Category: Theory

Finding our blind spots

Blind spots – they are with us all the time

Blind spots were something that Jesus was very concerned about. In a very well known passage from Luke he is recorded as saying:
“How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.” (Luke 6:42)
The inability to see inside ourselves is a major problem for our relationships, our effectiveness at work and our ability to build consensus with others. Our blind spots mean that we do not realise the problems that we make for other people! When we do not see the things that put us outside a healthy relationship with others then the wheels come off our ability to collaborate with them.

Where are your blind spots?

My thinking about blind spots and its impact on consensus building was stimulated by an article written by Romal Tune. The article appeared in Sojourners Magazine. In that article, he interviews Richard Rohr who is a Franciscan priest from the USA on his experience of white privilege.
As I read the interview, I was reflecting on how deeply hidden our biases are! Our core operating assumptions are often unknown to us. Everything that he was saying about white privilege can be applied to other social advantages. Many of us do not think of ourselves as racist. We men probably don’t see ourselves as sexist. Social status in Australia is not venerated as much as it is in other cultures.  Many members of the clergy don’t like to see themselves as superior or privileged over lay people. Yet within us, there are assumptions that drive our behaviour that surely rest on the privileges of race, gender, class and social position.

White privilege: a study in subjective blindness

Rohr says: “White privilege is largely hidden from our eyes if we are white. Why? Because it is structural instead of psychological, and we tend to interpret most things in personal, individual, and psychological ways. Since we do not consciously have racist attitudes or overt racist behaviour, we kindly judge ourselves to be open-minded, egalitarian, “liberal,” and therefore surely not racist.
Because we have never been on the other side, we largely do not recognize the structural access, the trust we think we deserve, the assumption that we always belong and do not have to earn our belonging, the “we set the tone” mood that we white folks live inside of — and take totally for granted and even naturally deserved.”
We may not be racist but we can presume and enjoy all the benefits of white privilege. We may not be patriarchal but men operate as though they have a right of presence and agency that not many women automatically feel belongs to them. Some clergy may like to think that they can treat all members of the church with respect, but they still enjoy the privileged place of being sought after as a contributor and counsel in all situations.

What’s wrong with using these privileges?

Rohr notes: “I profited from white privilege on so many fronts that I had to misread the situation many, many times before I began to feel what others feel and see what others could clearly see. Many must have just rolled their eyes and hopefully forgiven me!”
When we don’t recognize our privilege then we:
    • mess up and don’t make the best response to situations
    • don’t understand the feelings of others
    • fail to provide genuine spaces for all to contribute
    • damage relationships
    • miss out on accessing the best wisdom to address our problems
Rohr again: “Frankly, it is dangerous to put the Bible into the hands of people who still worship their own group, their own country, their own denomination, or any other idolatry. They will always abuse it.”
Perhaps even more concerning is that because of our blind spots we probably end up abusing the Bible and misrepresenting God! When we take our subjective reality and make it the social norm then we put our perspective/group on top. When people are on top they often use the Bible to keep themselves there!!

Where are your blind spots?

Before you can answer this question you need to get help. We cannot know how our subjective worldview skews things. The only way to glimpse its impact is to have friends, colleagues and opponents point them out to you.

In the next post, I will look further at this question. For now, I invite you to prayerfully reflect on your situation. Where might your privilege be and what negative effects is it having?

Blind spots and consensus discernment

Our ability to grasp how our biases and privileges are at work is incredibly difficult. Failure to understand and allow for the inherent privileges that we possess makes genuine engagement with others impossible. When others are not engaged in the process of discernment then genuine consensus is not possible. Consensus building approaches to discernment need to address the subconscious and subjective privilege of all participants in the process. To fail to do so entrenches the dominant privilege(s) and creates significant disruption to the quality of the community’s life and decision-making ability.

Ambiguity: anxiety or opportunity?

Ambiguity – or the space of not knowing – is an uncomfortable place for many people. Even though uncertainty may be unwelcome it is also a place of opportunity.

rawpixel-com-256642

Ambiguity: an unwelcome visitor?

I know a great many people for whom uncertainty is a cause of great internal stress. Ambiguity might mean that they don’t know what is going to happen next, or whether someone is going to behave well, or unresolved issues sit on the table. At such times they get stressed.

Ambiguity – or the space of not knowing – is an uncomfortable place for many people. It arrives unbidden when that which we know or could expect is thrown into uncertainty. There is no doubt that such uncertainty can be disorienting and as such a cause for concern.

Even though uncertainty may be unwelcome it is also a place of opportunity.

