Convincing fanatics

Today I watched a segment of an Al-Jazeera show in which an Arabic female psychologist engaged in a debate with several Muslims, including a cleric, about the problems being created by the intolerance of Muslims. She was vehement, clear, concise and correct in her analysis of the situation. She was also totally wrong in her approach.

It's not enough to be right. Everyone believes they are right. Having a battle of "rightness" never results in one side being convinced that it was wrong. What the psychologist said would never and could never convince a fanatic to change his/her values. By vigorously propounding her point of view (and mine), she probably widened the schism between sides and entrenched the fanatics more firmly than before in their position.

You can't change a moral or religious conviction through discussion and argument. Such behavior serves to polarize rather than enlighten. Technically, as a psychologist, I know that she knows better. It's gratifying to take the high ground, to be morally superior AND to be right. But argument just isn't effective in changing anyone's values. The ONLY way values get changed is through internal re-programming leading to behavioral change. Internal re-programming of values can only take place in an un-emotional and non-defensive posture. When the other person, the one to be convinced, is on the defensive, it is hopeless to appeal to reason. It's also hopeless to attempt to force people to be aware of the conflict in their own internal value set, since that part of the personality (the Parent state) has no internal monitor for dissonance, which is why we can go for years without realizing that we believe mutually contradictory things.

Values change from the inside, not from the outside. Values can change when people are in a non-defensive posture and are exposed to new information and data. If you don't know how to elicit a non-defensive posture and internal discussion in the other person, you will find it almost impossible to have any real impact on their values. Television has caused more change in values than any number of discussions or arguments or polemics. The impact of television, ostensibly neutral and non-parental, probably contributed to a major degree to the changes in values in Russia that ultimately led to the collapse of the Soviet regime. The Muslim world is being heavily influenced by Western television, and as a result the senior clerics are increasingly aware of the changes being induced in their culture in favor of Western liberal values. I'm sure this is causing them increasing anxiety and an awareness that they are losing control of the general value system of the people in their world.

I think the psychologist on the video has done more harm than good by emphasizing the polarization between positions. A lot of harm can be done by naive and well-meaning people, especially when they are right.