never persuade anyone of anything.
01:11:24.480 --> 01:11:28.080
Now, what I mean by that is something very specific.
01:11:30.320 --> 01:11:39.120
No one is persuaded by someone else. Because ultimately, how it works is the other person
01:11:39.120 --> 01:11:44.400
takes in the information, takes in the argument, data, whatever it is that you are providing,
01:11:45.360 --> 01:11:53.200
synthesizes that himself and he persuades himself. Now, for some men, it may be that your argument
01:11:53.200 --> 01:11:57.200
is the one that he takes, makes his own and persuades himself given your argument.
01:11:59.040 --> 01:12:04.160
Now, it's a subtle point. It seems like a minor point. It's almost on the level of Kant's point
01:12:04.160 --> 01:12:09.120
about the thing in itself versus the thing as we perceive it with the senses. But it's a salient
01:12:09.120 --> 01:12:18.320
point. What you are doing is providing that other person with the necessary means to construct
01:12:18.400 --> 01:12:23.760
what he needs to arrive at the conclusion. And that's why it's important to know your audience.
01:12:23.760 --> 01:12:27.760
That's why it's important to know the person with whom you're speaking because you'll know what he
01:12:27.760 --> 01:12:33.360
needs to construct that argument for himself, the one that will convince him, that will persuade him.
01:12:34.960 --> 01:12:41.200
Because ultimately, that is an internal matter to the person. Persuasion happens in the psyche,
01:12:41.200 --> 01:12:46.480
as it were, in the mind of the person being persuaded. It doesn't happen externally.
01:12:46.800 --> 01:12:52.960
Yes, the information is provided externally, the argumentation in some cases, the data,
01:12:53.520 --> 01:12:58.160
whatever it may be. But the ultimate persuasion is an internal matter.
01:12:59.680 --> 01:13:04.800
And that is again why knowing your audience, having that relationship, having that built-up
01:13:04.800 --> 01:13:11.040
trust truly matters, because then the person can take what you are giving him and construct the
01:13:11.040 --> 01:13:17.680
case himself. Because ultimately, he is the one doing that final construction in his own mind.
01:13:18.800 --> 01:13:25.840
So yes, you can be persuasive, but the ultimate act of persuasion lies in the mind of the person
01:13:25.840 --> 01:13:32.480
persuading, in this case, persuading himself. The last big point that I want to make is a
01:13:33.120 --> 01:13:39.920
corollary to that. Something happened in the last few years, really in the universe,
01:13:39.920 --> 01:13:47.280
I think we've all felt it, between COVID and the BLM riots. I think everyone has a sense that
01:13:47.280 --> 01:13:55.040
there's been a shift somehow metaphysically. And one of the things that happened, both in COVID and
01:13:55.040 --> 01:14:04.560
with BLM, is that the divisions within families, within communities, within friendships became
01:14:04.560 --> 01:14:11.440
much more apparent. Or in some cases, where there was previously no division, now there is division.
01:14:12.400 --> 01:14:19.200
The important thing that I want to highlight in the case of COVID and BLM, and all the associated
01:14:19.200 --> 01:14:25.920
screaming, is that when those divisions occurred in what had formally seemed to be cohesive units,
01:14:25.920 --> 01:14:33.520
in some cases those congregations were split by COVID policies, or COVID fears, or COVID messaging,
01:14:33.520 --> 01:14:41.920
whatever. We, on the right, the people who are right about these things, should never be the ones
01:14:41.920 --> 01:14:49.520
who are causing the division for the sake of accusation. What I mean by that is if you look
01:14:49.520 --> 01:14:56.800
back at BLM and COVID, it was the people on the left who by and large became utterly hysterical,
01:14:57.360 --> 01:15:03.440
and filled with condemnation and rage at anyone who wouldn't comply. It seemed like there
01:15:03.440 --> 01:15:09.040
was an entirely new emergent religion that appeared almost fully formed in the span of like
01:15:09.040 --> 01:15:16.960
six months. And in that time, the adherents to that new religion were vicious to anyone who
01:15:16.960 --> 01:15:25.200
would not bend the knee to it, literally bending the knee in the case of the BLM crap. Those were
01:15:25.200 --> 01:15:31.200
the people who were cutting us out of their lives. Those are the people who if we had to cut them out
01:15:31.200 --> 01:15:37.920
of our lives, it was usually self-defense. It was usually actual fear that these people who had
01:15:37.920 --> 01:15:43.360
once been friends or maybe even family had now become a real potential physical threat to you
01:15:43.360 --> 01:15:49.360
or your family. And so if you did cut them off, it was almost certainly defensive. And it wasn't
01:15:49.360 --> 01:15:54.720
simply, I hate this guy because he's wrong about something. And so the last point I want to make
01:15:54.720 --> 01:16:01.440
is that we on the right are not the ones who isolate people and disparage them for being wrong.
01:16:02.480 --> 01:16:06.720
If you have someone that you love, someone you're friends with, some of your neighbors with,
01:16:06.720 --> 01:16:11.360
and they're wrong about something, that's a matter of Christian love and concern. You want them to
01:16:11.360 --> 01:16:18.320
be right. You want to help move them in the right direction. But because it is rooted in love and not
01:16:18.400 --> 01:16:24.080
rooted in wanting to win an argument, you never get to the point that you say,
01:16:24.080 --> 01:16:29.280
I hate you because you don't agree with me. I want nothing to do with you because you believe
01:16:29.280 --> 01:16:35.200
the wrong thing about this. That's not us. That's not what we on the right do. That's not how truth
01:16:35.200 --> 01:16:41.200
behaves. Yeah, Corey and I can tell you don't believe a word we say, go read for yourself.
01:16:41.200 --> 01:16:45.040
And we know you're going to come to the same conclusions in part because we don't want you
01:16:45.040 --> 01:16:50.160
to be persuaded by podcasters or by people writing articles or people writing books.
01:16:50.160 --> 01:16:55.920
You shouldn't be persuaded by the guy who makes the loudest, angriest, whatever argument. You
01:16:55.920 --> 01:17:02.480
should be persuaded by truth. And so when we do these meta episodes, we want to get people engaging
01:17:02.480 --> 01:17:08.160
in metacognition about thinking about thinking about truth. What are you thinking about? How do
01:17:08.160 --> 01:17:14.720
you incorporate the ideas that you hear into what you believe? Because it's a two step process.
01:17:14.720 --> 01:17:19.520
You hear something, you think about it. If you believe it, it becomes much more intrinsic.
01:17:20.240 --> 01:17:26.640
What we saw with COVID and BLM is that they kind of skipped the truth part and just went straight
01:17:26.640 --> 01:17:32.480
to the belief part. And so a religion emerged with nothing behind it except for these fictional
01:17:32.480 --> 01:17:42.080
fantasy stories. And the religious fervor that was used to target us was horribly divisive.
01:17:42.080 --> 01:17:46.880
Again, it divided families, it divided communities and congregations in terrible ways.
01:17:47.600 --> 01:17:54.000
And we should never be the ones who are causing that. So if your friends with someone and you're
01:17:54.000 --> 01:18:01.920
further to the right than them, never go after them, certainly publicly, for not being as right as
01:18:01.920 --> 01:18:06.960
you are for being wrong about something that you're right about. Don't tone beliefs the way they
01:18:06.960 --> 01:18:14.240
say things. It's funny, people think that I'm a bomb thrower on Twitter, not to the same degree
01:18:14.240 --> 01:18:19.680
as Corey, but people think that we're both antagonistic. If you actually look at me replying
01:18:19.680 --> 01:18:26.880
to other people's accounts, I very, very rarely say anything negative in someone else's replies.
01:18:26.880 --> 01:18:32.960
Usually if I reply to someone and I disagree, it's A, it's a mutual. B, I'm very respectful.
01:18:32.960 --> 01:18:38.880
And C, I'm trying to make a narrow point. I'm trying to nudge things a little bit. But I never
01:18:38.880 --> 01:18:43.760
look at someone's timelines. I never look at their statements and say, I got to fix what
01:18:43.760 --> 01:18:48.880
they're saying. They got something wrong. But it's their timeline. It's their space to make
01:18:48.880 --> 01:18:54.160
their point about whatever they want to talk about. Sometimes I can contribute something
01:18:54.160 --> 01:18:57.840
helpful. Sometimes I can contribute. I want to nudge in a slightly different direction because
01:18:57.840 --> 01:19:01.040
the thing will be helpful to them in what they're actually trying to say.
01:19:02.720 --> 01:19:07.440
The important point that I want people to take home is that if you see someone making a mistake
01:19:07.440 --> 01:19:15.360
wherever and in conversation on social media, your first instinct shouldn't be, I got to fix this.
01:19:15.920 --> 01:19:20.480
You've said that all along. Your friends, your family especially are not people you should be
01:19:20.480 --> 01:19:26.800
fixing. They're people you should be loving. And loving them involves helping them at some point
01:19:26.800 --> 01:19:31.280
get some of these things right. But if there's someone who's friends with you or friends with
01:19:31.280 --> 01:19:38.160
your sphere of friends, particularly if you're the undesirables, as Corey and I are, social
01:19:38.160 --> 01:19:42.640
media is very interesting because anyone can interact with anyone. You can reply to Elon Musk
01:19:42.640 --> 01:19:49.040
and he may see it. That's incredible. That's completely insane. On Gab, it's a smaller space.
01:19:49.040 --> 01:19:55.040
You can respond and or he's likely to see it because it's a much more tight-knit community,
01:19:55.040 --> 01:20:00.880
which is one of the awesome things about it. It's a community. It's a town square. It's not
01:20:00.880 --> 01:20:05.600
like a global billboard. That's a different culture and that's a good thing. The internet needs
01:20:05.600 --> 01:20:12.320
multiple different cultures. On the internet, if someone says something and you disagree with it,
01:20:12.960 --> 01:20:18.160
it's okay to let it go. You don't constantly have to fix everything around you. And so
01:20:19.200 --> 01:20:24.400
because other people can interact completely at random on Twitter especially because it's so large,
01:20:25.520 --> 01:20:29.280
it's very conspicuous to me especially in the last few months just kind of looking at
01:20:29.280 --> 01:20:36.080
own interactions. Who is willing to still talk to me because there's been such a concerted slander
01:20:36.080 --> 01:20:42.000
campaign against Corey and myself and against Stone Choir that a lot of people just refuse to
01:20:42.000 --> 01:20:47.360
acknowledge we exist anymore. Even some who will speak in private won't speak to us in public because
01:20:47.360 --> 01:20:52.400
they're downsized to them. And I respect that. I don't go after these people in public. I'm not
01:20:52.400 --> 01:20:56.880
naming them here. I'm not trying to shame anyone by mentioning this. I'm simply highlighting that
01:20:57.840 --> 01:21:03.120
there are people who are still willing to follow me, who are willing to respond, reply to me and
01:21:03.120 --> 01:21:09.120
engage with me in public. I respect the fact that they're taking a chance to even be seen
01:21:09.120 --> 01:21:15.840
interacting favorably. There are multiple parables in scripture about engaging with the
01:21:15.840 --> 01:21:22.000
public. You have lepers. You have these text collectors. You have undesirables of the lowest
01:21:22.000 --> 01:21:30.240
order and the manner in which they were treated in those days. Today, being on the dissident
01:21:30.240 --> 01:21:35.760
right is basically being part of a leper colony. And it's artificial. I mean, it's not leprosy.
01:21:35.760 --> 01:21:41.440
Leprosy was a highly contagious, hideous disease. It was incurable. Leprosy colonies existed because
01:21:41.440 --> 01:21:46.480
those people had to be set apart not only because ceremonially they were unclean, but because they
01:21:46.480 --> 01:21:53.680
had a horrific, contagious disease. There's no contagion among the dissident right. There's
01:21:53.680 --> 01:21:57.680
only people who are telling the truth, and then other people are afraid to go near them because
01:21:57.680 --> 01:22:03.360
of it. So I highlight this because if there's someone who's willing to actually still talk to me
01:22:03.360 --> 01:22:09.440
publicly, I respect that and I respect them for it. And part of my respect for that is that I'm
01:22:09.440 --> 01:22:14.160
going to engage with them as little as possible because I don't want to bring heat on them by
01:22:14.160 --> 01:22:19.360
speaking to them because there are people who hate me so much that they're sitting in the telegram
01:22:19.360 --> 01:22:24.880
public chat for Stone Choir trying to dox pastors and laymen. If anyone they can find,
01:22:24.880 --> 01:22:31.200
they want to dox them and go to their congregations and try to get them destroyed because they hate
01:22:31.200 --> 01:22:36.480
the fact that we are speaking so much. Why do they hate it? They hate it because we are the men
01:22:36.480 --> 01:22:41.680
who are actually able to talk to men like Adam and men like Andrew from different perspectives
01:22:41.680 --> 01:22:47.440
and help them move in a direction that's closer to the truth. And it's a truth that's completely
01:22:47.440 --> 01:22:52.640
at odds with the world. And there's servants of the world that passionately hate that and will
01:22:52.640 --> 01:22:58.720
spare no expense of, and they'll take any amount of time to try to harm us and anyone who comes near
01:22:58.720 --> 01:23:03.760
us. So if someone is not willing to come near me publicly, I notice, I absolutely notice,
01:23:03.760 --> 01:23:08.240
I'm really good at pattern recognition. If you used to talk to me and you don't anymore,
01:23:08.240 --> 01:23:13.360
I can tell. And I don't care. If there's anything to forgive, I certainly forgive it.
01:23:13.360 --> 01:23:17.600
But it is conspicuous when someone's willing to talk to me. I mention this because if there's
01:23:17.600 --> 01:23:22.400
someone who's still willing to engage with the men who are treated as lepers and as tax collectors,
01:23:23.120 --> 01:23:28.160
don't make them regret it. Don't make their lives harder because they're one of the few people who
01:23:28.160 --> 01:23:33.120
are willing to actually treat us like Christian brothers and like human beings.
