BEFORE I FORGET – A final thought for the evening #17

DO YOU SPEAK DONKEY? – It seems that many do, given the high incidence of ‘donkey logic’ and the ongoing debates with donkeys.

In 350 BC, Aristotle wrote: “…a man, being just as hungry as thirsty, and placed in between food and drink, must necessarily remain where he is and starve to death.”

This paradox has more recently been coined “Buridan’s ass”, where the ‘man’ is replaced by a ‘donkey’ which cannot make a rational decision whether to eat the day or drink the water.

Donkey’s have become the brunt of such analogies over time, and yet, I would wager that most of them would know exactly what to do in a situation like this – as animals are driven by their innate instincts. Mankind on the other hand, often supersedes instinct with indecision – ironically due to indecision or non sequitur logic.

In some cases, we don’t think. At other times, we think too much. Both lead to us either making the wrong decision or none.

In life, we sometimes cross paths with those who apply this special trait, and we are tempted to engage them with cogent and fact-based discussion.

For my part, I was guided early. When I attended Arima Boys’ RC School, Mr. Claude Mannette introduced us to Mark Twain (Tom Sawyer and other works). In guiding us through the study of the books, Mr. Mannette shared several of Twain’s famous quotes. One of them was: “Don’t argue with a fool, those looking on may not know the difference.” Now, for those who may remember him, Mr. Mannette used ‘colourful’ language. Instead of “fool”, he used “ass”. Now that I am writing this, I recall he also introduced us to the words “asinine”.

Later, I came across the fable of “The Donkey and the Tiger”:

The donkey said to the tiger:

- "The grass is blue".

The tiger replied:

- "No, the grass is green."

The discussion heated up, and the two decided to submit to arbitration, and for this they went before the lion, the King of the Jungle.

Already before reaching the forest clearing, where the lion was sitting on his throne, the donkey began to shout:

- "Your Highness, is it true that the grass is blue?".

The lion replied:

- "True, the grass is blue."

The donkey hurried and continued:

- "The tiger disagrees with me and contradicts and annoys me, please punish him."

The king then declared:

- "The tiger will be punished with 5 years of silence."

The donkey jumped cheerfully and went on his way, content and repeating:

- "The grass is BLUE!"

The tiger accepted his punishment, but before he asked the lion:

- "Your Majesty, why have you punished me? After all, the grass is green."

The lion replied:

- "In fact, the grass is green."

The tiger asked:

- "So why are you punishing me?".

The lion replied:

- "That has nothing to do with the question of whether the grass is blue or green. The punishment is because it is not possible for a brave and intelligent creature like you to waste time arguing with a donkey, and on top of that come and bother me with that question."

Like the pitiful donkey, despite mountains of evidence, many are bound by their incapacity to understand and accept facts (and cling to “alternative” ones). This is at times exacerbated by a cognitive bias in which people with limited competence in a particular domain, overestimate their abilities. This is known as the ‘Dunning-Kruger’ effect. This is why there are ‘flat earthers’ spending their lives trying to prove everyone else wrong.

Given how limited time is, it is really a waste of it, arguing with fools and fanatics. Their goal is not to arrive at ‘truth’, but some version of consensus where their beliefs, delusions and worldview are accepted.

As someone whose career and social work is founded on ‘communications’, I know first-hand this experience. I will concede that I do deliberately waste a little time here and there, having arguments with such folks. To me, it is an experiment – a test if you will – to help me hone my own position. It’s like a sharp knife being stroked against the whetstone. Or maybe that’s my ‘donkey brain cells’ telling me that. Perhaps I just really have some belief that they may have an 'ah-hah moment'. 

Nonetheless, I limit myself to no more than 15 minutes in such an encounter. Maybe 30 – if they present a particularly novel opinion that I have never heard before.

Too bad, instead of Spanish being deemed (in 1995) T&T's 2nd language, we should have added 'Donkey' to the curriculum. In that way, we might be able to translate better.

Even though we should neither fall prey to the logic of donkeys, nor argue with them, the louder ignorance screams, the more silent intelligence becomes. So, we should use our voices and platforms to reinforce facts, reason, sense, logic, science, evidence-based rationale, and the truth!

After all, as Eric Williams advised, an appropriate prescription to the debilitating and frustrating dilemma of donkeys, is to “Let the jackass bray!”.

Eventually their throat will become hoarse!

– Rudolph Hanamji