Continuing to build on the last two posts, I offer this next step in understanding the Ladder of Inference as a reflection on why we so often misunderstand one another and how it is impacting our ability to communicate and build any kind of commonality or consensus.

In the application phase (last post) I shared three examples of ways people climb the ladder of inference that cause difficulties, and all three examples involved partisan politics. The reason I selected those three examples (and alluded to others) is that EVERYTHING today is political! No matter what one says, no matter what one means, no matter what one intends, someone is going to filter it through their own personal political perspective. Support immigration, you are anti-Trump. Oppose cuts to Medicaid and SNAP and you are anti-Trump. Oppose the inhumane, violent, and tragic killing of Palestinian women and children and you are antisemitic. Call for due process and protection of the Constitution and you are anti-American. Say you are for something, and people will decide for you what you are against and attack you for it.

In the past few years, a troubling and dangerous truth has emerged in our culture: facts don’t matter, reality is malleable, science is suspect, intelligence is overrated, expertise is optional, and opinion defines what is true. One’s beliefs are no longer shaped by reliable and verifiable data, information, and knowledge. Instead, one’s beliefs and biases define what data, information, and knowledge we will accept. Subjectivity is king. Everything is a conspiracy. Nothing can be trusted, except the most egregious and outrageous lies. Proof is irrelevant. History is meaningless. Research is for idiots. Empathy is weakness. How in the world can we make our way out of this miasma of misery and misperception?

I believe one of the most essential early steps to take is to differentiate the intellectual from the emotional. Today, emotions reign supreme and run amok. What we feel is dictating what we think, not the other way around. People are emotionally charged and energized and too often we think the best way to confront them is with information and reason. But information and reason are only powerful tools in the realm of the intellect. We tend to believe that rational and reasonable people will be respectful. They will address each other with some measure of decorum and civility. They won’t name call, not talk down to, not attack or insult. They will focus on the positive and how to resolve differences. The measures of maturity include patience, kindness, mercy, empathy, tolerance, forgiveness, and more than a smidgen of self-control. Is that what we are witnessing in our culture and our politics today?

No, when even the most rational and reasonable among us find ourselves stressed out, fearful for the future, disgusted with the past, despairing in the present moment, we tend not to act in the most productive ways. When we feel like the house is on fire, wisdom and common sense fly out the window. Disagreements occur. We seek someone to blame, someone to hold responsible. We grow suspicious and dubious. We make assumptions and ascribe malicious intent. We lose trust and see opponents as enemies. Courtesy, compassion, and consideration disappear. We leap up the ladder of inference, assuming the very worst and looking for anything and everything that supports our distrust and disgust. It is not a pretty picture, and it is not a healthy place to be. It is made worse when our most prominent politicians and corporate leaders model the absolute worst behaviors, beliefs, and interpersonal dynamics.

My simple assessment of our current political situation is that the left witnesses the emotional upset in our country and says, “O don’t feel that way. Just be nice. Everything is fine,” while the right says, “We hear you, we feel your pain, and we’re going to change things.” Disregard whether either side is being honest. Think about it. The worst thing you can tell someone who is upset is “calm down, just relax.” When someone is emotionally distraught, they want nothing more than someone who will acknowledge and accept their pain.

Reflecting on the ladder of inference it is an excellent intellectual tool for understanding how emotions can undermine our best communication practices. It asserts that a whole variety of factors contribute to the creation of our beliefs. What it doesn’t do is explain what happens when our beliefs become the baseline filter through which we receive data and information, make assumptions, draw conclusions, and take action. That’s where we will go next as we transition from reflection to implications (PARIS – presentation, application, reflection, implications, strategy).