01:23:34.720 --> 01:23:40.320
If you hold views that are not popular, if you hold views that are contrary to the world's religion,
01:23:40.880 --> 01:23:47.360
and someone is willing to engage with you, make sure they don't regret it. That's one of the chief
01:23:47.360 --> 01:23:51.920
messages of this episode. Make sure that when you're trying to persuade someone, sometimes it's
01:23:51.920 --> 01:23:56.800
just as simple as, I'm not going to be a jerk. I'm not going to make your life any harder than it
01:23:56.800 --> 01:24:03.520
already is because you have your own thing to focus on. That's important too, to not be the guy
01:24:03.520 --> 01:24:09.440
that someone regrets that they were friends with because that's a way to lose friends and negatively
01:24:09.440 --> 01:24:15.280
influence people. I mentioned the Andrew example earlier on. If I had gone after him and bet a
01:24:15.280 --> 01:24:20.480
complete jerk, he would have very rightfully ignored some of the things I said and maybe he
01:24:20.480 --> 01:24:25.440
wouldn't think what he does now. Even maybe if only for the sake that he didn't want to be associated
01:24:25.440 --> 01:24:30.880
with someone who would be as much of a jerk as me. Sometimes you just have to shut your mouth and
01:24:30.880 --> 01:24:37.440
let someone be wrong on the internet. It's not the end of the world. It may be that by being silent,
01:24:37.440 --> 01:24:41.840
in the future, you're buying a chance to make the persuasive case that you didn't have
01:24:41.840 --> 01:24:48.320
the opportunity to make in that moment. Patience, grace are the key elements of persuasion.
01:24:48.320 --> 01:24:52.640
Sometimes just saying nothing is the most powerful thing you could say. In some part of that is just
01:24:52.640 --> 01:24:57.680
still being a friend, like Corey's father, who was friends for a man because they were friends
01:24:57.680 --> 01:25:02.320
and the fact that the man wouldn't receive the gospel didn't dissuade him from being his friend
01:25:02.320 --> 01:25:07.760
or for continuing to talk about it. Being friends with people who have different views
01:25:07.760 --> 01:25:13.360
is a testimony to the confidence that you have in your own beliefs. Don't let your beliefs become
01:25:13.360 --> 01:25:19.840
an excuse for you to be brittle. Truth never causes brittleness. It causes strength. Wherever
01:25:19.840 --> 01:25:25.760
you find strength, especially today when there are men with convictions, people who don't know
01:25:25.760 --> 01:25:31.280
anything will see strength being upheld in the face of adversity and think maybe there's some
01:25:31.280 --> 01:25:36.720
truth behind that because there has to be some metaphysical explanation for how someone could
01:25:36.720 --> 01:25:42.320
withstand the hatred of the world. Maybe he's just completely crazy or maybe he's on to something.
01:25:43.120 --> 01:25:47.600
Maybe all you do as a personal witness to the world is acting in his example who says,
01:25:47.680 --> 01:25:52.240
I'm still here. You can't chase me away. If that's the only persuasion you can do,
01:25:52.240 --> 01:25:56.480
that's a powerful message because there's so few men today who are willing to do that.
01:25:59.280 --> 01:26:04.880
There's a lot to think about here. It's a meta discussion around how we interact with each other
01:26:04.880 --> 01:26:11.760
and how we think about ourselves. Be patient. It's okay to be quiet. Measure twice, cut once.
01:26:12.480 --> 01:26:18.240
Think before you go after someone, anywhere. Even think before you tell them the things
01:26:18.240 --> 01:26:22.800
that we talk about on Stunkwire or wherever else you're getting your interesting information.
01:26:23.520 --> 01:26:28.880
Don't be hasty to try to upend someone else's life because even if it's beneficial,
01:26:28.880 --> 01:26:34.560
it may well upend things. Have some empathy for that and have some grace for that person
01:26:34.560 --> 01:26:39.440
to try to go easy and to make it easy for them. If they want nothing to do with it,
01:26:39.440 --> 01:26:43.600
you should still love them because whatever relationship you had beforehand should still
01:26:43.600 --> 01:26:49.120
exist. If they respond the way people did with COVID and BLM by writing you off,
01:26:50.000 --> 01:26:56.240
well, that was part of Jesus' prophecies of end times, that fathers would be adversaries against
01:26:56.240 --> 01:27:00.880
daughters, mothers and sons, daughter-in-laws and father-in-laws and butchering the relationships.
01:27:00.880 --> 01:27:06.080
Like Jesus basically covered everything. Families will be torn down. Churches will be torn down
01:27:06.160 --> 01:27:11.520
internally, not just externally. Whether or not this is an end time moment,
01:27:11.520 --> 01:27:15.200
the fact that these things are happening are always a reminder to us to believe
01:27:15.200 --> 01:27:20.000
God's promises because they will come true one day. When we see them happening,
01:27:20.000 --> 01:27:24.000
it's not a cause for panic or worry. It's just a cause for making sure that we focus
01:27:24.000 --> 01:27:27.920
on the things that matter most. Chief of all, that's God and His promises,
01:27:27.920 --> 01:27:41.760
and that includes the truth of all things in creation.
WEBVTT
00:00:00 – 00:00:02: Oh
00:00:30 – 00:00:45: Welcome to the Stone Choir podcast. I am Corey J. Mahler, and I'm still woe. On today's Stone
00:00:45 – 00:00:50: Choir, we're going to be discussing persuasion. And the last number of months we've tackled
00:00:50 – 00:00:56: a bunch of different so-called controversial topics, subjects that the world takes a very
00:00:56 – 00:01:02: different view than we take, and responds to the views that we have shared on Stone Choir,
00:01:02 – 00:01:08: generally with hysteria. And we tackle those issues specifically because some of them are
00:01:08 – 00:01:13: hard to hear, some are probably hard for some of you to hear. And the point is that we wanted
00:01:13 – 00:01:20: to be able to present a calm reasoned case for these things in part to make the point
00:01:20 – 00:01:25: about the subjects, but also with every episode that we've done, we're trying to demonstrate
00:01:25 – 00:01:31: that you don't have to be a bomb-throwing madman to agree with us about Scripture being
00:01:31 – 00:01:37: true, or about history being true, or about science being true. Truth is truth. And when
00:01:37 – 00:01:42: faithful, honest men talk about the truth, they should be able to do that without getting
00:01:42 – 00:01:48: worked up about it. So this week, we're talking about persuasion, specifically, because last
00:01:48 – 00:01:54: week we talked about not wanting people to get sucked down into the tar pit of, oh, Cam
00:01:54 – 00:02:00: Red Pill, now I want to know all the Red Pill subjects, and I want to engage in every so-called
00:02:00 – 00:02:04: conspiracy theory. And I know that they lie to me about something, so they must have lied about
00:02:04 – 00:02:11: everything. This is now my personality. When we tackle these subjects, we don't want people to
00:02:11 – 00:02:17: feel like talking about race, or the Jews, or Hitler, is your personality, because it's not,
00:02:17 – 00:02:22: you know, it's the Ryan Gosling meme where the guy watches Drive. And then for the next eight
00:02:22 – 00:02:27: years, all of his relationships are defined by pretending to be somebody else. That it's
00:02:27 – 00:02:33: fake. That's not, it's not mature. It's not healthy. And we certainly don't want to be a part of
00:02:33 – 00:02:38: anyone else going down that path on any of these subjects, because we all have our lives. We're
00:02:38 – 00:02:44: living in the community. We're doing whatever it is that God put us here to do. And when you
00:02:44 – 00:02:49: learn about something new, that's great. Today, we're going to talk about persuasion, because on
00:02:49 – 00:02:55: one hand, we don't want you to fall into a trap of getting obsessed with stuff, which is something
00:02:55 – 00:02:59: that Corey and I are often accused, like, Oh, those guys are, those are the race guys, those are
00:02:59 – 00:03:05: the haters. We're not. And when someone listens, they realize that. But if you only listen to the
00:03:05 – 00:03:11: slander about us, instead of listening to us, you'll believe that, you know, it's only crazy
00:03:11 – 00:03:17: people who think these things. When you're clear reasoned arguments, like, Okay, well, that makes
00:03:17 – 00:03:24: sense, even if you disagree. And so today, we want to talk about how to be persuasive. As you're
00:03:24 – 00:03:30: tackling some of these subjects, you know, Dale Carnegie with winning friends and influencing
00:03:30 – 00:03:36: people and the Dilbert guy, Scott Adams, he's talked a lot about persuasion, we're not trying to
00:03:36 – 00:03:44: jump into that sort of big brain TED talk world, where here's how you make people like you more.
00:03:44 – 00:03:50: The specific point that we hope to get across in today's episode is that, if and when you choose
00:03:50 – 00:03:55: to engage in some of the subjects that we discuss, there are certain things you can do if you're
00:03:55 – 00:04:02: not thinking that will turn people off completely to what it is you're trying to convince them of.
00:04:02 – 00:04:08: And there are certain things you can do that will be persuasive. It's, this is just basic adult
00:04:08 – 00:04:13: human stuff. There's a good way and there's a bad way to do anything. And there's no particular
00:04:13 – 00:04:19: script for how to do it well in every single situation. Every individual is different. You're
00:04:19 – 00:04:23: different than we are. Your family is different than you are. You have more similarities with your
00:04:23 – 00:04:27: family than probably with us. You have more similarities with us, you know, we have with
00:04:27 – 00:04:33: someone on the other side of the world. So they're varying degrees of familiarity. And all those
00:04:33 – 00:04:40: have to be incorporated into how we discuss things. One of the things that made us think about doing
00:04:40 – 00:04:44: this episode is that when we did last week's, we were talking about conspiracy theories. Somebody
00:04:44 – 00:04:48: on Twitter replied and said, you know, basically, he was a fan of the show, and he always looked
00:04:48 – 00:04:52: forward to what we put out. But he said last week's show wasn't our best work. And I appreciated
00:04:52 – 00:04:58: that comment because it was, it was critical. He wasn't being nasty, but it made me think. It made
00:04:58 – 00:05:04: me think specifically, why do we select some of the topics that we select? Why would it be that
00:05:04 – 00:05:08: someone would hear last week's episode and think, yeah, that wasn't really for me. That wasn't
00:05:08 – 00:05:12: that great. Maybe he's right. Maybe it was a crap episode and it wasn't suitable for anyone.
00:05:13 – 00:05:17: Almost immediately after we got a ton of feedback from other people saying, thank you so much for
00:05:17 – 00:05:23: this episode. I loved it. It was really important. And I realized that one of the reasons for that
00:05:23 – 00:05:27: disparity, it wasn't that like the guy who said that has bad taste or something, he had never
00:05:27 – 00:05:32: dealt with probably, I didn't ask about, assume he never dealt with the problems that we were
00:05:32 – 00:05:37: addressing in that episode. There are a lot of people, especially in the dissident right, who
00:05:37 – 00:05:43: go completely nuts for so-called conspiracy theories. Like I said, it becomes their personality.
00:05:43 – 00:05:47: And if you talk to one of those guys, you can't help but hearing about that stuff, even if you
00:05:47 – 00:05:53: want to talk about something completely different. And so I realized that one of the things that
00:05:53 – 00:06:00: Corey and I do when we tackle subjects is every episode is not for every listener. That's not to
00:06:00 – 00:06:04: be dismissive. It's just that we're trying to tackle a specific issue in hopes that, you know,
00:06:04 – 00:06:08: eventually in a perfect world, everyone would get on the same page. So if you hear something,
00:06:08 – 00:06:14: you're like, that's not really for me. It's fine if you don't like the episode. But I realized
00:06:14 – 00:06:18: when he said that, that especially in light of all the other people saying, yeah, those are really
00:06:18 – 00:06:25: value of episode, I realized that there are people that just don't have certain problems. And so
00:06:25 – 00:06:32: when if we do an episode, and you're like, that doesn't have anything to do with me, I'm not saying
00:06:32 – 00:06:39: you should just like every episode. If someone says something, and it doesn't make sense to you,
00:06:39 – 00:06:44: and we're telling you, this is a big problem in the world, like conspiracy theory obsession is a
00:06:44 – 00:06:49: problem in the world, especially on the right. So when we say, Hey, here's a really important
00:06:49 – 00:06:53: thing to deal with. And someone's like, that doesn't have anything to do with me. Hey, thank God,
00:06:53 – 00:06:58: that you've been spared that. But be be aware that there are people who are actually being
00:06:58 – 00:07:05: significantly burdened by confusion and disorientation and obsession in some cases,
00:07:05 – 00:07:09: about a subject that thankfully you've been spared. And that's kind of the case with a lot of
00:07:09 – 00:07:13: reps. As you know, some people, you know, there are some people in certain denominations, when we
00:07:13 – 00:07:17: talked about slavery, like, yeah, that's fine. You know, maybe it's not exactly what I've heard
00:07:17 – 00:07:23: in church, but that's consistent with a scriptural approach. And then there are other people who
00:07:23 – 00:07:28: completely freak out because I've never heard anything except for the modern, strictly moral
00:07:28 – 00:07:36: anti slavery views that have only existed in the last century and a half. So one of the things
00:07:36 – 00:07:43: about being persuasive is really knowing your audience. In our case, as podcasters, we have a
00:07:43 – 00:07:48: generic audience is entirely opt in. But we don't know you, we don't know you personally, we don't
00:07:48 – 00:07:53: know what your interests are, your concerns are. So obviously, we can't address every episode to
00:07:53 – 00:07:59: each person listening individually. So when you think that there's a miss on something, just think
00:07:59 – 00:08:03: about maybe the fact that there are other people out there that are dealing with something that
00:08:03 – 00:08:09: you've been spared, you know, be thankful for that, but also be aware of it. Because if we take the
00:08:09 – 00:08:13: time to devote an entire week to something, it's because we see enough in the world, we haven't,
00:08:13 – 00:08:18: you know, enough people commenting to us DMing us, we've seen enough struggle that we're saying,
00:08:18 – 00:08:25: this is something affecting others. And when we talk about being persuasive, that's part of it,
00:08:25 – 00:08:31: knowing that my problems are not necessarily your problems. You know, the worst thing that's ever
00:08:31 – 00:08:36: happened to me is going to be different in degree than the worst thing that's ever happened to each
00:08:36 – 00:08:41: person listening. You know, there's some people who maybe you have a horse girl where she has,
00:08:41 – 00:08:44: she's rich, daddy's rich. And the worst thing that's ever happened to her in her life, she's
00:08:44 – 00:08:50: never lost friends or family, but her dad had to sell her horse. And she was bereft. That was the
00:08:50 – 00:08:56: worst thing that ever happened to her. I think we have a tendency to look at someone, you know,
00:08:56 – 00:09:01: like that in the hypothetical, and be completely unsympathetic and say, Oh, you spoiled little
00:09:01 – 00:09:09: brat. How dare you complain about this when my problems are XYZ worse than that. The sympathetic
00:09:09 – 00:09:14: approach is to look at that and to empathize to realize that that was the worst day in that girl's
00:09:14 – 00:09:20: life. If the horse that she dearly loved got sold, you know, for whatever reason, and that was
00:09:20 – 00:09:24: cause of heartbreak, she's heartbroken. It's the worst thing that ever happened to her.
