What do you think about . . . Three Rules for When to be Still

What do you think about . . . Three Rules for When to be Still January 19, 2017

uZYSV4nuQeyq64azfVIn_15130980706_64134efc6e_o_optI often get asked why I do not write on every Big Story of the Day. This sort of question caused me to step back and think: “What should I write? What are my goals? What should my goals be?” If you like to think, and your preferred method is to process “out loud,” learning to be silent on a topic is as important as speaking.

As a result, I have three rules for when I should be silent on a topic.

Don’t write about topics on which I have no expertise, even as a layman. 

Sometimes I am quiet because I have nothing interesting to say, though as daily readers know, this does not always stop me. (Hello Dad and Mom!)  I do not write on global warming because I have not done enough research to have an opinion worth hearing.

I could say something, but it would be mish-mosh of what I read on the BBC, NPR, National Review, and some of the pop science sites I frequent. Perhaps on the back porch with Dad and the men of Celtic Evensong (where opinions like the drink flow freely), I might opine.

Nobody else needs to hear it.

I am not saying one has to be an expert to have an opinion. I am no literature scholar, but after a lifetime of reading, teaching, and watching Shakespeare, there might be some helpful things that have come from it to other amateurs. Of course, when writing on topics outside my academic wheelhouse (Plato, epistemology, and philosophy of religion), I should accept quick correction from real experts.

The other day on Twitter, historian John Fea gave me a different perspective on US Grant. I could have argued, but he has done far more reading so I was a student and not the teacher. This is good fun! An advantage of social media is the ability for those of us who love to read to get to interact with real experts!

I have said all I have to say on a topic fairly recently.

Everyone has ideas that are themes to writing or topics about which we do have something to say. For example, I have followed Republican politics all my life and have strong opinions about President Trump’s fitness for office, but I have said those things fairly recently. I am not going to repeat them for a bit. Why?

Repeating my opinions too frequently has (at least for me) two risks:

One can easily become a bore. 

Again, anybody who gets paid to teach, talk, and opine has the risk of becoming a monomaniac. I am particularly prone to such temptations . . . when I like I topic, I can easily spend all my time thinking about it. Just now, I am very interested in the Panama Canal.

This does not mean anybody else is.

As a result, I try to keep Titanic, Romanov, and Star Trek references down. This does not always go well, but at least I try!

One can start writing to join the Good Kids Club, but should not.

Most of us like to be liked. Sometimes I will write a piece, because courage is required. That is good and generally will mean speaking truth to people more powerful than I am in a community I love. Picking on the powerless publically when they make errors is to be a cad and making fun of the “other team” just to get a shout out from your team is to be a sycophant.

Let me give you an honest example.

like the Republican Party and I enjoy doing talk radio. Some of things I have had to say in this election have not helped my relationships in either place. That makes me sad. One is tempted to write something to get into the Good Kids Club there. Simultaneously, I am an academic with many academic friends. This present Republican Party is very unpopular, unprecedentedly hated (for good or bad), and I am tempted to become the “good Republican” in those groups.

Both temptations must be avoided because they make big, important issues about me. One should not use opposition to evils, such as a racism, as a means to become a Cool Kid. It is false, loathsome, and proud. Best to say what needs to be said, say what I mean, and then be still.

Don’t try to get into clubs. CS Lewis warns of this danger in That Hideous Strength and just now that book is worth a read.

Jeremiads are generally for Jeremiah: be for the good far more than being against the bad.

We all learn in school that the easiest essay to write is the “what is wrong with this” essay. Agreeing with a book and reviewing it is much harder than criticism. As a result, there is a tendency in those of us who did well in school to keep writing that essay.

If you love a thing, as Jeremiah loved Jerusalem, then writing tough words about Jerusalem might be good. Most of us are called to spend time learning to love better . . . we need to practice loving Jerusalem far more than rebuking.

Being silent is a powerful position. I have learned from my very quiet wife just how powerful. It is not a power that comes to me naturally, but one that, by God’s grace, I am learning.


Browse Our Archives