The Discomfort of Ambiguity

This is the title of a blog post by Rev Dr John Squires. I am indebted to my colleague and fellow Uniting Church Minister for stimulating the following thoughts.

In his post, John makes reference to a book by William Bridges entitled Managing Transitions (2009). For him, transitions have three stages

  • the letting go
  • the neutral zone of being in-between; and finally
  • the connection into a new place, a new way of being.

Ambiguity and consensus building

Conventional debating styles assume a rigid commitment to staying with our starting convictions. Debating, and the parliamentary style of decision-making that uses it, like certainty. Debaters are supposed to resist every new idea raised against their point of view. Debating hates ambiguity – the idea of uncertainty!

In contrast, consensus-building processes are not premised on people firmly holding on to predetermined positions. Rather, they need people to be open to changing their view. Consensus-building requires that people will be prepared to let go of their first ideas or thoughts. Indeed people in this process are genuinely open to letting go of their current positions. Consensus-building encourages people to enter into the “endings” which Bridges sees as the way to something new.

Staying in the Neutral Zone

When people are disoriented through having to let go of what they know the tendency is to seek equilibrium as quickly as possible. Like a person drowning in a raging sea, they grasp after any flotsam or jetsom floating nearby in a search for security.

There is no doubt that when we realise that we must let go of a deeply held view it can be unnerving. Leaping into the unknown when our deepest convictions and practices are found to be wanting can be very stressful. It’s natural to want to lock in on an alternative as quickly as possible! However, this is a grave mistake and can short change the path to growth and new insights.

If you are a person who gets stressed when there is ambiguity I encourage you to take a deep breath and slow down. Ask yourself, and talk with others, about why you struggle with uncertainty. Address those needs in yourself that make it hard for you to end things and live in a place of not knowing for a time. Find companions in that place but do learn to stay there for a while. This place is not your enemy.

As Bridges encourages, in that neutral, in-between zone, there is a need for us to nurture and develop a capacity to live within the discomfort of ambiguity which arises during the experience of loss, as we move away from the familiar.

Growing Possibilities in the Neutral Zone

In his blog post, John Squires reflects upon the story of the so-called “Prodigal Son”. In the story, the younger son reflected on what it might mean to return shamed and impoverished. The father wondered what the various options were for his relationship with his son as he approached from a distance. The other son wrestled with how his relationship with father and brother might unfold with the brother’s return. These were times of openness, wondering, fear and possibilities.

Without the uncertainty generated by changing the known – ending the familiar – new futures could never begin. Stepping into the neutral zone made new futures possible. Living with ambiguity made amazing things possible.

Only by living with the discomfort of ambiguity is it possible to imagine new beginnings. Ambiguity – the place of not knowing – is the place for creativity and imagination to flourish. Ambiguity can be both anxiety-inducing and a God given opportunity.

Conclusion

Consensus-based discernment processes can be experienced as stressful by some people. Not knowing how the discussion is going to unfold and where the decision will land can cause some people quite a bit of anxiety. Yet, this place of ambiguity is the creative space – the place of opportunity.

As Bridges notes, if we are able to sit within the neutral zone and engage with the discomfort of ambiguity, then we can experience change and transition as a constructive and life-giving experience. The neutral zone can become a pivot away from the past, into the future. That is the best outcome of a process of transition.

Psychology and Consensus

Man getting lost in a fog

Psychology / our disposition to certain ways of responding to the world is very powerful. How much does psychology influence the preference of a person to take up an “Evangelical” or socially conservative view of the faith? The same question could be asked of socially progressive and theologically “liberal” Christians.

This post is not so much interested in the reason people are “Evangelical” or otherwise. Rather the concern is how do we navigate our relationships and build consensus when psychology is such an influence on our views of the world.

Psychology and religious conservatism

In a previous post, I shared an article that explored the link between a person’s psychological traits and their willingness to stay with their support of President Trump – no matter what he does. I noted there that Trump’s support among “Evangelical Christians” is incredibly high and stable.

It is incontestable that the actions endorsed by the US President, and his behaviour, are far from Christian norms. These norms are of acting justly, loving mercy, and walking humbly with God. (Micah 6:8) Even so, Evangelical Christians continue to support him in overwhelming numbers. They do so irrespective of how much his decisions demean, damage and destroy the life of people and the planet.

That article offered some psychological explanations for why people support Trump. I wondered if the same psychological drivers that encourage people to be a rusted on Trump supporter might also be an explanation for why people prefer an “Evangelical” expression of the faith.