00:09:25 – 00:09:31: I think that we can approach things as we're trying to be persuasive and just trying to discuss
00:09:31 – 00:09:37: things with people to some degree by putting ourselves in their shoes. Because if something
00:09:37 – 00:09:42: is really hurting someone else and it doesn't bother you at all, you have to keep that in mind
00:09:43 – 00:09:47: when you're interacting with them and certainly don't dismiss whatever is concerning them. Because
00:09:47 – 00:09:53: even if their concerns are dumb or wrong, it's still what's concerning them. And you can find
00:09:53 – 00:09:57: common ground simply in the fact that you yourself have concerns or things that burden you, things
00:09:57 – 00:10:02: that frighten you, things that confuse you. And so if the only commonality that you have with the
00:10:02 – 00:10:08: person you're talking to is that you share having had a bad day, that's still a place to begin.
00:10:08 – 00:10:13: And so I think as we begin talking about persuasion, finding common ground is one of the most
00:10:13 – 00:10:20: crucial elements. So I think at the outset, it's important to distinguish between two distinct
00:10:20 – 00:10:28: things that are both really in this area we're discussing in this episode. The first is persuasion,
00:10:28 – 00:10:33: which is what we are discussing properly. How do you persuade someone of something? What is
00:10:33 – 00:10:39: persuasion? And the second is manipulation. There's a distinction between these. We are not talking
00:10:39 – 00:10:46: about manipulation. Some of the psychology or things like that would get into manipulation,
00:10:46 – 00:10:50: where you're talking about propaganda in the negative sense, and we'll get into that later
00:10:50 – 00:10:57: in the episode as well. But for our purposes here, persuasion is attempting to convince someone of
00:10:57 – 00:11:05: something by engaging with that person. So you're engaging that person's reason or emotions. It's
00:11:05 – 00:11:11: not always wrong to engage the emotions. God gave you emotions for a reason. You don't totally ignore
00:11:11 – 00:11:16: them. Yes, when you're dealing with something that is a purely logical problem, you set your
00:11:16 – 00:11:22: emotions aside. It's important to be able to do that, particularly for men. But it's not wrong
00:11:22 – 00:11:27: to engage the emotions of another person per se. That can be used to manipulate, of course.
00:11:28 – 00:11:35: But the distinction is that manipulation is an attempt to circumvent or subvert, to take advantage
00:11:35 – 00:11:43: of the other person in some way. So you're trying to befuddle the person, confuse the person,
00:11:43 – 00:11:50: engage with emotions that aren't really at issue here in order to manipulate the outcome. So it's
00:11:50 – 00:11:56: the difference basically in intent. There's some difference in means as well, but largely it's the
00:11:56 – 00:12:05: intent. Persuasion you want to bring the person to, one would think, your position through convincing
00:12:05 – 00:12:11: the person, engaging with that person's reason, engaging with that person's emotions, engaging
00:12:11 – 00:12:18: with that person's thoughts, etc. Whereas with manipulation, again, you are attempting to subvert
00:12:18 – 00:12:28: or control. Now, manipulation technically is not an inherently negative term. Because manipulation
00:12:28 – 00:12:32: also has the sense of just doing something skillfully, because it just comes from Latin
00:12:32 – 00:12:37: manipulus, which is Latin for handful, has to do with the hands. And the hands are obviously
00:12:38 – 00:12:45: dexterous, as it were. However, in modern English, manipulation has taken off that negative
00:12:45 – 00:12:50: connotation. So here, we'll just contrast those two. Persuasion being what we are discussing,
00:12:50 – 00:12:56: manipulation being sort of the shadow version of it, the dark version of it, not what we are
00:12:56 – 00:13:01: advocating. And as well mentioned, we're not going to get into the psychology of, you know,
00:13:01 – 00:13:07: if you want to convince someone, do these four things in this order. Yes, we could get into that,
00:13:07 – 00:13:16: but that's not the point here. The point of the episode is, how do you engage with other people
00:13:16 – 00:13:23: in a meaningful way on these topics? And how do you choose when to engage? Because that's part of
00:13:23 – 00:13:30: it. As Will mentioned, you don't just always go 100% on every single one of these issues.
00:13:31 – 00:13:38: Yes, you've listened to the episodes on race and World War II. That doesn't mean that the first
00:13:38 – 00:13:45: thing you say when you sit down to have a beer with someone is, so, how about racial IQ? You don't
00:13:45 – 00:13:50: open that way. I mean, maybe if it's with your friends and it's a joke, fine, but you have to
00:13:50 – 00:13:57: know your audience. You have to know where you are as well. And how to engage with that audience
00:13:57 – 00:14:05: in that place. And so, as was mentioned, we don't know our audience personally. Of course,
00:14:05 – 00:14:10: we know some of you personally, but we generally don't know the overwhelming majority of our audience
00:14:10 – 00:14:16: personally. So what we are doing here is necessarily more general than what you would be doing with
00:14:16 – 00:14:23: someone in person or what we would do with someone in person. Woe was just on the myth of the 20th
00:14:23 – 00:14:30: century. And there, he is engaging personally with someone. So that's different from how you would
00:14:30 – 00:14:35: engage, say, on this podcast with the audience. With each other, we can engage personally. We
00:14:35 – 00:14:40: know each other. But with the audience, it has to be more general. So the first thing you want to do
00:14:40 – 00:14:47: when you're going to persuade someone is just to know the other person. Start with an actual
00:14:47 – 00:14:52: conversation with the person. You don't have to open up with politics and religion and theology.
00:14:54 – 00:15:01: You can open with a general discussion. You're building a relationship, building rapport to some
00:15:01 – 00:15:07: degree, and that is going to count toward whether or not that person will give any weight to what
00:15:07 – 00:15:17: you say later. If you just open up cold open with so about the world war two, probably not going
00:15:17 – 00:15:24: to get you anywhere. That's part of why people like the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Mormons,
00:15:24 – 00:15:28: when they do the cold call at your front door, they typically don't get anywhere with that.
00:15:30 – 00:15:37: Now, maybe over time, they can wear certain people down. But if you have a relationship with
00:15:37 – 00:15:43: someone, you have an established rapport, you're going to be more successful in persuading that
00:15:43 – 00:15:49: person. So that first part is just getting to know your audience, knowing your audience.
00:15:50 – 00:15:54: And that goes back to something that we've discussed in the past, the basic question,
00:15:54 – 00:16:00: what problem are you trying to solve? And I think something that I hope that people in our
00:16:00 – 00:16:05: audience will keep in mind is that if you learn something new, maybe it's from Stone Choir,
00:16:05 – 00:16:09: maybe it's somewhere else, and it's a really big deal to you, like it revolutionizes some
00:16:09 – 00:16:14: aspect of how you view the world, you're probably going to be excited about that. Like,
00:16:14 – 00:16:19: this is cool, like this opens up new horizons. This explains things that I never understood
00:16:19 – 00:16:23: before. I'm energized, I have this new knowledge, and you want to share it.
00:16:25 – 00:16:30: The question of what problem are you trying to solve when you're looking to persuade people in
00:16:30 – 00:16:37: your own life is that I think the mistake that many people make in interpersonal discussions is
00:16:38 – 00:16:43: suddenly the problem you want to solve with your friends or God forbid your family is,
00:16:43 – 00:16:48: oh, they're not red-pilled. I need to go lecture them about these things that I know about and
00:16:48 – 00:16:55: that they're wrong about, and I need to fix them. That is exactly the wrong approach. If you approach
00:16:55 – 00:17:02: wanting to discuss a subject in terms of I need to fix you, it's revolting. We did an episode,
00:17:02 – 00:17:07: five-part episode on race, three-part episode on Jews, between those is probably close to 20 hours
00:17:07 – 00:17:15: of content. As Corey mentioned, people knocking on doors for these cults, if I showed up on your
00:17:15 – 00:17:20: door and said, hey, I'm here to talk to you about race for three hours, you're going to chase me off.
00:17:20 – 00:17:25: Even if you happen to like me, you're not going to want to hear it. There's a blessed passivity to
00:17:26 – 00:17:30: things like podcasts and articles that you can share with other people because it's completely
00:17:30 – 00:17:37: one-sided. You can pick up an article or maybe a book or a podcast episode and you can listen or
00:17:37 – 00:17:42: read, engage in your own time on your own terms. If you don't like it, you can just walk away. If
00:17:43 – 00:17:48: we say something in one of our episodes that rubs you the wrong way, like, I got to put this down,
00:17:48 – 00:17:53: it's annoying or whatever, you can't. You don't have to chase us off to do it because we don't
00:17:53 – 00:18:00: know who you are. There's never any mutual engagement there, so we can make a case for
00:18:00 – 00:18:05: something in this sort of passive teaching environment. There's different fundamentals
00:18:05 – 00:18:10: than the way you can make a case to someone you know personally. The very thing that we can do
00:18:10 – 00:18:15: quite successfully on a podcast where take it or leave it, you can listen or not,
00:18:15 – 00:18:20: it would be virtually impossible to do this in person to strangers, even though virtually all
00:18:20 – 00:18:26: of you are strangers to us. The fact that we're not coming to you and trying to convince you
00:18:26 – 00:18:33: is part of what makes it easy for you to listen. I think one of the keys for us to understand as
00:18:33 – 00:18:39: we're engaging interpersonally is that one of the things that we say all the time, I particularly
00:18:39 – 00:18:42: say a lot here and I actually said on the midst of the 20th century this past week,
00:18:42 – 00:18:48: I don't care if anyone agrees with me. Adam on the other show thankfully got me to clarify,
00:18:48 – 00:18:52: didn't mean that I'm completely indifferent to people believing these things. What I was talking
00:18:52 – 00:18:59: about and what I'd say on this podcast frequently is I am completely outcome independent to how you
00:18:59 – 00:19:05: receive this information. Yes, Corey and I are spending probably about 30 hours a week on some
00:19:05 – 00:19:11: of the easier episodes preparing and delivering this stuff to you. So there's clearly investment,
00:19:11 – 00:19:15: we wouldn't be doing this if no one were listening and we thought no one cared.
00:19:16 – 00:19:20: When I say I don't care, what I mean is that if you as an individual who's completely
00:19:20 – 00:19:26: undone to me don't agree with the thing that we just told you, that's okay. We frequently say
00:19:26 – 00:19:32: take it or leave it. There are a lot of episodes where we explicitly say don't take our word for it,
00:19:32 – 00:19:37: don't listen to a couple of podcasters, tell you stuff. It's completely contrary to everything
00:19:37 – 00:19:42: you've ever heard. That should rightly raise your hackles. I use that phrase frequently. We have a
00:19:42 – 00:19:52: natural basic animal understanding of something being off and the instinctual response to off is
00:19:52 – 00:19:57: to be protective and that's fine, that's good. The reason that Corey and I can say it's fine if
00:19:57 – 00:20:02: you don't believe us, go look for yourself is that we know that we're telling you the truth.
00:20:02 – 00:20:06: And so our confidence in the subjects that we discuss is based on the fact that we know
00:20:07 – 00:20:13: we've done all the legwork long before we come to the microphone and deliver one of these episodes.
00:20:13 – 00:20:19: So when I say I don't care and I say you can take it or leave it, it's not that I don't
00:20:19 – 00:20:25: want you to believe or I'm indifferent. It's that if you say that's crap, I don't believe any of it.
00:20:25 – 00:20:32: There's no skin off my nose. It doesn't hurt me if you don't agree. And while that's easy
00:20:32 – 00:20:38: in an impersonal situation like a podcast, I think the vital thing that one of the key things I hope
00:20:38 – 00:20:44: people will take away from this episode is that it's okay to have a sense of that same spirit
00:20:44 – 00:20:51: in person with your friends, with your family. And one of the big turnoffs when you want to
00:20:51 – 00:20:54: talk about a subject is when it's just the most important thing in the world for you to talk about
00:20:54 – 00:21:01: it. If you're just brimming with excitement to tell somebody about something, maybe the best
00:21:01 – 00:21:06: approach, it depends on your relationship, maybe a relationship where your friend is just used to
00:21:06 – 00:21:12: you getting excited about stuff and they'll humor you. But sometimes for some people, depending
00:21:12 – 00:21:17: on their personalities and their friends, if you're brimming with excitement to share something you
00:21:17 – 00:21:22: just learned, maybe the best thing is to wait and to say nothing and to let it naturally come up in
00:21:22 – 00:21:27: conversation. So you've been informed, you've learned about something, you really want to share
00:21:27 – 00:21:34: details, but you don't want to be this guy who's just wild eyed about convincing other people.
