If You Were Right I Would Agree With You

When arguing on social media (an admittedly futile effort that I undertake solely because I like to debate a position), recently I have taken to asking for evidence from a credible source. “Link to your reputable sources, please. I await your response” is now my standard reply to those who cite nebulous claims about a subject.

This was may response to a recent discussion on Iran. You know the one (Obama paid billions to Iran. Iran never upheld the treaty anyway. We will get a better deal). Like a chess match, the opening was fairly standard and developed into the “Iran broke the treaty and Obama did nothing” gambit. I countered with the deadly “ Link to your reputable sources, please. I await your response.” Time passed. I was confident that my opponent had resigned himself to his inability to counter the move.

Then came his answer, a link to a report from what I would agree was a credible source. As I read the summary statement, there it was, his evidence……. “On numerous occasions Iran had violated the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT), of which it was a signatory”.

I was stunned. I pride myself of staying abreast of the news. After all, I read the Times, the Post, the Economist, and Twitter. How could I have missed this? Could I be wrong? I would have to review my thinking, perhaps change my position.

As I delved into the multi-page report, it became apparent that my adversary had not. Those violations of the NPT were what lead to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) signed the five permanent members of the UN Security council and the EU (5P+1) and Iran. There had been no violations of the plan by Iran. HA!! I had him. I copied and pasted the relevant sections and waited.

A day passed and then came the response. My worthy opponent admitted that he was wrong. But more than that, he said that he would have to review what he thought he knew about JCPOA.

As I thought about this exchange, my spirits lifted. Far from the bitter name calling that infiltrates most online chatter, this was civil. Far from the dug in positions, this was fluid with each willing to consider the idea that he might be wrong. Far from devaluing each other, I believe that we grew in mutual respect. Far from the reality of echo chambered “sharing”, this was a microcosm of the potential of honest interaction.

The challenge for me, now, is to continue to think differently. To perhaps reorganize my critical thinking tool chest, to move to a more prominent position the possibility that “I might be wrong.”