By Mike Leno

“As dumbness has been defined downward in American public life during the last two decades, one of the most important and frequently overlooked culprits is the public’s increasing reluctance to give a fair hearing—or any hearing at all—to opposing points of view” (LA Times, April 20, 2008).

With those incriminating words Susan Jacoby began the LA Times’ opinion section in an article entitled “Talking to Ourselves.” Jacoby went on to say that in her public presentations, about 95% of her audience already agrees with her. And rather than being happy about this, she finds it very disturbing. Furthermore, she says this phenomenon appears typical for other speakers with other views in a variety of public venues. The obvious conclusion is we like to listen to people who affirm what we already believe. And we avoid listening to people who present ideas contrary to ours. But Jacoby says this contributes to our general ignorance.

It might be tempting to pass this off as someone else’s problem. We’re ok—it’s those other poor ignorant souls who have a problem listening! Or we might explain it as just another one of those unfortunate quirks of human nature. Human beings are all like that and always have been. But Jacoby finds the situation far worse now than it has been in the past. Public discourse in past generations was actually more open and accommodating to differing points of view. Speakers with various political, religious and cultural points of view attracted large audiences who were interested in, and at the same time critical of, the ideas presented. She cites as an example the 1876 presentations on Darwin by Thomas Henry Huxley whose audiences were largely comprised of people who rejected evolutionary theory. And among politicians, notably Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, deeply held, long standing disagreements did not prevent them from talking and listening to each other. One can hardly imagine today’s politicians taking the time, as did Jefferson and Adams, to write detailed private letters to each other in an effort not to force agreement but to understand each other. But lest we simply point fingers, I suspect we all find it much easier to simply write off our intellectual opponents as unworthy of our attention; rather than give them a fair hearing.

By Mike Leno

My car had baked in the sun all morning and now a blast of heat enveloped me as I slid onto the hot upholstery. The steering wheel and other surfaces were too hot to touch but I managed to get the windows down and the AC blowing as hard as it was able. I drove out of the church parking lot noticing that the outside temperature indicator on the dash registered 106 degrees. As the interior of my car gradually cooled I thought of Mary [for the sake of privacy I’ve changed the names in this story] whom I was about to visit. I wondered if she even had air conditioning.

Mary is 97 and confined to a bed. A long-time member of my church she must content herself with religious television programs rather than personally attend services. A couple of weeks ago she suffered a cardiac event. Not wanting to allow any heroic measures and preferring to die at home if it came to that, she refused to cooperate with the paramedics. When asked if she was suffering any pain she gave them a strong and definite “no!” But it was only with the help of nitroglycerin and morphine that she survived the next 24 hours. The family had requested that I come pray for her and anoint her according to the biblical custom. After that she seemed to get better, but ended up in to the emergency room a few days later because of an infection. She’s home again and resting comfortably. But she has a lot of things against her. And on this hot Sabbath afternoon at her daughter’s request I will give her communion.