00:21:34 – 00:21:40: Sometimes the best way to be convincing is to completely relax and just forget about it.
00:21:40 – 00:21:47: And then later on, maybe months down the road, some say rice or IQ comes up, you now have
00:21:47 – 00:21:51: something you can contribute to the conversation that's going to be novel to your circle of friends
00:21:51 – 00:21:56: because they're not listening, they haven't heard this stuff before. You can drop a few facts in
00:21:56 – 00:22:01: conversation that are probably going to blow their minds and maybe they'll get really mad at you,
00:22:01 – 00:22:06: like some people get mad at us, maybe they'll pique their curiosity. The nice thing about
00:22:06 – 00:22:11: having resources like books and articles and podcasts to point people to is that you don't
00:22:11 – 00:22:16: have to have the personal investment to say you must believe and listen to this thing right away.
00:22:16 – 00:22:20: This is the most important thing. You can say, you know what, I heard something really interesting.
00:22:20 – 00:22:25: Listen to this episode, tell me how you think. I found it curious. I was really interested by
00:22:25 – 00:22:30: what they have to say. You can be non-committal, but curious, and that doesn't put pressure on
00:22:30 – 00:22:35: the other person to have to just say, you're absolutely right. Those guys make complete sense.
00:22:35 – 00:22:39: Maybe they're going to respond very negatively. And so one of the reasons that Corey and I created
00:22:39 – 00:22:46: Stone Choir is that we can take the heat for you. We can be the crazy men screaming into the void
00:22:46 – 00:22:51: on the internet. And then if a few people come along in here and say, yeah, that makes sense,
00:22:51 – 00:22:56: then you can have a conversation with your friend in your own particular context in a way that
00:22:58 – 00:23:03: we've delivered the scary payload, and then you can work with whatever bits and pieces and add
00:23:03 – 00:23:08: your own. And say you disagree with something we said and agree with something else, but you can
00:23:08 – 00:23:14: take the pressure off of yourself and off of your friends and family if you say, hey, here's something
00:23:14 – 00:23:18: somebody else is doing. We've had a lot of feedback recently. I mentioned it to Adam on
00:23:18 – 00:23:22: Myth of the 20th Century that a number of people have said wives and girlfriends have started
00:23:22 – 00:23:27: listening. And I realize that for saying that to individuals who said that, it might seem a little
00:23:27 – 00:23:33: doxy. Any wives and girlfriends who are listening, I want you to know that we've heard that dozens
00:23:33 – 00:23:37: of times in the last couple of weeks. So you should assume if you were one of those wives and
00:23:37 – 00:23:43: girl or girlfriends, hopefully not both that or mothers in some cases, it's not the man in your
00:23:43 – 00:23:46: life that we're talking about. It's somebody else because there've been a bunch of people. So it's
00:23:46 – 00:23:51: kind of like a firing squad where there's a blank. Assume that the guy that your boyfriend or husband
00:23:51 – 00:23:56: who told you to watch, he's not the one who DMed us because we don't people feel like there's a
00:23:56 – 00:24:01: conspiracy to trick you into believing things. That's precisely the opposite intent of what we
00:24:01 – 00:24:07: have. Here's some stuff. Take it or leave it. We think there's some value here. That's an approach
00:24:07 – 00:24:12: that when we take it in personally, it becomes very convincing just because the guys have relaxed.
00:24:12 – 00:24:18: He's not freaking out. There's inherent skepticism when anyone delivers new information.
00:24:18 – 00:24:23: And if they deliver it in a way that's wild-eyed and wants to grab you by the lapels and shake
00:24:23 – 00:24:29: you and say, you must believe this, my first response is no. I want no part of that. So we
00:24:29 – 00:24:33: want to make sure that we don't come across that way and we don't just naturally. That's not my
00:24:33 – 00:24:39: personality or Cordy's personality, but the same can also be even more effective in person.
00:24:39 – 00:24:43: Say, hey, there's this cool thing I learned about. What do you think about it?
00:24:43 – 00:24:49: And ask that way. Don't say you must believe this. Say, here's an interesting article. Here's an
00:24:49 – 00:24:54: interesting podcast. What do you think about this? And then use it as a springboard for your own
00:24:54 – 00:25:00: discussion to think what you think about the thing. It doesn't need to be to mirror what some
00:25:00 – 00:25:05: stranger on the internet told you. What do you think about the thing? How do you think it affects
00:25:05 – 00:25:10: your life? That becomes personal. It doesn't become, here's a religious tenant of this new
00:25:10 – 00:25:16: big red pill discovery I have. It's just, huh, I think this is a fact. And I think it has this
00:25:16 – 00:25:22: to do with life. And I think that's relevant. What do you think? That can be an interesting
00:25:22 – 00:25:29: human conversation at a small scale where there's no hard feelings. If they say that's racist,
00:25:29 – 00:25:34: that's dumb, you can just laugh and say, well, I think everything gets called racist at this point.
00:25:34 – 00:25:38: So I don't think that matters. Oh, by the way, those guys did an entire episode on the invention
00:25:38 – 00:25:44: of racism in the 20th century. Maybe find out what the word that you're using actually means.
00:25:44 – 00:25:49: And then again, you can blame someone else if they disagree. You don't have to fight. We don't
00:25:49 – 00:25:55: want people fighting with each other or straining relationships for the sake of things that,
00:25:56 – 00:26:00: even though they do have impact on all of our lives, it's not immediately obvious.
00:26:00 – 00:26:07: And so the immediacy of the need is really what this part is about. There's no immediate need
00:26:07 – 00:26:11: for the person you're talking to to agree with you. Just as there's no immediate need for you to
00:26:11 – 00:26:16: agree with us, you listen to an episode saying, yeah, I don't get that. That's dumb, or it's crazy,
00:26:16 – 00:26:21: or whatever. That's fine. Maybe you come back to a later, maybe you completely forget about it and
00:26:21 – 00:26:26: never care. That's perfectly okay. If you take that approach with your friends and family,
00:26:26 – 00:26:33: you can still have normal human relationships with them, even while you're incorporating new
00:26:33 – 00:26:38: things that you've learned into your life and maybe your conversations. But don't make it the
00:26:38 – 00:26:43: determining factor for whether or not you're going to be friends with your friends, or certainly
00:26:43 – 00:26:47: whether you're going to have a loving relationship with family. None of these things should ever
00:26:47 – 00:26:53: undermine those things as far as it depends on you. You touched on a couple of things there that
00:26:53 – 00:26:58: I want to expand. But first, I guess I really should give an example of manipulation,
00:26:59 – 00:27:04: not being a negative thing, because I did say that and some maybe have not encountered that.
00:27:05 – 00:27:10: One of the best and most obvious examples is interacting with a small child, particularly
00:27:10 – 00:27:16: one who is being cantankerous or uncooperative for some reason, maybe he doesn't want to put on his
00:27:16 – 00:27:22: shoes. A neat little trick, if you've never done this with children, I highly recommend you use
00:27:22 – 00:27:29: this, is instead of saying, would you like to do something? Or if you do this, then we'll
00:27:30 – 00:27:36: give him two options, both of which are acceptable to you. So for instance, if your child is not
00:27:36 – 00:27:41: picking what he wants to eat for lunch, or he's just being difficult with eating his lunch,
00:27:41 – 00:27:47: say would you rather have carrots or broccoli? Assuming he'll actually eat either of those.
00:27:48 – 00:27:54: Most children, when given the option of two things, will pick one. Yes, eventually they get old
00:27:54 – 00:28:00: enough to figure out your trick and go, no, I want candy. But for a while it works. And that's
00:28:00 – 00:28:06: manipulation. That's not negative. You're actually being a parent or an uncle or whatever you happen
00:28:06 – 00:28:13: to be with relation to this child. You're doing your duty. And yes, you're manipulating the child
00:28:13 – 00:28:17: to do it. But that's a positive. You're doing it for a good reason in a good way.
00:28:19 – 00:28:26: But then the two things on which I wanted to expand. First, you touch tangentially on the fact
00:28:27 – 00:28:35: that human beings are hardwired to process things negatively, more so than positively.
00:28:37 – 00:28:42: This is just an important psychological and biological fact about humanity. And the reason
00:28:42 – 00:28:50: for it is fairly obvious if you think about it. If you are walking through the woods, and you hear
00:28:50 – 00:28:56: some strange noise, and you decide, yep, that must be a bear or a wolf, I am going to go the other
00:28:56 – 00:29:03: direction, you're probably going to survive whatever that encounter is. Unless you're being
00:29:03 – 00:29:08: actively stalked by something in which case, you're still more aware your odds go up. If on the other
00:29:08 – 00:29:13: hand you are the person who just says, oh, must be a squirrel, and just keeps walking, you put a
00:29:13 – 00:29:20: positive spin on it, you are more likely to be eaten by something and not survive. And so,
00:29:20 – 00:29:27: evolutionarily, and I do mean in the micro sense, the minor sense, not speciation, I'm not talking
00:29:27 – 00:29:32: about that. And as Christians, yes, we can say that evolution in the micro sense is true. We know
00:29:32 – 00:29:37: that. That's why we have different breeds of dogs. That's why we have different races of men. But
00:29:37 – 00:29:45: when it comes down to it, we are hardwired for a negative interpretation of novel information,
00:29:46 – 00:29:53: unless we have reason, good reason, to put a positive spin on it. So this goes back to that
00:29:53 – 00:29:59: building of a relationship. If you are speaking with someone whom you trust, and that person gives
00:29:59 – 00:30:05: you novel information, you don't necessarily have to put the negative spin on it that you
00:30:05 – 00:30:12: otherwise would because you trust the source. For instance, if we go back to the example of
00:30:12 – 00:30:17: being out in the woods, if you're wandering through the woods and you find a random mushroom and pick
00:30:17 – 00:30:22: it up, unless you're a crazy person, you're not going to just eat the random mushroom if you don't
00:30:22 – 00:30:28: know what it is. However, if you're walking through the woods hiking with your friend who knows
00:30:28 – 00:30:33: mushrooms really well and he hands you a mushroom, you're more likely to maybe try that.
00:30:33 – 00:30:40: So it matters that relationship you have, and it's important to bear in mind that we are all,
00:30:40 – 00:30:47: to various degrees, of course, hardwired to put a negative spin on novel information.
00:30:49 – 00:30:53: At least if we haven't become completely credulous and we believe everything we hear,
00:30:53 – 00:31:01: which is the opposite problem. But then I really already touched on the second point I wanted to
00:31:02 – 00:31:11: expand on the issue of trust, and that's vital to all of this. Whether or not the audience trusts
00:31:11 – 00:31:16: you, whether or not the person with whom you're speaking can trust the things you say, and that's
00:31:16 – 00:31:23: built over time. Trust takes time to build. It can be destroyed in seconds, which is always important
00:31:23 – 00:31:29: to bear in mind, but it takes time to build. And that is fundamentally one of the things
00:31:29 – 00:31:36: that we are doing on this podcast. It's why we don't mislead on anything. Whether or not you want
00:31:36 – 00:31:42: to hear it, whether or not it is going to be necessarily good for us to say it, whatever the
00:31:42 – 00:31:49: consequences may be, if it's true, we're going to say it. Now, we may endeavor to say it in a way
00:31:49 – 00:31:55: that is persuasive, hence why we are doing this episode, and it wouldn't make much sense if we
00:31:55 – 00:32:02: deliberately produced episodes in a way that was not persuasive, but we are not going to subvert
00:32:02 – 00:32:06: the facts or the truth in order to be persuasive, that veers into manipulation,
00:32:07 – 00:32:14: because part of the reason we can be effective, part of the reason you can share these episodes
00:32:14 – 00:32:22: with others and actually have people listen and perhaps believe the things we say, is because of
00:32:22 – 00:32:28: that building of trust, the fact that we are going to tell the truth about every single topic
00:32:29 – 00:32:37: that comes up on this podcast, because building that trust over time is vitally important,
00:32:37 – 00:32:44: and all it takes is lying on one topic or about one facet of a topic, and it destroys that trust,
00:32:44 – 00:32:49: because then people, when they listen to you, if they know in the past you've lied about something,
00:32:49 – 00:32:54: particularly something important, then they're going to wonder if you're lying every time.
00:32:55 – 00:33:01: Now, that eventually attenuates to some degree over time, so if you lied to someone 10 years
00:33:01 – 00:33:07: ago about something, and you have been truthful since, that's largely in the past,
00:33:08 – 00:33:16: but it can take years, so it is important to maintain that trust you have with others
00:33:16 – 00:33:21: if you are going to attempt to be persuasive with those others.
00:33:22 – 00:33:28: And on the subject of lying, it's important again to distinguish between if we were to
00:33:28 – 00:33:34: deceive for the purpose of advancing one of our points, and if we simply got something factually
00:33:34 – 00:33:40: wrong, we endeavored gray lengths not to let that happen, we're not perfect, we may miss speak, we
00:33:40 – 00:33:46: may inadvertently misconstrue something, it's not going to be something that's a key part of a point,
00:33:46 – 00:33:50: but we're not saying if anyone ever makes any mistakes in their entire life, you write them
00:33:50 – 00:33:56: off, because that's insane, no one can survive that. But again, it's the deception, we talked last
00:33:56 – 00:34:02: week about some of the people engaging in some of these clear deceptions, where it's clear that
00:34:02 – 00:34:08: they're, whether they're grifters or they're just being entertaining, they're willing to
00:34:08 – 00:34:14: fill people's heads full of lies for the sake of entertainment, and who knows what they get out
00:34:14 – 00:34:21: of that doesn't matter. That's fundamentally different from just miss speaking or accidentally
00:34:21 – 00:34:25: mistaking something, you know, for example, when I was on Myth of the 20th century is after I
00:34:25 – 00:34:32: normally go to sleep, and so when I'm extremely tired, my reason, my faculties are fully intact,
00:34:32 – 00:34:37: but my recall just goes in the toilet. So a couple times I completely flubbed some timeline stuff,
00:34:37 – 00:34:41: and like, you know, if you, I practically had Moses landing on the moon, I was getting some
00:34:41 – 00:34:47: of the timelines still wrong. That doesn't discredit what I said, because like, I acknowledge you at
00:34:47 – 00:34:54: the time. But the overall point I was making wasn't hinging on that. And I think it's okay for you,
00:34:54 – 00:35:00: like, try to get things straight before you say them as we do. But if you make a mistake, don't
00:35:01 – 00:35:06: be terrified of that either. That's, that's human to, to miss speak or to accidentally get something
00:35:06 – 00:35:11: wrong. If you find that you've made an error in something factually, go back and fix it.