Building Consensus Across Psychological Barriers

To say that there may be a psychological disposition to preferring an “Evangelical” or “liberal” expression of faith does not go to the question of who is right or wrong. However, it is important for us to understand this personal background so that we can have a better understanding of one another.

This is important for many reasons. For one, it will help temper a temptation to rush to condemn people for hypocrisy or for not taking the Bible seriously. In addition, it may help us to relate better to people of an “Evangelical” disposition. This may meet their psychological needs in healthy ways or reduce its power. Finally, it helps us to develop consensus building strategies that might actually work. This is because they respond to the psychology of the other person.

Building consensus can seem impossible in the face of apparently intractable differences between people. However, we should not give in too quickly!! Consensus building processes always begin by seeking to understand the needs of the other person. When the needs of the other are understood it might be possible to find ways of meeting those needs.

However, before such conversations can happen at least one party to the conversation must show respect for the other person, care enough about them to try and understand them,  seek to meet their legitimate needs, and to have a toolkit that can help to build consensus.

Psychology and Being an Evangelical Christian

The Psychology Today article referenced in the earlier post identified 14 psychological traits that dispose people to be a rusted on Trump supporter. Only a disposition to racism seemed to offer no clue to why persons might prefer to express their Christian faith within the theological, cultural and social norms of “Evangelical” faith. These dispositions may also explain why some people are inclined to accept hierarchical church structures and Pentecostal expressions of faith.

Some of these traits are nurtured by parts of the Bible. Most though are nurtured by preachers, church culture and social practices in “Evangelical” and other churches. This serves to reinforce and meet these psychological needs.

Following are the 12 psychological traits that it might be wise to take into account when seeking to build consensus. Two do not apply. The suggestions for how to build consensus takes as a given that a person with an “Evangelical” and possibly a Pentecostal expression of faith could be operating out of this trait.

Let me state clearly that I am not saying that every “Evangelical” or Pentecostal Christian is living out of these psychological traits or needs.  However, where people are dogmatic and unrelenting in their position it could be that their actions owe more to psychology than Scripture. When this is so we need to be sensitive and creative in the responses that we make. At this point, an understanding of possible psychological traits may be helpful.

1. Practicality Trumps Morality

This is where people want to win at all costs. They consider that their goal is the most important one. In its worst expression, we see Christians who will manipulate others, lie, and seek the harm of others so that they get what they want. This is a very ugly witness for Christians to offer!!!

When this psychology takes over it can seem impossible to develop a consensus. When people want different things – opposites even – then how is consensus possible? The key here is to dig deeper into what it is that a person wants. Perhaps they are desiring an outcome, for example, no change to the worship times, but the need is different. Get behind the ask to what need is really driving them. Maybe then other solutions are possible. It is even possible that you can appeal to a higher goal. For example, a person may really prefer 11.00am for worship for reasons A, B and C. However, they may also care that the church connects with a new demographic and grows. So they will put aside one desire in favour of a goal that they value more highly.

Of course, there will always be people who want to get their way and will do anything to stop others. But by exploring through conversation to find deeper motives, or by appealing higher goals it may be possible to find an agreed solution.

2. The Brain’s Attention System Is More Strongly Engaged by Certain Stimuli

Emotional arousal keeps some people engaged. So it is possible that they will be more emotive, perhaps use more extreme language, quite likely they will engage with issues at a visceral level.

We need to respect that not everyone prefers to explore issues from a “head” / mind level. Rather than be disparaging about people who are emotive, think about the ways to engage them at that level. This will keep their interest and “speak their language.” This is not about getting into a shouting match. Rather, people are given the chance to speak their mind in ways that work for them. Then the communication back to them can also share emotions because this is what some people connect to as they think about an issue.

3. Obsession with Entertainment and Celebrities

The way the article put this point is: “To some, it doesn’t matter what Trump actually says because he’s so amusing to watch. With the Donald, you are always left wondering what outrageous thing he is going to say or do next. He keeps us on the edge of our seat, and for that reason, some Trump supporters will forgive anything he says. They are happy as long as they are kept entertained.”

OK, this is a hard one to handle. If people get their highs in a church from being entertained and not encouraged to seriously engage with issues that can make it a challenge to work with them on a shared project!

Hopefully, we can tap into other life experiences where they have had to dig deeper than a surface experience of a topic. People do know how to seek understanding but its amazing how many Christians don’t do that as they listen to worship services and in their decision-making processes. Yes, it comes down to convincing such people that not everything is fun and games.

4. Some Men Just Want to Watch the World Burn

We know that there is a lot of disenchantment in the church about many things. Traditional mainline churches are subject to a lot of criticism from within their membership. When this leads to frustration – because their concerns are not taken seriously – then some people don’t care if the whole thing blows up.

