More chimpanzee inkblot test

Two days ago, I commented on the flap surrounding the New York Post chimpanzee cartoon. Well, it is still meandering its weary way through the “national” media, like a soap opera that refuses to end.

Nevertheless, there is something that we can learn out of all this, as Christians. Part of our family’s missionary training was on the whole subject of perceptions. What does that mean? Well, perception is what I alluded to in response to one of the people who responded to my post. I commented, “So often, when counseling couples in trouble, I am struck by how the couple being counseled persistently interprets motions or phrases in the worst possible manner. That is why ‘trust building measures’ are so often a part of counseling a couple. You start with small things and work up until the couple is not pathologically misinterpreting each other.” In other words, depending on people’s backgrounds, experiences, and training, they can look at the same set of data and come to different conclusions. One of the most important part of our training was to try and not immediately judge the other person’s conclusion, but to stop and try to understand what led them to that conclusion.

You see, by understanding the process behind the conclusion, you could decide whether you needed to work on the differences in conclusion to bring about change, whether you needed to simply shrug your shoulders and put it down to allowable differences, or whether you needed to change your personal conclusion. In some cases, such as the Israelis/Palestinian conflict, like a troubled marriage, they are so angry with each other that even innocent gestures can lead to the worst possible conclusions. Thus, trust-building measures are trying to be used by all the negotiators involved in that conflict, with the hope of slowly building up to a lasting settlement. That is, they both need to learn how to reach different conclusions when they look at data. And, no, terrorist bombers are actually only a small part of the equation, though we may find that hard to believe here in the USA.

The “conversation on race” in the USA is fraught with the perils of a couple in a troubled marriage. Because of the many years the history of race relations in the USA, we have a tendency to draw inappropriately negative conclusions about each other. And, both sides are guilty of doing so. In fact, if we want to have a “conversation on race” in the USA, all of us need to admit that we are guilty of, at times, looking at events in the worst possible interpretation. But, just like a troubled marriage, we both need to admit that we know how to push each other’s buttons in order to get an over-reaction that allows us to declare the other guilty and ourselves innocent. I have conluded that this is what happened with the New York Post article. If the editor did not know that a button was being pushed, he/she needs to retire. But, I suspect that was an episode of deliberate button-pushing. Its purpose was to be able to posture innocently while accusing the other side of an inappropriate response. And, frankly, it works just like in a marriage. Push the right button and you can guarantee an inappropriate response by the other spouse.

So, was there an inappropriate response to the cartoon? Very probably so. But, was the more guilty party the New York Post for button-pushing? I would say, clearly so.

But, in this whole area, there is hope. The outcry was actually limited, and it is the news media that is trying to still keep it alive. The President did not even bother to respond, which was actually the same advice that we give spouses in a troubled marriage. Do not respond quickly. Take a breath and make sure you are interpreting events correctly and that your response is appropriate.

In fact, this country just engaged in one of the largest trust building measure in this country’s history. WE elected an African-American. That trust building measure is already having very positive results in the “conversation on race” that the USA is having.