00:35:13 – 00:35:16: On the related note of, you know, outcome independence and
00:35:17 – 00:35:23: convincing people over time, I think time is a key part of this. You know, when we do an episode,
00:35:23 – 00:35:29: we lay it down and then move on. And we'll refer it off into previous episodes and newer ones,
00:35:29 – 00:35:34: as we're doing in this one. For example, one of the early episodes we did on framing,
00:35:34 – 00:35:39: this is really a continuation of that. In the framing episode, we focused entirely on
00:35:39 – 00:35:44: the use of frame in persuasion or deception. So this is kind of a continuation of that
00:35:45 – 00:35:50: metacognition aspect of things. You know, this is, this is a meta episode where we're talking
00:35:50 – 00:35:56: about thinking about talking about things, which is most people don't normally approach
00:35:56 – 00:36:00: things that way. We're willing to do that, even though it's, you know, it's kind of a lull episode
00:36:00 – 00:36:05: in terms of here's not a ton of new facts. It's just we've been delivering so many facts over
00:36:05 – 00:36:10: the last number of months that are really hard to swallow. In some cases for some people,
00:36:10 – 00:36:15: we want to just give people a little bit of time to digest and then figure out how to incorporate
00:36:15 – 00:36:20: it themselves. I want to give a personal example of this, just kind of demonstrate, like we,
00:36:20 – 00:36:25: we don't want to make this about us, but on this podcast, we are the frame of reference for everything.
00:36:25 – 00:36:30: So as you're listening, you know, you can apply what we're saying about ourselves
00:36:30 – 00:36:33: in your own lives. I don't want you thinking about us when you're thinking about yourself
00:36:33 – 00:36:38: and how you can live a better Christian life, speaking faithfully in your community. So
00:36:38 – 00:36:44: just pointing to our example is not intended to be self aggrandizing. It's literally just
00:36:44 – 00:36:47: here's something that happened and maybe you can learn something from it.
00:36:48 – 00:36:55: I was on Gab for a year or so. I prior to that, I had engaged before I got on Gab for,
00:36:55 – 00:36:58: for good, after I finally got expelled from Twitter for the last time,
00:36:58 – 00:37:03: I had engaged with Andrew Torbund Gab and I eventually gave him a whole rash of crap
00:37:03 – 00:37:07: because of some of his hiring practices. I was pretty antagonistic about him openly and he
00:37:07 – 00:37:13: blocked me and like, I don't blame him. I was, I was ankle biting on his timeline. And I was right
00:37:13 – 00:37:18: incidentally about his hiring practices. He turned out later on to regret some of those people, but
00:37:20 – 00:37:24: we began with kind of a strange relationship and then I got on Gab and he gave me a second chance
00:37:24 – 00:37:28: and eventually he started boosting some of the things that I said and I appreciated that because
00:37:29 – 00:37:38: I had shifted focus more than in 2017 versus 2020. And I can't remember the time. I think it was,
00:37:38 – 00:37:46: it was either the end of 2019 or 2020 was, I think it's probably 2020 when I was invited by Andrew
00:37:46 – 00:37:54: to do an essay on Christian nationalism. It was one of the earliest things that news.gab had been.
00:37:54 – 00:38:00: They'd just begun sort of highlighting writers from the community. Boniface Option was one of
00:38:00 – 00:38:05: the first guys he had and he had a few others, but I was one of the very first. I was almost the first
00:38:05 – 00:38:11: to be invited to discuss anything about Christian nationalism. Now, the episode that Cory and I
00:38:11 – 00:38:17: did on Christian nationalism earlier this year was a much more fully fleshed out version of
00:38:17 – 00:38:22: what I gave to Andrew. And the reason I'm highlighting this example is that when I was
00:38:22 – 00:38:28: invited to do that, both Andrew and I knew, like we've never, we've never had private personal
00:38:28 – 00:38:32: conversations about any of this stuff. I can just help like by reading the room, reading the audience,
00:38:32 – 00:38:35: even if it's an audience of man, one, if it's another man you're interacting with.
00:38:36 – 00:38:41: It was clear to both of us at the time that I was further to the right on things like race and
00:38:41 – 00:38:47: in capital and nationalism than he was. And so when he invited me to write on Christian nationalism,
00:38:47 – 00:38:56: I knew at that time that if I were to make the fully racialist case for the subject that we
00:38:56 – 00:39:01: made on Stone Choir, he wasn't going to publish it because at the time, at least those were not
00:39:01 – 00:39:06: his views. And so I didn't want to be antagonistic. It was an honor to be asked to do anything about
00:39:06 – 00:39:10: a subject that was important to me. So I think we'll link in the show notes the essay that I did
00:39:10 – 00:39:15: on Christian nationalism. So you can take a look at it if you're interested and maybe contrast it
00:39:15 – 00:39:20: with some of the things that we say on this episode. I bring this up because it's an example
00:39:20 – 00:39:27: of being patient in your persuasion. I could have done a couple different things when Andrew came to
00:39:27 – 00:39:32: me. I could have fought him and said, well, I'm only going to write for you if I get to make the
00:39:32 – 00:39:38: completely racial case for what nations are. And I'm going to say that America is a white's only
00:39:38 – 00:39:43: country. And that's going to be the point. If I had done that, he would have flat out said no.
00:39:43 – 00:39:49: I knew that. And so I didn't. I wasn't going to be antagonistic. Again, when you look at the essay,
00:39:49 – 00:39:55: everything that I say is entirely true. I was not being deceptive about what I said. However,
00:39:55 – 00:40:00: I omitted a big chunk of the argument for Christian nationalism by basically just focusing on the
00:40:00 – 00:40:06: Christian part. I talked about the history. I talked about the state of the West of Christendom
00:40:06 – 00:40:11: and then the United States in terms of Christianity and a Christian government.
00:40:12 – 00:40:17: I almost completely omitted any discussion of race because again, I knew it wouldn't be welcome.
00:40:17 – 00:40:24: I knew there would be too far at that time. So that was an example in my mind of trying to be
00:40:24 – 00:40:29: effectively persuasive. I did make the case for Christian nationalism on the Christian side.
00:40:29 – 00:40:33: And there's absolutely a case to be made there. Here's what Christian
00:40:34 – 00:40:39: nations look like. I completely omitted any discussion of what nation means, which is,
00:40:39 – 00:40:44: again, the other half of the conversation. And I did that because I knew it wouldn't be welcome.
00:40:45 – 00:40:50: A few years on, he's saying many of the same things now publicly that I was saying that.
00:40:50 – 00:40:56: Again, I haven't talked to him, but just based on the other things going on at the time,
00:40:56 – 00:41:00: I knew they wouldn't be welcome. And so rather than picking a fight with a guy who might already
00:41:00 – 00:41:08: fought in the past, we got over it, whatever, I chose to bite my tongue and to make the narrow
00:41:08 – 00:41:13: case that I could make that we could both agree on. I'm not to say that he endorsed 100% of what
00:41:13 – 00:41:18: I said, but he was willing to publish it pretty much as is. I didn't push any buttons that were
00:41:18 – 00:41:24: going to alienate the people he wanted to reach at the time. That's persuasion. You can make part
00:41:24 – 00:41:29: of the case, even knowing that you have other stuff to say. So what does this have to do with
00:41:29 – 00:41:35: you personally? You don't have to say it all at once. It's fine to just get one or two things out
00:41:35 – 00:41:42: on the table and let people digest it. A lot of the things that my friends and I were saying
00:41:42 – 00:41:48: on Gab at the time are things that now Andrew is much more willing to say in public. I don't think
00:41:48 – 00:41:52: he believed in them. He's more willing to say them now because he realized that we were right.
00:41:53 – 00:41:58: I'm certainly not taking personal credit for whatever to whatever degree he was persuaded by
00:41:58 – 00:42:03: anything. I'm simply pointing out the fact that if instead of doing what I did, if I had been
00:42:03 – 00:42:09: antagonistic, if I had said, unless we go whole hog and do everything that I want us to say, I don't
00:42:09 – 00:42:14: want any part of it, if you're an aggravating friend, if you're an aggravating ally to someone,
00:42:15 – 00:42:19: that's a turn off to whatever it is you're trying to convey. If I have a point to make,
00:42:19 – 00:42:25: I want to make it as gently and persuasively as possible. It's funny for me to say gently because
00:42:25 – 00:42:30: I think a lot of people assume that Corey and I are bomb throwers. We're bulls in a china shop
00:42:30 – 00:42:36: just storming through everything that's going on and just leaving wreckage in our wake. That's not
00:42:36 – 00:42:42: the case, but if you're not giving us a charitable view, particularly if you're just looking at social
00:42:42 – 00:42:48: media, some people conclude that most of that frankly is reputational. It's not things that
00:42:48 – 00:42:53: I've done, it's things that people have said about me. Whatever, if I have to worry about what
00:42:53 – 00:42:59: people are thinking about me, it's a complete waste of time. I worry about people getting these
00:42:59 – 00:43:06: subjects right. When I was offered the opportunity to make a case for Christian nationalism, I did
00:43:06 – 00:43:11: the best I could in the constraints that I had at the time. Then when Corey and I had our own
00:43:11 – 00:43:16: platform here on Stonequire to make a more fleshed out case, particularly for the nation side,
00:43:16 – 00:43:23: the racial side of Christian nationalism, we made it here. We made it in public in a way that
00:43:23 – 00:43:29: people who may be read part of it before they've heard it elsewhere, they can come along at their
00:43:29 – 00:43:34: own pace. I think that's another key element of this, let people come along at their own pace
00:43:34 – 00:43:38: because you're not trying to fix them. I wasn't trying to fix Andrew or anyone else,
00:43:38 – 00:43:43: I was just trying to tell the truth. If there's only a portion of it that they can receive
00:43:43 – 00:43:48: and absorb, it's important to know that and to leave the rest out because if I can give you
00:43:49 – 00:43:53: one dish that you're really going to like and another dish that I know you're going to hate,
00:43:54 – 00:43:58: if the goal is for me to get you to eat a dish, I'll give you the one you're going to like.
00:43:58 – 00:44:03: I can save the broccoli for later, give you the carrots, that's perfectly fine.
00:44:04 – 00:44:07: We get so excited about trying to convince people and trying to fix them
00:44:07 – 00:44:11: that we forget that in many cases we didn't believe this stuff a few years ago,
00:44:11 – 00:44:17: so just be patient, show some grace and give people a chance to come along at their own pace
00:44:17 – 00:44:23: and leave them as much room as you can. Tell them a truth where you can find common ground
00:44:23 – 00:44:26: and push them a little bit, give them a little bit more than they're comfortable with,
00:44:26 – 00:44:32: give them something to think about, but if you try to just waterboard someone and put it down
00:44:32 – 00:44:37: their throat all at once, you're going to alienate them even with the truth because the manner in
00:44:37 – 00:44:44: which it's presented is so much worse that who cares what the content is if you're aggravating,
00:44:44 – 00:44:49: because people don't want anything to do with you. Be patient, have low time preference. We talk
00:44:49 – 00:44:55: about this all the time in the racial space. There are certain races that have higher or lower
00:44:55 – 00:45:03: time preference. They're more focused on the future or the current and we must be patient,
00:45:03 – 00:45:08: we must be focused on the future and knowing telling something to someone that's hard to hear
00:45:08 – 00:45:12: is probably going to take some time. It might have taken you time to absorb it, it's going to take
00:45:12 – 00:45:18: them maybe even more time because you have a certain set of give-ins and experiences,
00:45:18 – 00:45:23: theirs are different. If it takes them twice as long as you, just let it happen. Give them a
00:45:23 – 00:45:29: little bit, give them what they can digest and then wait and be willing to answer questions in a way
00:45:29 – 00:45:34: that's not challenging, that doesn't make them feel like you think there's something wrong with them,
00:45:34 – 00:45:38: that they don't agree with you, just give it time, be patient.
00:45:39 – 00:45:42: So you're saying that time preference actually matters?
00:45:44 – 00:45:50: It matters tremendously and in the same people who think that the whites have super low time
00:45:50 – 00:45:55: preference and we're just the masters of patience, as soon as we learn something new we go nuts and
00:45:55 – 00:45:59: like, oh I gotta tell everyone right away. It's good to be excited, it's bad to make other people
00:45:59 – 00:46:06: regret being in the same room with you. I was actually just discussing something tangentially
00:46:06 – 00:46:15: related to this with someone last night. When you're building an argument, you may very well
00:46:15 – 00:46:22: have to build the argument in pieces. And there's a tendency for some when it comes to politics or
00:46:22 – 00:46:29: religion, these hot button issues as it were, to attempt to get someone to believe everything
00:46:29 – 00:46:35: all at once. And that's just not how things work, that's particularly not how human beings work.