I have seen local churches and even denominations where people are so frustrated and angry they don’t care if the place crashes and burns. Even worse they seem to act in ways that try and make it happen. They become intransigent, aggressive and uncompromising.

The key here is to create genuine spaces of listening where that anger and frustration can get out. It is also essential that people can genuinely influence the outcomes of their group. A consensus building approach knows how to make safe spaces to hear people well. It is committed to vulnerability so that the original proposal is changed in the process. The changes may reflect the concerns of the frustrated, angry people.

People don’t destroy the groups that they value. So give people valuable experiences of the group and remind them of when the group was appreciated by them in the past.

5. The Fear Factor: Conservatives Are More Sensitive to Threat

There is certainly a lot in the preaching of some churches that promote fear and themselves / their message as the answer to that fear. If people have been discipled in a church that encourages fear then it heightens the habit of seeing things through the prism of fear. People become more anxious by default.

However, harder to handle is when the issues on which we seek to build a shared understanding are the topics around what people have been told to be fearful. Many Christians disagree over what to do in response to mass human migration, gender issues, human sexuality, humanitarian crises, etc. In many societies and churches, the fear factor has been played and people have bought into the answers to those fears delivered by those who peddled the fear.

In Australia at present, we are seeing church leaders creating a climate of fear about the future of the family and religious freedom because same-gender marriage is now legal. Perfect love casts out fear. So when met by fearful people all we can do is to create a safe place where it is possible to talk about our fears, offer comfort and hope, and a context in which to reduce fear through personal sharing, exposure to those who are causing the fear, and some good theological and information sharing.

Consensus discernment is committed to taking the time that is needed to bring everyone along. Overcoming fear can take a lot of time!

6. Mortality Reminders and Perceived Threat

“Terror Management Theory predicts that when people are reminded of their own mortality, which happens with fear mongering, they will more strongly defend those who share their worldviews and national or ethnic identity and act out more aggressively towards those who do not.”

When people see the future of themselves, kinship, values group, etc under threat then they turn on the attacker. When Christians engage in these sorts of attacks it can be an appalling departure from acceptable Christian behaviour.

There are two key options in this situation. First, help people find common ground with you. Do not let people position you as the enemy. Affirm shared values and the bonds that come from being Christians together. Avoid demonising and don’t get trapped into accepting the demonising that others do to you. Keep holding out the vision and the practical examples of being together in this challenge.

Secondly, challenge whether the threat / danger is really as big as people want to make out. “What’s the worst thing that can happen?” When people are highly anxious and threatened they want to find an enemy and they want to fight. Don’t be that enemy or target!

7. Humans Often Overestimate Their Expertise

Many issues in life are complex. So it is not surprising that people are often under-informed or misinformed. In such situations, people are often willing to accept the views of their preferred expert. They can be very reluctant to listen to other opinions.

The Dunning- Kruger effect says that not only are people uninformed they do not even know that they are uninformed! Hence they think their insights are adequate.

A critical step in consensus discernment is to take time to provide all the information that is necessary for a person to participate in the decision-making. This step allows people to ask questions, to develop understanding and to be informed. Sure if people are so locked into their bias that they will not be open to new views it can be a problem. However, the operating assumption that information is empowering is a significant tool for encouraging people to learn.

8. Relative Deprivation — A Misguided Sense of Entitlement

To hear many Evangelical, Pentecostal and other preachers you would think that the world as we knew it is ending. Way too many preachers encourage their followers to believe that Christians have lost influence, are under threat from the rights that others are given, and will become a persecuted minority. Then they offer a solution on how to overcome these fears by “righting the wrongs” that Christians have “suffered”.

Pandering to greed and desire for power is never a good look for Christian preachers. If you are involved in a discernment process with someone who has a strong sense of entitlement the answer is not to tell to “stop being so precious”! Although that is a reasonable end game.

Once again sharing feelings can be a doorway to hearing each other better. Taking fears seriously and generating alternative perceptions of reality and how to overcome the “threat” is a pathway to growth.

Sharing some stories from the experience of those who are seen to be privileged is also helpful. This is connected with the next point.

9. Lack of Exposure to Dissimilar Others

A lot of Christians only hang out with people like themselves. This reinforces their prejudices and the narratives around them. In a consensus building process, the planning group should always ask “Who needs to be in the room when we have this discussion?” This may include people who are not decision makers but be people who are affected by decisions.

Consensus processes make space for all the voices that are relevant to decision-making. Also, by using small groups and random table groups for discussion people don’t only talk to like-minded people.

