Cynicism

1775: 

If we’re hoping to reach people face to face, without the use of computers, we need to come up with a very interesting form of ‘total delivery package’. If we want to connect in a more interesting and inspiring way we have to learn about how new information like ours is taken in.

Firstly we’re up against a whole lot of cynicism. People have good reason not to trust new information. If we really want to educate one-on-one, we have to wait for the other person’s willingness to be receptive. In other words, tedious though it may be, we have to wait for permission to speak. Without that we drive away any listener, unless we have an audience of drones. And surely the Animal Rights movement doesn’t simply want tame agreement to what’s being told. We don’t want people who will accept any old life-recipe. Our cause needs imaginative, creative people, and difficult-to-persuade people, whose sense of free-will is strongly embedded. We need those who will challenge our ideas and stop us becoming complaisant and dull.

But when it comes down to the actual information we aim to pass on, we must be prepared for questions. We will be judged by our ability to answer questions and by the manner in which we do that. Which brings us to the other important consideration. It’s not just information people want, but their instinctive willingness to identify with those with the information. If we can’t answer the big questions for the cynical listener we won’t break through their protective shield. We won’t even get the ‘big questions’ asked in the first place, unless we’re approachable as people. Today the no-questions-asked audience doesn’t exist! There’s nothing forcing anyone to listen to us, let alone agree with us.