00:46:36 – 00:46:43: To some degree beliefs and things like that, very few people are going to turn on a dime and go
00:46:43 – 00:46:48: from believing one thing to believing the diametrically opposed thing. Usually how it
00:46:48 – 00:46:53: works is more akin to Bayesian updating, which essentially is just a fancy way of saying that
00:46:53 – 00:46:59: as additional information comes in, the person slowly moves with regard to what he believes about
00:46:59 – 00:47:07: the issue. And so over time you may get someone to change his position on something, you're probably
00:47:07 – 00:47:14: not going to get that in one discussion, in one conversation with most people. Some men, yes,
00:47:14 – 00:47:19: if you present a strong enough case, they'll say, I was wrong previously, I now believe this.
00:47:19 – 00:47:27: You may encounter some men like that. Not many. Most people take time to change their views,
00:47:27 – 00:47:33: particularly on important things. And the context in which I was discussing this
00:47:33 – 00:47:40: with the aforementioned person was basically apologetics. How do you prove the Christian
00:47:40 – 00:47:46: God is the true God? I'm not going to go into apologetics in depth in this episode, because
00:47:46 – 00:47:51: I'm sure eventually we'll get around to probably a series of episodes on apologetics, different
00:47:51 – 00:47:58: arguments for God and things like that. But the core point that I want to draw out of that
00:47:59 – 00:48:07: is that when you're building the argument for the Christian God, you don't start by arguing
00:48:07 – 00:48:13: for the Christian God. Particularly if you're dealing with an atheist or an agnostic, if you're
00:48:13 – 00:48:18: dealing with someone who doesn't even believe in God, you don't start by saying, Jesus is your Lord
00:48:18 – 00:48:24: and Savior, period. That's not going to get you anywhere. The person is going to stop listening
00:48:24 – 00:48:28: and probably walk away and probably also be quite annoyed with you and perhaps not listen to you
00:48:28 – 00:48:37: again. Instead, if you're building up, you build up to that argument by establishing more basic
00:48:37 – 00:48:43: facts, by laying the groundwork, building a foundation. And you do that by establishing,
00:48:44 – 00:48:50: well, there's something other than matter. If there's something other than matter,
00:48:50 – 00:48:56: the universe is not purely material. It's not a materialistic universe. We have to explain
00:48:56 – 00:49:02: this thing that isn't matter. And then you can get into proving the necessity of the infinite.
00:49:02 – 00:49:08: Then you can prove that the infinite is personal. The infinite being personal must be God.
00:49:09 – 00:49:15: And then you can move on from there and build up and build your argument piece by piece and arrive
00:49:15 – 00:49:21: at the conclusion that the Christian God is the only explanation for the information presented.
00:49:22 – 00:49:28: But that takes time. That takes patience. That takes multiple interactions with this person.
00:49:28 – 00:49:32: You're probably not going to go through all of this in one marathon session. Maybe you will.
00:49:32 – 00:49:36: Maybe you happen to be the kind of person who enjoys that. And if the other person also does,
00:49:36 – 00:49:42: then by all means talk about it for six hours. But typically speaking, it is going to take
00:49:42 – 00:49:51: many interactions over a course of days or weeks, months, even years. I have friends where I have
00:49:51 – 00:49:58: discussed religion and these issues for years with these people. They've slowly changed their
00:49:58 – 00:50:05: position, but it takes time. And some are more resistant to change than others. My father has
00:50:05 – 00:50:14: a friend that he has had for, I want to say 30 years almost, who recently became a Christian
00:50:16 – 00:50:24: after my father had been discussing religion with him for 30 years. Patience matters. These things,
00:50:24 – 00:50:29: when they're these very important things, are going to be in large part in God's time. That
00:50:29 – 00:50:34: doesn't mean don't play your role, do your part. Of course, do that. That's your duty as a Christian.
00:50:34 – 00:50:41: But be patient. Recognize that a lot of these things are to some degree out of your hand.
00:50:43 – 00:50:50: We're advising you to be effective and to be wise as a serpent. When it comes to the things
00:50:50 – 00:50:55: that are in your hands, the things that are in your control, don't worry about the things that aren't.
00:50:55 – 00:51:05: There was one time when Martin Luther was asked why he wasn't more worried about the state
00:51:05 – 00:51:11: of Christian knowledge amongst supposed Christians and just the general state of Christendom,
00:51:12 – 00:51:19: and his response was that he put in the work and the outcome was in God's hands and so he
00:51:19 – 00:51:26: could enjoy his beer with melanchthon. That's the right perspective to have on these things.
00:51:28 – 00:51:31: And that's why that outcome independence that was mentioned earlier matters.
00:51:33 – 00:51:39: Do the thing because it is the thing you should do, not because it guarantees a result, because
00:51:39 – 00:51:45: when it comes to human beings, the result is almost never guaranteed. Particularly when you're
00:51:45 – 00:51:49: dealing with persuasion, you're dealing with psychology, you're dealing with things
00:51:49 – 00:51:56: that are very much beyond your control. You can influence these things. You cannot really control
00:51:56 – 00:52:03: them. So you can make the persuasive argument. You can properly engage with other people.
00:52:04 – 00:52:10: But if you become obsessed with the outcome, you're actually going to harm your chances of arriving
00:52:10 – 00:52:17: there because you're going to be obnoxious. If you're constantly insisting, no, you absolutely must
00:52:17 – 00:52:24: believe this specific conclusion. And yes, that's sort of what social media and certain
00:52:25 – 00:52:32: fora tend to encourage, that it brings it out of a certain personality type. I willingly admit that
00:52:32 – 00:52:39: I engage in some of that sometimes. But there's a time and a place. Engaging on Twitter again,
00:52:39 – 00:52:44: general audience, you probably don't know most of those people personally. You're going to engage
00:52:44 – 00:52:50: differently from how you engage with a family member or a close friend or someone you met at a bar.
00:52:51 – 00:52:59: Stranger, what have you. So know your audience. When you know your audience and you aren't
00:53:00 – 00:53:05: so hyper focused on the outcome that you can just be a person and have a conversation,
00:53:06 – 00:53:15: you are going to be so much more effective than if you are just hyper laser focused on that outcome
00:53:16 – 00:53:23: and driving people away because you're being abrasive. If you're being abrasive or obnoxious,
00:53:23 – 00:53:29: you are going to be less effective. That's just the fact of the matter. Yes, it's about the truth,
00:53:29 – 00:53:36: ultimately. The truth matters. But your goal is to get people to believe the truth. Hopefully,
00:53:36 – 00:53:40: that's your goal. That's not your goal, then it's manipulation and you're doing something you should
00:53:40 – 00:53:47: stop. But if your goal is to get people to believe the truth, then yes, you are absolutely correct
00:53:47 – 00:53:55: to say, think and believe that the truth matters. But that's not the end of it. Because you have to
00:53:55 – 00:54:01: have a way. You have to know how to get people to that truth. And you can't get them to the truth.
00:54:02 – 00:54:07: If all you do is just keep insisting, this is the truth and you must believe it. You have to
00:54:07 – 00:54:12: know how to get to the truth. And that's where what we're discussing in this episode comes in.
00:54:13 – 00:54:21: That's where persuasion matters. How do you get from where you are to where you need to be?
00:54:21 – 00:54:27: How do you get other people to join you in going to where they need to be?
00:54:28 – 00:54:34: Where is the truth? How do we get there? Another big part of persuasion is having
00:54:34 – 00:54:42: that degree of confidence, not necessarily in yourself, but in your beliefs. We did the episode
00:54:42 – 00:54:47: on the fear of the Lord I talked about when I had a stroke and my confidence in God and the fact
00:54:47 – 00:54:55: that that's not me, that's not my faith doing something because I chose it for it to do that.
00:54:55 – 00:55:01: That was God giving me a gift and taking care of me when I needed it. And I only mention it then,
00:55:01 – 00:55:08: I only mention it now because it's an example of how when we have genuine confidence in the promises
00:55:08 – 00:55:14: of the one true God, it's something from outside us that doesn't, it gives us a sort of supreme
00:55:14 – 00:55:20: confidence that in the liturgy it's described as the peace of God which passes all understanding.
00:55:21 – 00:55:28: That sort of absolute assurance in a belief. And I'm not saying that everything that you
00:55:28 – 00:55:33: believe about all these material things should have the same degree of confidence as your
00:55:33 – 00:55:38: confidence in your faith. Our faith should be paramount. And so there are a lot of aspects
00:55:38 – 00:55:44: of this episode that go to sharing the gospel, but they also equally apply to sharing other things.
00:55:45 – 00:55:50: Regardless of what we're sharing, when we're confident in what we're saying, that comes across.
00:55:50 – 00:55:56: And there's a mixture of, there's a balancing act between the confidence in what we have to say
00:55:56 – 00:56:02: and the desire for others to believe it. Corey's father's friend, after 30 years,
00:56:03 – 00:56:09: regardless of the arguments that his dad made to him, the fact that he still cared enough and
00:56:09 – 00:56:17: loved him enough and didn't give an inch of ground on the subject, all by itself was a testimony to
00:56:17 – 00:56:22: his faith to the fact that there was something real there. Because that sort of persistence
00:56:23 – 00:56:29: is rarely found where falsehood is found. People don't die with the lie, not in real life.
00:56:30 – 00:56:34: You know, if you're trying to trick someone, you might try to go down with a ship for
00:56:34 – 00:56:40: something to gain some advantage, but only if you actually believe something will you stick to it
00:56:40 – 00:56:48: when you have nothing else left to cling to. And so as we look to be persuasive, it's not about
00:56:48 – 00:56:52: winning arguments. I think that's one of the key things. It's not about winning arguments on the
00:56:52 – 00:56:58: internet or in person or anything else. It's not about winning. It's about if you have the truth,
00:56:58 – 00:57:03: any truth, and someone else is missing it. The problem you're trying to solve
00:57:03 – 00:57:09: is to convey that truth to them in a way that they'll actually receive it. And again,
00:57:09 – 00:57:14: that may take patience. It may take a particularly rational argument. It depends on whom you're
00:57:14 – 00:57:19: speaking with. Different men will respond differently to different types of arguments.
00:57:19 – 00:57:25: And so in some cases for some individuals, maybe you're not up to it. And that's fine. You know,
00:57:25 – 00:57:32: a lot of people are not equipped to make the fully sound convincing argument for something
00:57:32 – 00:57:40: to any random man. You know, if there's a blue collar guy who's a machinist in his spare time,
00:57:40 – 00:57:46: he does small engine repair. He probably doesn't worry about any of this crap. And God bless him
00:57:46 – 00:57:52: for it. I wish the more people didn't have to worry about these things. The reason that a man like
00:57:52 – 00:57:58: that becomes the battle space is that while he is blessed by not paying attention to any of this
00:57:58 – 00:58:04: stuff, many of the subjects that we've discussed in the past episodes are still floating around in
00:58:04 – 00:58:11: the ambient world. And so he's absorbing bits of pieces. And some of those things have been
00:58:11 – 00:58:17: deliberately inserted into the world that he's only barely paying attention to in order to
00:58:17 – 00:58:23: encircle him and limit the options for his kids, his community, his schools, whatever.
00:58:24 – 00:58:30: He has fewer options. He has fewer legitimate moral choices in the world's morality,
00:58:30 – 00:58:34: because of the things that we talk about. So while he's not paying attention to it,
00:58:36 – 00:58:39: maybe there's a time and a place where you would have a small piece of the discussion
00:58:39 – 00:58:46: with such a man and say, Hey, did you care about X, Y, and Z in the news? I think that this is what's
00:58:46 – 00:58:51: going on. I learned this other bit. I think we connect A to B. There's a picture there.
00:58:52 – 00:58:55: The guy who's not going to pay much attention, maybe you can make a case to him. And maybe
00:58:55 – 00:59:00: that's all you do. Maybe all he's worried about is the local schools where his kids go and he wants
00:59:00 – 00:59:07: his kids to turn out as decent human beings as everyone does. You don't need to make a full case
00:59:07 – 00:59:12: to every single person. You need to make the necessary case to make sure that they can't be
00:59:13 – 00:59:18: used against you. They can't be weaponized to harm what's around them. And for some people,
00:59:18 – 00:59:22: that's the whole hog. There are some people that are sufficiently engaged. They're
00:59:22 – 00:59:27: sufficiently persuasive to others that if they're missing out on something,
00:59:28 – 00:59:34: it's important for someone to reach them. When I was on Myth of the 20th Century,
00:59:34 – 00:59:38: one of the questions that Hans asked me was if I could recommend any books on Christian nationalism.
00:59:38 – 00:59:43: And I mentioned Torba and Boniface Options' book and Stephen Wolf's book. And I said,
00:59:43 – 00:59:48: I hadn't read them. And I think maybe I was a bit uncharitable to those books. Because I hadn't
00:59:48 – 00:59:53: read them, the only impressions I had of them were of the things that those men have said
59:54 – 01:00:00
since they came out over the last year or so. And my impression was that the arguments that
01:00:00 – 01:00:05: they were making were essentially civic nationalist arguments, arguments that
01:00:06 – 01:00:11: blood doesn't matter, that nations are countries, and therefore it's a legal entity. That was the
01:00:11 – 01:00:17: impression I had. If that was wrong, I apologize. Certainly lately, some of their comments are
01:00:17 – 01:00:24: much closer to the things that we're saying. I'm thankful for that. Again, I highlight that to say
01:00:24 – 01:00:30: that I think that when those books came out, they were making another part of the argument for
01:00:30 – 01:00:34: Christian nationalism. Just as I did in the original essay, there was a lot more to say than
01:00:34 – 01:00:40: what I said. It's perfectly legitimate to make part of the argument if it's part that you can
01:00:41 – 01:00:46: gain credibility with and you can make credibly. The reason that I highlighted the distinction
01:00:46 – 01:00:53: between my overtly racial view of Christian nationalism on Myth of the 20th Century with
01:00:53 – 01:00:59: Adam was that I know that much of his audience is not Christian or not particularly engaged.