10. Tapping into Collective Narcissism

Collective narcissism is an unrealistic shared belief in the greatness of one’s group. It often occurs when a group believes it represents the ‘true identity’ of a nation or religion. This perspective / psychological trait makes for arrogance and closed-mindedness. 

I am sure that many of us have been in a situation where people consider themselves to be the defenders of the faith and show scant respect for the opinions of others. This attitude is one of the hardest to address in any meeting style. Perhaps the advantage of consensus processes is that it creates the expectation that participants will listen to others, be vulnerable and be open to change.

It is naive to think that anything less than a Damascus Road experience will cause some people to recant of their arrogance. However, it is the case that when the consensus process, rather than combative ones, are used then people do change. The less strident, the more open-minded, the persons who have not solidified too much can be drawn away from such a group arrogance. The result is that the hardcore arrogant and aggressive people become a smaller group and so less influential over time. One thing is certain – picking a fight is only going to harden the aggression coming your way.

12. The Desire to Want to Dominate Others

Some people just love hierarchy and dominating over others. For them, that is the best way to organise the work. Especially if they are in the dominating group! This is far from a healthy pathology and yet it has a long tradition in the church!

Sadly, the church has a history of favouring some groups and putting others down. The privileged in such arrangements (usually men and clergy) don’t like to see the empowerment of others. They resist and this is often one of the reasons they oppose consensus discernment processes – because it empowers the marginalised.

Sometimes all that can be done is to persist in offering a counter view on the nature of the Christian community by persevering with consensus principles. Coupled with the commitment to spending 20% of the time in prayer and devotional activities there is a chance for God’s perspective to reach people. When we pray and fellowship around the Scripture and Holy Communion it is much harder to sustain the hierarchical approach that fosters domination.

13. Authoritarian Personality 

High authoritarians prefer a strong leader. Sometimes one will hear the criticism of consensus processes that nothing gets done. Then it is said that the solution is that we need is a strong leader. Chances are that this is a person who accepts an authoritarian approach to the world. There are plenty of “Evangelical” and other churches that have authoritarian Ministers! So chances are that people who go there actually prefer not to have to make decisions.

While authoritarians prefer an individual to be the boss it is more about having clear directions and being expected to follow them. Consensus discernment seeks to come down to a decision that has very high levels of support – certainty. It also has the theological expectation that people will defer to the wisdom / discernment of the group once a decision is made. Persons with authoritarian personalities can be very loyal to the one to which they pledge allegiance. So encourage them to be loyal to the decisions of the group!

Conclusion

When people are driven by psychological traits this will affect the way that they operate in group decision-making settings. By understanding these drivers it is possible to decide which consensus discernment processes are most helpful in combatting them.

Recognizing the psychological traits that encourage people to operate in a particular way empowers you to make constructive choices about how to behave rather than get sucked into their way of doing things.

Christian behaviour – why doesn’t it happen?

man at sunset with cross behind him

Christian Behaviour doesn’t always show up

Christian behaviour is meant to be marked by a love of God and one’s neighbour. The benchmarks of Christian behaviour include spiritual disciplines that link a person with God, and a life committed to caring, doing justice and seeking the wellbeing of others above oneself.

If the hallmarks of Christian behaviour are obvious why do they consistently fail to show up? If these great attributes have been affirmed over the centuries what stops Christians from doing these things?

Sadly, we see so many examples of people who claim the name of Christ but they’re not living his way. Sure some of them will be out and out hypocrites. Yet there are way too many examples of Christian behviour that doesn’t align with Gospel imperatives for hypocrisy to explain it all.

Trump and American Evangelical Christians

President Trump has huge support among American Evangelicals. To many people this is an alarming example of Christian behaviour not aligning with Christian norms.

In the US, white “Evangelical Christians” predominantly vote Republican.  Is their slavish willingness to go along with Trump a case of political preferences overriding faith? Or could it be that the kind of mindset that disposes people to be loyal to Donald Trump is also what disposes people to be “Evangelical Christians”? (I have been using quotation marks around “Evangelical Christians.” This is to indicate that it is a title for a group of people and not a complete category. There are many Christians who are evangelical in their concern to encourage faith in Jesus who do not accept the theological framework and assumptions of those who are called “Evangelical Christian”. )

So in this post, I want to share with you a psychological analysis of Trump supporters. As you read it I invite you to consider whether the same analysis might help explain why some people are disposed to identify as “Evangelical Christians.”

A Psychological Analysis of Trump’s Support

The thoughts in this post are taken from a Psychology Today article called “A complete psychological analysis of Trump’s Support”. In the article the author suggests that science can help us make sense of the President’s apparent political invincibility.