01:01:00 – 01:01:07: What they see coming from within the church is a completely pan-nationalist, essentially
01:01:07 – 01:01:12: universalism, that all human beings are completely interchangeable, borders are evil,
01:01:13 – 01:01:20: countries should be subsumed by basically NGOs, just unifying us as one human mass of
01:01:22 – 01:01:28: charity cases. It's just all the horrors that Soros is producing, especially in Europe, because
01:01:28 – 01:01:33: guys can walk or take a boat from Africa into Europe. It's harder to get them here. They have
01:01:33 – 01:01:40: to walk up from Mexico. I wanted to specifically highlight to his audience that there's an
01:01:40 – 01:01:47: explicitly racial case that is a fundamental case, in my view, of the Christian nationalist argument,
01:01:47 – 01:01:53: because I don't want people to think the only way to be Christian is to say that all states must
01:01:53 – 01:02:00: collapse, that all borders must be destroyed, that all people must be wiped out by virtue of
01:02:00 – 01:02:04: interbreeding, that you take every race, you mix it with every other race until we're all the same
01:02:04 – 01:02:10: color, we have no differentiating features whatsoever. There are a lot of people in the church
01:02:10 – 01:02:15: saying precisely that. If I was uncharitable or if I was inaccurate, I apologize to them.
01:02:16 – 01:02:19: I was trying to specifically make the case that there's absolutely
01:02:20 – 01:02:27: a racial view in Scripture of nations. It's synonymous. It's synonymous in the law,
01:02:27 – 01:02:32: in the 1790s in this country. It's synonymous 2000 years earlier in Scripture. The reason that
01:02:32 – 01:02:39: there's not much discussion of race and Christian history is it was so obvious. There's no theology
01:02:39 – 01:02:43: for us to go back to and borrow from the past when men were more intelligent about making these
01:02:43 – 01:02:50: arguments, because this wasn't the fight. The fight in previous centuries was about other doctrines.
01:02:51 – 01:02:59: Today, when Satan moves the fight to being about race, about genes, about borders,
01:02:59 – 01:03:05: about the created body, male and female, two sexes, not infinite sexes, disparate races,
01:03:05 – 01:03:12: distinct races, not some just sea of humanity that's indistinguishable, those are the two sides
01:03:12 – 01:03:19: that they're the most important for me to defend. Back to my point earlier about Andrew,
01:03:19 – 01:03:23: if I had attacked him at the time and said, no, we must make the racialist case,
01:03:23 – 01:03:28: or there's no case at all, I don't think that he would necessarily be where he is today.
01:03:28 – 01:03:32: Again, I'm not taking credit for that. I'm just saying I could have very easily done harm
01:03:33 – 01:03:39: to my views by being a jerk about it. If I had argued and picked a fight, in fact,
01:03:39 – 01:03:44: I left Gab about a year later, or maybe not too long after. For unrelated reasons,
01:03:44 – 01:03:49: I was very frustrated with some business choices he had made, some moderation choices,
01:03:49 – 01:03:58: some culture choices on Gab. I made a strategic decision about persuasion not to fling mud at him,
01:03:58 – 01:04:02: because although I disagreed with the things that he was doing on his platform,
01:04:02 – 01:04:07: not mine, he's the boss, he owns it, he can do what he wants with it. I strongly disagreed with
01:04:07 – 01:04:11: some of the things that he did and I kept my mouth shut. The reason I did that,
01:04:11 – 01:04:15: the reason I didn't go after him when I was pissed off and I was disappointed, was that
01:04:16 – 01:04:20: despite my differences with him about how he was running his business and some of those strategic
01:04:20 – 01:04:26: decisions, he was still doing very good work and things that mattered to me. I knew that alienating
01:04:26 – 01:04:32: him and being a jerk, being the guy who's sniping at someone, would make anything that I'm saying
01:04:32 – 01:04:39: elsewhere a turn off to him. I highly am in particular because he has influence,
01:04:39 – 01:04:46: he has much more influence than we have. We're not ankle biters and we're not trying to ride
01:04:46 – 01:04:51: coattails, but if there are people, there are certain people in the world who have bully
01:04:51 – 01:04:57: pulpits, there are people who have influence over more people than you do. If you're in a position
01:04:57 – 01:05:02: where you can influence someone who's more influential than you, it's really important to
01:05:02 – 01:05:07: get it right and part of that is not making them regret listening to you. I didn't go after him
01:05:07 – 01:05:12: despite the fact that I was frustrated at the time. I pretty much kept my mouth shut publicly
01:05:12 – 01:05:16: other than saying a couple things that were limited to the scope of that because he's doing
01:05:16 – 01:05:22: really good work. I saw the trajectory and I hope that he would continue to, for lack of a better
01:05:22 – 01:05:28: term, move to the right and he has. He's saying a lot of the things today on Twitter and on Gab
01:05:28 – 01:05:34: that were on the verge of getting people banned from Gab a few years ago. People change, people's
01:05:34 – 01:05:41: views change and sometimes being persuasive is just biting your tongue. One of the most persuasive
01:05:41 – 01:05:47: things that I did in that particular situation was not to be antagonistic about something that
01:05:47 – 01:05:52: wasn't a big ticket item. They had to do with this platform, but it didn't have to do with the
01:05:52 – 01:06:00: larger project that I saw as allies. I want this to be a Christian nation. I want his kids to grow
01:06:00 – 01:06:04: up in a place where they're not going to be persecuted for the fact that they're white.
01:06:05 – 01:06:10: That's important to me. I don't have kids on my own. I never will. The only thing that I can do
01:06:10 – 01:06:15: is effectively to fight for other people's kids in their world. I don't get anything out of any of
01:06:15 – 01:06:21: this. One of the things that Adam mentioned to me after doing the podcast was that he sees the
01:06:21 – 01:06:26: treatment that Corey and I have received at the hands of the church as part of our persuasion to
01:06:26 – 01:06:32: him. He can tell that we are sincere because we're being treated like crap by some of the people he
01:06:32 – 01:06:38: sees as being detrimental to the world. I apologize if I'm speaking out of turn by saying something
01:06:38 – 01:06:43: he said to me private, but that is a common view that I think a lot of people have. Corey and I
01:06:43 – 01:06:49: understand that instinctively. We also understand it explicitly from all the conversations we've had
01:06:49 – 01:06:55: with these men. There are a lot of men on the right who don't have a church. They don't know God.
01:06:55 – 01:07:02: They see ontological evil in the world and they're looking for where people talk about ontological
01:07:02 – 01:07:07: good. That should be the church. It is the church. Yet Corey and I are two of the only men in the
01:07:07 – 01:07:13: world who can speak to men like Adam and say, look, there's a Christian case to be made for not
01:07:13 – 01:07:18: destroying your race in your nation, in your country. There's a Christian case for that.
01:07:18 – 01:07:22: There's a moral case. There's a secular case too. I want there to be a Christian voice in those
01:07:23 – 01:07:30: conversations. If you're persuasive in a way that makes you, someone people are willing to listen to,
01:07:30 – 01:07:35: you're given the opportunities to say more than maybe you would have just said on your own.
01:07:36 – 01:07:40: If we were the bomb throwers that people say we are, he wouldn't want to talk to me. I'd just be
01:07:40 – 01:07:48: another crazy guy on the internet. If you can seem calm and persuasive and relaxed and not worry
01:07:48 – 01:07:54: about what people think, people care more about what you think. It's one of the many ironies of
01:07:54 – 01:08:01: the way the human psychology works. We're convinced by people who don't care if they're convincing,
01:08:01 – 01:08:05: more than we're convinced by people who really want to be convincing. It's not an act on the
01:08:05 – 01:08:11: part of Cory and myself. I want you to believe because it's true. I frequently say if we never
01:08:11 – 01:08:16: get any credit, fine, whatever. We never wanted to do this in the first place. We didn't want to
01:08:16 – 01:08:21: start a podcast. We did it because we felt that no one else was speaking to these matters.
01:08:22 – 01:08:27: The subject of credibility, if you go back and look at the arc of episodes on Stone Choir,
01:08:27 – 01:08:31: we waited until we were six, eight months in until we got into some of the really
01:08:32 – 01:08:37: controversial so-called subjects. That was conscious. That was deliberate on our part.
01:08:37 – 01:08:43: If we had begun on episode one talking about Africans and Jews and these other things that
01:08:43 – 01:08:47: get people so angry, we would have just been the podcast that talks about really angering,
01:08:47 – 01:08:54: controversial subjects. That's not us. There's a lot of things to talk about. It's fine to tailor
01:08:54 – 01:09:00: the message, narrow it down, and make your point, and then wait. Let the point do its work. Then
01:09:00 – 01:09:04: you come back later and see if anything's growing and find out if it was rocky soil
01:09:04 – 01:09:11: or if it was fertile soil. You never know. It's the truth that gives the growth to the message.
01:09:13 – 01:09:17: It's ultimately not how persuasive you are. Really, a lot of persuasion is just
01:09:17 – 01:09:23: not getting in the way by your own stumbling and getting in the way of the truth that you're trying
01:09:23 – 01:09:31: to convey to others. When it comes to making these arguments, particularly about complex or
01:09:32 – 01:09:39: central, very important subjects, you should always bear in mind that you may not be the person
01:09:40 – 01:09:45: who actually makes the final part of the argument. You may even not make the majority
01:09:45 – 01:09:51: of the argument. You may just put one brick in place. You may add one building block.
01:09:52 – 01:09:58: You may be the one who lays part of the foundation. You're building part of the argument for that
01:09:58 – 01:10:05: person. Don't necessarily feel that you have to be the one to make the entirety of the argument.
01:10:05 – 01:10:09: Now, if it's a family member or a close friend, maybe you will be the person who makes
01:10:09 – 01:10:15: the rest of the argument as well, but you may be discussing something with
01:10:15 – 01:10:20: someone you met at a coffee shop and you may lay the foundation for someone else to come in and
01:10:20 – 01:10:24: make the rest of that argument in the future. So don't think that necessarily just because you
01:10:24 – 01:10:30: didn't get to whatever ultimate conclusion you think you should have been able to make that
01:10:30 – 01:10:39: what you did was ineffective or useless. It probably was not. Human beings work by building up
01:10:39 – 01:10:43: information over the course of a lifetime. So all of those interactions matter.
01:10:44 – 01:10:51: It may be that your role is just to add that one brick. Don't necessarily feel that that's
01:10:51 – 01:10:57: unimportant. Go ahead and find a wall if you're so inclined and start pulling random bricks out
01:10:57 – 01:11:03: and see what happens. They all matter. Every little piece matters. I'm not actually telling you to go
01:11:03 – 01:11:10: pick apart your neighbor's wall. Don't do that. Only your own wall. But there's another point
01:11:11 – 01:11:16: in all of this that I feel it's important to make explicit. We've sort of implied it throughout the
01:11:16 – 01:11:23: episode so far, but fundamentally, you will never persuade anyone of anything.
01:11:24 – 01:11:28: Now, what I mean by that is something very specific.
01:11:30 – 01:11:39: No one is persuaded by someone else. Because ultimately, how it works is the other person
01:11:39 – 01:11:44: takes in the information, takes in the argument, data, whatever it is that you are providing,
01:11:45 – 01:11:53: synthesizes that himself and he persuades himself. Now, for some men, it may be that your argument
01:11:53 – 01:11:57: is the one that he takes, makes his own and persuades himself given your argument.
01:11:59 – 01:12:04: Now, it's a subtle point. It seems like a minor point. It's almost on the level of Kant's point
01:12:04 – 01:12:09: about the thing in itself versus the thing as we perceive it with the senses. But it's a salient
01:12:09 – 01:12:18: point. What you are doing is providing that other person with the necessary means to construct
01:12:18 – 01:12:23: what he needs to arrive at the conclusion. And that's why it's important to know your audience.
01:12:23 – 01:12:27: That's why it's important to know the person with whom you're speaking because you'll know what he
01:12:27 – 01:12:33: needs to construct that argument for himself, the one that will convince him, that will persuade him.
01:12:34 – 01:12:41: Because ultimately, that is an internal matter to the person. Persuasion happens in the psyche,
01:12:41 – 01:12:46: as it were, in the mind of the person being persuaded. It doesn't happen externally.
01:12:46 – 01:12:52: Yes, the information is provided externally, the argumentation in some cases, the data,
01:12:53 – 01:12:58: whatever it may be. But the ultimate persuasion is an internal matter.
01:12:59 – 01:13:04: And that is again why knowing your audience, having that relationship, having that built-up
01:13:04 – 01:13:11: trust truly matters, because then the person can take what you are giving him and construct the
01:13:11 – 01:13:17: case himself. Because ultimately, he is the one doing that final construction in his own mind.
01:13:18 – 01:13:25: So yes, you can be persuasive, but the ultimate act of persuasion lies in the mind of the person
01:13:25 – 01:13:32: persuading, in this case, persuading himself. The last big point that I want to make is a
01:13:33 – 01:13:39: corollary to that. Something happened in the last few years, really in the universe,
01:13:39 – 01:13:47: I think we've all felt it, between COVID and the BLM riots. I think everyone has a sense that
01:13:47 – 01:13:55: there's been a shift somehow metaphysically. And one of the things that happened, both in COVID and
01:13:55 – 01:14:04: with BLM, is that the divisions within families, within communities, within friendships became
01:14:04 – 01:14:11: much more apparent. Or in some cases, where there was previously no division, now there is division.