It is incontestable that we are seeing extreme and unusual behaviour from this US President. So one is left to wonder: how is it possible to maintain such high levels of unwavering support?

The Psychology Today article notes that it brings together 14 things that have been mentioned elsewhere that may help to understand the minds of his staunch supporters. The list begins with the more benign reasons for the intransigent support for Trump. As the list goes on, the explanations become increasingly worrisome, and toward the end, border on the pathological.

I support the following view expressed by the author: “It should be strongly emphasized that not all Trump supporters are racist, mentally vulnerable, or fundamentally bad people. It can be detrimental to society when those with degrees and platforms try to demonize their political opponents or paint them as mentally ill when they are not. ” I take the same view that Christians should not demonise Christians who hold different views to themselves.

1. Practicality Trumps Morality

For some supporters, it’s simply a financial matter or supporting a President who is cutting their personal taxes, or trying to bring jobs back to America. Some people who genuinely are not racist simply want stronger immigration laws. These people have put their practical concerns above their moral ones. To them, it does not make a difference what his character is or how he gets the results – the results matter.

2. The Brain’s Attention System Is More Strongly Engaged by Trump

Donald Trump is unique in his ability to keep the brain engaged. This pattern of activity was seen even when Trump made remarks that individuals didn’t necessarily agree with. His showmanship and simple language clearly resonate with some at a visceral level.

3. America’s Obsession with Entertainment and Celebrities

To some, it doesn’t matter what Trump actually says because he’s so amusing to watch. He keeps us on the edge of our seat, and for that reason, some Trump supporters will forgive anything he says. They are happy as long as they are kept entertained.

4. Some Men Just Want to Watch the World Burn.

Some people are supporting Trump simply to be rebellious or to introduce chaos into the political system.

5. The Fear Factor: Conservatives Are More Sensitive to Threat

Science has shown that the conservative brain has an exaggerated fear response when faced with stimuli that may be perceived as threatening. A 2008 study in the journal Science found that conservatives have a stronger physiological reaction to startling noises and graphic images compared to liberals.

A brain-imaging study published in Current Biology revealed that those who lean right politically tend to have a larger amygdala — a structure that is electrically active during states of fear and anxiety. And a 2014 fMRI study found that it is possible to predict whether someone is a liberal or conservative simply by looking at their brain activity while they view threatening or disgusting images. These brain responses are automatic and not influenced by logic or reason.

6. The Power of Mortality Reminders and Perceived Existential Threat

A well-supported theory from social psychology, known as Terror Management Theory, explains why Trump’s fear mongering is doubly effective. The theory is based on the fact that humans have a unique awareness of their own mortality. In order to manage this terror, humans adopt cultural worldviews — like religions, political ideologies, and national identities — that act as a buffer by instilling life with meaning and value.

Terror Management Theory predicts that when people are reminded of their own mortality, which happens with fear mongering, they will more strongly defend those who share their worldviews and national or ethnic identity, and act out more aggressively towards those who do not. By constantly emphasizing existential threat, Trump may be creating a psychological condition that makes the brain respond positively rather than negatively to bigoted statements and divisive rhetoric.

7. The Dunning-Kruger Effect: Humans Often Overestimate Their Political Expertise

Some who support Donald Trump are under-informed or misinformed about the issues at hand. When Trump tells them that crime is skyrocketing in the United States, or that the economy is the worst it’s ever been, they simply take his word for it.

The Dunning-Kruger effect explains that the problem isn’t just that they are misinformed; it’s that they are completely unaware that they are misinformed, which creates a double burden.

8. Relative Deprivation — A Misguided Sense of Entitlement

Relative deprivation refers to the experience of being deprived of something to which one believes they are entitled. It is the discontent felt when one compares their position in life to others who they feel are equal or inferior but have unfairly had more success than them.

Common explanations for Trump’s popularity among non-bigoted voters involve economics. These Trump supporters are experiencing relative deprivation. This kind of deprivation is specifically referred to as “relative,” as opposed to “absolute,” because the feeling is often based on a skewed perception of what one is entitled to.

9. Lack of Exposure to Dissimilar Others

Intergroup contact refers to contact with members of groups that are outside one’s own, which has been experimentally shown to reduce prejudice. As such, it’s important to note that there is growing evidence that Trump’s white supporters have experienced significantly less contact with minorities than other Americans. For example, a 2016 study found that “…the racial and ethnic isolation of Whites at the zip-code level is one of the strongest predictors of Trump support.”

10. Trump’s Conspiracy Theories Target the Mentally Vulnerable

While the conspiracy theory crowd — who predominantly support Donald Trump and crackpot allies like Alex Jones and the shadowy QAnon — may appear to just be an odd quirk of modern society, some of them may suffer from psychological illnesses that involve paranoia and delusions.

Researchers found that those who were more likely to believe in outlandish conspiracy theories, such as the idea that the U.S. government created the AIDS epidemic, consistently scored high on measures of “odd beliefs and magical thinking.” One feature of magical thinking is a tendency to make connections between things that are actually unrelated in reality.

11. Trump Taps into the Nation’s Collective Narcissism

Collective narcissism is an unrealistic shared belief in the greatness of one’s national group. It often occurs when a group who believes it represents the ‘true identity’ of a nation — the ‘ingroup,’ in this case White Americans — perceives itself as being disadvantaged compared to outgroups who are getting ahead of them ‘unrightfully.’ This psychological phenomenon is related to relative deprivation (#6).

12. The Desire to Want to Dominate Others

Social dominance orientation (SDO) — which is distinct from but related to authoritarian personality (#13) — refers to people who have a preference for the social hierarchy of groups, specifically with a structure in which the high-status groups have dominance over the low-status ones. Those with SDO are typically dominant, tough-minded, and driven by self-interest.

13. Authoritarian Personality 

Authoritarianism refers to the advocacy or enforcement of strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom and is commonly associated with a lack of concern for the opinions or needs of others. Authoritarian personality is characterized by belief in total and complete obedience to authority. Those with this personality often display aggression toward outgroup members, submissiveness to authority, resistance to new experiences, and a rigid hierarchical view of society. Authoritarianism is often triggered by fear, making it easy for leaders who exaggerate threat or fear monger to gain their allegiance.

14. Racism and Bigotry

It would be grossly unfair and inaccurate to say that every one of Trump’s supporters has a prejudice against ethnic and religious minorities. However, it would be equally inaccurate to say that few do. Perhaps unsurprisingly, a recent study has shown that support for Trump is correlated with a standard scale of modern racism.

Psychology and religious conservatism

To say that there may be a psychological disposition to being religiously conservative (aka “Evangelical”) or liberal does not go to the question of who is right or wrong. However, it is important for us to understand this personal background so that we can have a better understanding of one another.

The reason that it is important to understand the drivers for people’s behaviour is because it will help us not to rush to condemn people for hypocrisy. Also, it may help us to know how to work with people of an “Evangelical” disposition so that their psychological needs can be reduced and they not continue in an expression of Christian behaviour that does not reflect the heart of the gospel message.

However, for now, I am wondering about this. Do these psychological needs and experiences that were mentioned in the article on the psychology of Trump supporters also draw people to the expression of faith that is called “Evangelical Christian”? If they do then this may go some way to explaining the high correlation between “Evangelical Christians” and support for Trump.

From the list above the only psychological trait that I would exclude from the 14 is to one “racism and bigotry”. All the others, in my experience, dispose and support people’s preference for an “Evangelical Christian” expression of faith. Some of these traits are nurtured by parts of the Bible. Most though are nurtured by preachers, church culture and social practices in “Evangelical” churches that reinforce and meet these psychological needs.

1. Practicality Trumps Morality

2. The Brain’s Attention System Is More Strongly Engaged by Trump

3. America’s Obsession with Entertainment and Celebrities

4. Some Men Just Want to Watch the World Burn.

5. The Fear Factor: Conservatives Are More Sensitive to Threat

6. The Power of Mortality Reminders and Perceived Existential Threat

7. The Dunning-Kruger Effect: Humans Often Overestimate Their Political Expertise

8. Relative Deprivation — A Misguided Sense of Entitlement

9. Lack of Exposure to Dissimilar Others

10. Trump’s Conspiracy Theories Target the Mentally Vulnerable

11. Trump Taps into the Nation’s Collective Narcissism

12. The Desire to Want to Dominate Others

13. Authoritarian Personality 

Conclusion

When people are driven by psychological traits then reason, social expectations and the harm done to others don’t change their behaviour. What some people think of as acceptable Christian behaviour clearly is not! Chances are, even allowing that people need to mature and grow as Christians if bad behaviours sticks then it could be that people are living out of personal needs and not the gospel.

In a later post, I will look at how consensus decision-making processes can help overcome intransigence by taking these psychological traits into account.

Conflict is Your Friend

Conflict is your friend

How does growth happen in a person or organization? What makes learning and new insights possible? Something new shows up! When what we know is challenged by the new (conflict) we have the opportunity to grow as a person or an organization.