01:14:12 – 01:14:19: The important thing that I want to highlight in the case of COVID and BLM, and all the associated
01:14:19 – 01:14:25: screaming, is that when those divisions occurred in what had formally seemed to be cohesive units,
01:14:25 – 01:14:33: in some cases those congregations were split by COVID policies, or COVID fears, or COVID messaging,
01:14:33 – 01:14:41: whatever. We, on the right, the people who are right about these things, should never be the ones
01:14:41 – 01:14:49: who are causing the division for the sake of accusation. What I mean by that is if you look
01:14:49 – 01:14:56: back at BLM and COVID, it was the people on the left who by and large became utterly hysterical,
01:14:57 – 01:15:03: and filled with condemnation and rage at anyone who wouldn't comply. It seemed like there
01:15:03 – 01:15:09: was an entirely new emergent religion that appeared almost fully formed in the span of like
01:15:09 – 01:15:16: six months. And in that time, the adherents to that new religion were vicious to anyone who
01:15:16 – 01:15:25: would not bend the knee to it, literally bending the knee in the case of the BLM crap. Those were
01:15:25 – 01:15:31: the people who were cutting us out of their lives. Those are the people who if we had to cut them out
01:15:31 – 01:15:37: of our lives, it was usually self-defense. It was usually actual fear that these people who had
01:15:37 – 01:15:43: once been friends or maybe even family had now become a real potential physical threat to you
01:15:43 – 01:15:49: or your family. And so if you did cut them off, it was almost certainly defensive. And it wasn't
01:15:49 – 01:15:54: simply, I hate this guy because he's wrong about something. And so the last point I want to make
01:15:54 – 01:16:01: is that we on the right are not the ones who isolate people and disparage them for being wrong.
01:16:02 – 01:16:06: If you have someone that you love, someone you're friends with, some of your neighbors with,
01:16:06 – 01:16:11: and they're wrong about something, that's a matter of Christian love and concern. You want them to
01:16:11 – 01:16:18: be right. You want to help move them in the right direction. But because it is rooted in love and not
01:16:18 – 01:16:24: rooted in wanting to win an argument, you never get to the point that you say,
01:16:24 – 01:16:29: I hate you because you don't agree with me. I want nothing to do with you because you believe
01:16:29 – 01:16:35: the wrong thing about this. That's not us. That's not what we on the right do. That's not how truth
01:16:35 – 01:16:41: behaves. Yeah, Corey and I can tell you don't believe a word we say, go read for yourself.
01:16:41 – 01:16:45: And we know you're going to come to the same conclusions in part because we don't want you
01:16:45 – 01:16:50: to be persuaded by podcasters or by people writing articles or people writing books.
01:16:50 – 01:16:55: You shouldn't be persuaded by the guy who makes the loudest, angriest, whatever argument. You
01:16:55 – 01:17:02: should be persuaded by truth. And so when we do these meta episodes, we want to get people engaging
01:17:02 – 01:17:08: in metacognition about thinking about thinking about truth. What are you thinking about? How do
01:17:08 – 01:17:14: you incorporate the ideas that you hear into what you believe? Because it's a two step process.
01:17:14 – 01:17:19: You hear something, you think about it. If you believe it, it becomes much more intrinsic.
01:17:20 – 01:17:26: What we saw with COVID and BLM is that they kind of skipped the truth part and just went straight
01:17:26 – 01:17:32: to the belief part. And so a religion emerged with nothing behind it except for these fictional
01:17:32 – 01:17:42: fantasy stories. And the religious fervor that was used to target us was horribly divisive.
01:17:42 – 01:17:46: Again, it divided families, it divided communities and congregations in terrible ways.
01:17:47 – 01:17:54: And we should never be the ones who are causing that. So if your friends with someone and you're
01:17:54 – 01:18:01: further to the right than them, never go after them, certainly publicly, for not being as right as
01:18:01 – 01:18:06: you are for being wrong about something that you're right about. Don't tone beliefs the way they
01:18:06 – 01:18:14: say things. It's funny, people think that I'm a bomb thrower on Twitter, not to the same degree
01:18:14 – 01:18:19: as Corey, but people think that we're both antagonistic. If you actually look at me replying
01:18:19 – 01:18:26: to other people's accounts, I very, very rarely say anything negative in someone else's replies.
01:18:26 – 01:18:32: Usually if I reply to someone and I disagree, it's A, it's a mutual. B, I'm very respectful.
01:18:32 – 01:18:38: And C, I'm trying to make a narrow point. I'm trying to nudge things a little bit. But I never
01:18:38 – 01:18:43: look at someone's timelines. I never look at their statements and say, I got to fix what
01:18:43 – 01:18:48: they're saying. They got something wrong. But it's their timeline. It's their space to make
01:18:48 – 01:18:54: their point about whatever they want to talk about. Sometimes I can contribute something
01:18:54 – 01:18:57: helpful. Sometimes I can contribute. I want to nudge in a slightly different direction because
01:18:57 – 01:19:01: the thing will be helpful to them in what they're actually trying to say.
01:19:02 – 01:19:07: The important point that I want people to take home is that if you see someone making a mistake
01:19:07 – 01:19:15: wherever and in conversation on social media, your first instinct shouldn't be, I got to fix this.
01:19:15 – 01:19:20: You've said that all along. Your friends, your family especially are not people you should be
01:19:20 – 01:19:26: fixing. They're people you should be loving. And loving them involves helping them at some point
01:19:26 – 01:19:31: get some of these things right. But if there's someone who's friends with you or friends with
01:19:31 – 01:19:38: your sphere of friends, particularly if you're the undesirables, as Corey and I are, social
01:19:38 – 01:19:42: media is very interesting because anyone can interact with anyone. You can reply to Elon Musk
01:19:42 – 01:19:49: and he may see it. That's incredible. That's completely insane. On Gab, it's a smaller space.
01:19:49 – 01:19:55: You can respond and or he's likely to see it because it's a much more tight-knit community,
01:19:55 – 01:20:00: which is one of the awesome things about it. It's a community. It's a town square. It's not
01:20:00 – 01:20:05: like a global billboard. That's a different culture and that's a good thing. The internet needs
01:20:05 – 01:20:12: multiple different cultures. On the internet, if someone says something and you disagree with it,
01:20:12 – 01:20:18: it's okay to let it go. You don't constantly have to fix everything around you. And so
01:20:19 – 01:20:24: because other people can interact completely at random on Twitter especially because it's so large,
01:20:25 – 01:20:29: it's very conspicuous to me especially in the last few months just kind of looking at
01:20:29 – 01:20:36: own interactions. Who is willing to still talk to me because there's been such a concerted slander
01:20:36 – 01:20:42: campaign against Corey and myself and against Stone Choir that a lot of people just refuse to
01:20:42 – 01:20:47: acknowledge we exist anymore. Even some who will speak in private won't speak to us in public because
01:20:47 – 01:20:52: they're downsized to them. And I respect that. I don't go after these people in public. I'm not
01:20:52 – 01:20:56: naming them here. I'm not trying to shame anyone by mentioning this. I'm simply highlighting that
01:20:57 – 01:21:03: there are people who are still willing to follow me, who are willing to respond, reply to me and
01:21:03 – 01:21:09: engage with me in public. I respect the fact that they're taking a chance to even be seen
01:21:09 – 01:21:15: interacting favorably. There are multiple parables in scripture about engaging with the
01:21:15 – 01:21:22: public. You have lepers. You have these text collectors. You have undesirables of the lowest
01:21:22 – 01:21:30: order and the manner in which they were treated in those days. Today, being on the dissident
01:21:30 – 01:21:35: right is basically being part of a leper colony. And it's artificial. I mean, it's not leprosy.
01:21:35 – 01:21:41: Leprosy was a highly contagious, hideous disease. It was incurable. Leprosy colonies existed because
01:21:41 – 01:21:46: those people had to be set apart not only because ceremonially they were unclean, but because they
01:21:46 – 01:21:53: had a horrific, contagious disease. There's no contagion among the dissident right. There's
01:21:53 – 01:21:57: only people who are telling the truth, and then other people are afraid to go near them because
01:21:57 – 01:22:03: of it. So I highlight this because if there's someone who's willing to actually still talk to me
01:22:03 – 01:22:09: publicly, I respect that and I respect them for it. And part of my respect for that is that I'm
01:22:09 – 01:22:14: going to engage with them as little as possible because I don't want to bring heat on them by
01:22:14 – 01:22:19: speaking to them because there are people who hate me so much that they're sitting in the telegram
01:22:19 – 01:22:24: public chat for Stone Choir trying to dox pastors and laymen. If anyone they can find,
01:22:24 – 01:22:31: they want to dox them and go to their congregations and try to get them destroyed because they hate
01:22:31 – 01:22:36: the fact that we are speaking so much. Why do they hate it? They hate it because we are the men
01:22:36 – 01:22:41: who are actually able to talk to men like Adam and men like Andrew from different perspectives
01:22:41 – 01:22:47: and help them move in a direction that's closer to the truth. And it's a truth that's completely
01:22:47 – 01:22:52: at odds with the world. And there's servants of the world that passionately hate that and will
01:22:52 – 01:22:58: spare no expense of, and they'll take any amount of time to try to harm us and anyone who comes near
01:22:58 – 01:23:03: us. So if someone is not willing to come near me publicly, I notice, I absolutely notice,
01:23:03 – 01:23:08: I'm really good at pattern recognition. If you used to talk to me and you don't anymore,
01:23:08 – 01:23:13: I can tell. And I don't care. If there's anything to forgive, I certainly forgive it.
01:23:13 – 01:23:17: But it is conspicuous when someone's willing to talk to me. I mention this because if there's
01:23:17 – 01:23:22: someone who's still willing to engage with the men who are treated as lepers and as tax collectors,
01:23:23 – 01:23:28: don't make them regret it. Don't make their lives harder because they're one of the few people who
01:23:28 – 01:23:33: are willing to actually treat us like Christian brothers and like human beings.
01:23:34 – 01:23:40: If you hold views that are not popular, if you hold views that are contrary to the world's religion,
01:23:40 – 01:23:47: and someone is willing to engage with you, make sure they don't regret it. That's one of the chief
01:23:47 – 01:23:51: messages of this episode. Make sure that when you're trying to persuade someone, sometimes it's
01:23:51 – 01:23:56: just as simple as, I'm not going to be a jerk. I'm not going to make your life any harder than it
01:23:56 – 01:24:03: already is because you have your own thing to focus on. That's important too, to not be the guy
01:24:03 – 01:24:09: that someone regrets that they were friends with because that's a way to lose friends and negatively
01:24:09 – 01:24:15: influence people. I mentioned the Andrew example earlier on. If I had gone after him and bet a
01:24:15 – 01:24:20: complete jerk, he would have very rightfully ignored some of the things I said and maybe he
01:24:20 – 01:24:25: wouldn't think what he does now. Even maybe if only for the sake that he didn't want to be associated
01:24:25 – 01:24:30: with someone who would be as much of a jerk as me. Sometimes you just have to shut your mouth and
01:24:30 – 01:24:37: let someone be wrong on the internet. It's not the end of the world. It may be that by being silent,
01:24:37 – 01:24:41: in the future, you're buying a chance to make the persuasive case that you didn't have
01:24:41 – 01:24:48: the opportunity to make in that moment. Patience, grace are the key elements of persuasion.
01:24:48 – 01:24:52: Sometimes just saying nothing is the most powerful thing you could say. In some part of that is just
01:24:52 – 01:24:57: still being a friend, like Corey's father, who was friends for a man because they were friends
01:24:57 – 01:25:02: and the fact that the man wouldn't receive the gospel didn't dissuade him from being his friend
01:25:02 – 01:25:07: or for continuing to talk about it. Being friends with people who have different views
01:25:07 – 01:25:13: is a testimony to the confidence that you have in your own beliefs. Don't let your beliefs become
01:25:13 – 01:25:19: an excuse for you to be brittle. Truth never causes brittleness. It causes strength. Wherever
01:25:19 – 01:25:25: you find strength, especially today when there are men with convictions, people who don't know
01:25:25 – 01:25:31: anything will see strength being upheld in the face of adversity and think maybe there's some
01:25:31 – 01:25:36: truth behind that because there has to be some metaphysical explanation for how someone could
01:25:36 – 01:25:42: withstand the hatred of the world. Maybe he's just completely crazy or maybe he's on to something.
01:25:43 – 01:25:47: Maybe all you do as a personal witness to the world is acting in his example who says,
01:25:47 – 01:25:52: I'm still here. You can't chase me away. If that's the only persuasion you can do,
01:25:52 – 01:25:56: that's a powerful message because there's so few men today who are willing to do that.
01:25:59 – 01:26:04: There's a lot to think about here. It's a meta discussion around how we interact with each other
01:26:04 – 01:26:11: and how we think about ourselves. Be patient. It's okay to be quiet. Measure twice, cut once.
01:26:12 – 01:26:18: Think before you go after someone, anywhere. Even think before you tell them the things
01:26:18 – 01:26:22: that we talk about on Stunkwire or wherever else you're getting your interesting information.
01:26:23 – 01:26:28: Don't be hasty to try to upend someone else's life because even if it's beneficial,
01:26:28 – 01:26:34: it may well upend things. Have some empathy for that and have some grace for that person
01:26:34 – 01:26:39: to try to go easy and to make it easy for them. If they want nothing to do with it,
01:26:39 – 01:26:43: you should still love them because whatever relationship you had beforehand should still
01:26:43 – 01:26:49: exist. If they respond the way people did with COVID and BLM by writing you off,
01:26:50 – 01:26:56: well, that was part of Jesus' prophecies of end times, that fathers would be adversaries against
01:26:56 – 01:27:00: daughters, mothers and sons, daughter-in-laws and father-in-laws and butchering the relationships.
01:27:00 – 01:27:06: Like Jesus basically covered everything. Families will be torn down. Churches will be torn down
01:27:06 – 01:27:11: internally, not just externally. Whether or not this is an end time moment,
01:27:11 – 01:27:15: the fact that these things are happening are always a reminder to us to believe
01:27:15 – 01:27:20: God's promises because they will come true one day. When we see them happening,
01:27:20 – 01:27:24: it's not a cause for panic or worry. It's just a cause for making sure that we focus
01:27:24 – 01:27:27: on the things that matter most. Chief of all, that's God and His promises,
01:27:27 – 01:27:41: and that includes the truth of all things in creation.