No one learns anything without being challenged to revisit what they already know or believe!! Into our life comes something that invites us to think of an alternative to our exisiting behaviour, knowledge, values, beliefs, etc. Two ideas trying to occupy the same space is a conflict. Conflict invites us into a new space. Therefore conflict is our friend because it makes growth possible.

Of course, we are talking about conflict that is handled well. When these contested spaces lead to unhealthy and negative reactions then harm is done. However when handled well conflict – in the sense of choices between different options – is an indispensable gift that makes imcreased maturity possible.

Healthy engagement builds trust and confidence

When people make their different points of view known they can do it in a way that is encouraging of discussion or in a way that is attacking. The latter approach generates negativity and breaks down relationships.
However when our different perspectives, knowledge and experience are shared in a humble and gentle way relationships are strengthened. By sharing important things – even different ones – people deepen their relationships.
By being able to work through our differences in ways that build up, and not pull down, we can learn to trust each other. We can believe that the other person wants the best for us and themselves. When we succeed in navigating significant differences we build confidence in our interpersonal skills and the quality of our relationships.

Relationship can be restored and strengthened

We all have times when we don’t welcome new ideas or the people who bring them! When handled badly conflict can break relationships. But what if you don’t let those bad feelings fester? Things can improve.
Don’t run away from the people with whom you have had a bad experience in conflict. If you possibly can, seek them out and try to start the conversation over. Don’t put the blame on them for the strain in the relationship. Own your part and let them decide what they will own up to. Use “I” statements so that you keep the focus on what you have seen, heard, said, felt, interpreted and done.
My experience is that when I do “the hard yards” in seeking to overcome a negative conflict then it makes the relationship better. There is something deeply satisfying and encouraging when we get over a bad experience of conflict. Such experiences give us confidence that if we can fix this then we can handle bigger issues too.

Issues are decisively resolved

One of the best things that you can do when you have a conflict is to admit that it exists. Ignoring conflicts never causes them to go away. Instead they undermine relationships and often lead to negativity.

When there are differences of opinion in a group get them out in the open. Help people to share their thoughts.  Create a safe space for talking together. Specifically invite people to share their ideas. Use processes that are respectful of all voices and give them a chance to be heard.

Once you know what the issues are then you can resolve them. A consensus building process is a great way to get all the ideas out there and to get to a resolution. No one likes problems that just keep hanging around! Name the differences, talk about them and work out a solution together.

New insights and discoveries made

Once again The Beatles got it right. They sang “Nothing you can know that isn’t known. Nothing you can see that isn’t shown.” (All You Need is Love, Yellow Submarine, 1969). Yep – we need people to share their knowledge and insights. Unless people do that then we live stunted, narrow and ineffective lives.

I can never understand churches that think they already know everything and refuse to listen to new ideas! Churches that stop hearing and engaging with new ideas will not gain new insights and discoveries. Any church that says that it has it all worked out is both arrogant and wrong. They condemn their church and members to living as stunted, narrow and ineffective disciples.

A group is energized

“Success breeds success” is an old and accurate saying. When individuals or groups get things done it encourages them to do it again. So when groups learn to cope with differences in a healthy way they are no longer worried about differences. Groups learn that new insights are creative, positive and make good decisions possible.
Groups are energised when conflict is handled well. This is in contrast with groups that are paralysed by conflict because it is such a painful experience. Give energy to your group by helping it to learn and appreciate different points of view and experiences.

People are engaged

A key reason that people behave badly in conflict situations is so that they can get their way. People frighten, bully and belittle opponents to silence them. When people are intimidated in a conflict they withdraw and stay on the sidelines. They are not engaged.

However if you create a positive culture about how to handle differences among people then everyone stays in the conversation. Then people become excited about the new possibilities, or what they are learning from others.

A powerful witness is given

Sadly we live in a world where negative conflict (combat) is the norm. Our societies are at risk of fracturing as groups move into armed camps and enclaves. Our world needs the church to witness to another way of being in community at the points of our disagreement.

The heart of the gospel is the reconcilliation of the whole of creation to God and to one another. What a wonderful hope to offer a world where the different are demonized and attacked!! Christians have an amazing opportunity to point to another way of dealing with difference. It is a way that shows respect, care and openness to the other. Sadly too many churches are caught up in the culture of our times and attack those who are different. My encouragement to you is to see the way that you handle conflict as, probably, the most evangelical act that you can engage in at this time.

Conclusion

Conflict is like fire. It is both dangerous and comforting. It is life threatening and life enriching. Like fire, handled well, conflict makes our life so much better.