We’ve updated our Terms of Use to reflect our new entity name and address. You can review the changes here.
We’ve updated our Terms of Use. You can review the changes here.

#1300 Better Arguments

from 2018 by Listening to America with Clay Jenkinson

/
  • Streaming + Download

    Includes high-quality download in MP3, FLAC and more. Paying supporters also get unlimited streaming via the free Bandcamp app.
    Purchasable with gift card

      name your price

     

about

Clay and David discuss how to conduct better arguments, and also speak with author Joseph Ellis to talk about his new book American Dialogue, which will be released this fall. Professor Joseph Ellis is the author of a great number of books about the founding fathers, including some of our favorites.

There's talk of violence against journalists; how can we ratchet down our national discourse rather than continue to ratchet it up? Jefferson's mantra was, 'We disagree, but if we do, we disagree as rational friends,' and Dr. Ellis is saying, disagreement is the beginning of wisdom and harmony.

---

DS: 00:02 Good day, Thomas Jefferson Hour podcast listeners, and thank you for listening. Without you, we are nothing.

CSJ: 00:10 We are nothing. David Swenson, the semipermanent guest host of the Thomas Jefferson Hour, we're in studio this week, we have a special conversation

DS: 00:18 It was a fun show. I just — I really enjoyed myself this week.

CSJ: 00:23 Our old friend Joe Ellis, Dr Joseph — Mount Holyoke — called us from Vermont, called you and said he's got a new book coming in, would we like to talk a little bit about it?

DS: 00:32 And I said, yeah, of course, but why don't you come on early before the book's out and we can just kinda talk about what's coming. And he said, really do you think anybody would be interested? I said, yes.

CSJ: 00:44 You know, I expected this to be kind of friendly proforma. And then we got into this conversation and it got deep fast.

DS: 00:50 Yeah.

CSJ: 00:50 I was surprised at a couple of things. First of all, he's using his, his lifelong study of the founding fathers in American history to talk about the current troubled situation and not just about the presidents.

DS: 01:03 He was troubled too. He is troubled, and then listening to the two of you, I kind of wanted to jump in and say, now, wait a minute, guys, you know, this is just one little piece of history in a long, a long period of our nation. It's going to come and go. As alarming as it is —

CSJ: 01:21 Two steps forward. One step back.

DS: 01:23 Yep.

CSJ: 01:24 But I think a lot of his liberal friends think two steps forward, seven steps back. Some people think we're heading towards the dark ages here. He's, he's a relative optimist, but he is concerned and he wanted to see what you always do. So when I get worked up on the show, as I do sometimes, you say, wait a minute, this is not the first time we've had this, the founding of this, we've done this before.

DS: 01:45 Excuse me, but you know who taught me that.

CSJ: 01:47 I know, but, but the point is we do that for each other —

DS: 01:49 Jefferson, yeah —

CSJ: 01:50 But I wanted to hear him say what in our history is parallel or analogous or helps us think about this in context. And he does, he's great about this. He says, look, this is not our first rodeo. We've been here before, but he did say that the lack of civility and deportment and respect for our basic norms by the current president is unprecedented. He said there'd been other populists, even demagogic presidents, but this was the first one that's made a kind of a hobby out of just nihilistic, shattering all the norms. And so I think that's why he's alarmed.

DS: 02:28 Well, you know, and it's, I think people on both sides of the arguments are alarmed — before we get away from it again, the name of his book and it's coming out in October.

CSJ: 02:38 Knopf, American Dialogue: The Founders and Us.

DS: 02:42 And rumor has it this may become a Jefferson Hour book club entry.

CSJ: 02:46 It is going to be. He's agreed to come on. He sending us the proofs to read the book in advance.

DS: 02:50 Terrific.

CSJ: 02:51 I'm very excited about it. He said that — He said, interestingly, he said to me, Clay, you and I are not going to agree on my treatment of Jefferson, but I'm very eager to have the conversation about it, and I thought —

DS: 03:01 What a great —

CSJ: 03:04 I can't wait, now I'm intrigued.

DS: 03:04 So we do talk about the five features of better arguments in the show and a couple of other things, but mostly we talked to professor Ellis in the second segment, so hope you enjoy this.

CSJ: 03:13 So I'm going to ask our listeners, our podcast listeners to write to us. Here's what I want them to say. There are people who think that we are on the edge of madness, darkness and national collapse and there are people who think, thank God Almighty, we are going to be saved because of Donald Trump. Finally, someone's standing up to the, to the establishment. On a scale of one to 10, I want to ask our listeners, how concerned are you? If 10 means the house is on fire and we may not survive this, and one is, no, this is, this is good even, this is good, good, healthy, shaking up of our system. Where are you? I'd like to have people say from their own point of view, not trying to please anybody, but just speak the truth, where you are on the concern scale. Are you jubilant that Donald Trump is shaking the world or are you as alarmed as it's possible to be or somewhere in the middle and people write to us we'll — and they can put in little sentence, we'll quote some of them.

DS: 04:12 We could do a whole show on that.

CSJ: 04:13 I'd like to hear what people have to say because, I'll tell you what, I meet people every day who say this is the end of civilization as we know it, but I also meet people everyday who say, this is fantastic. We needed this. We did. The system was broken. We were. We need to shake it up. We need draining.

DS: 04:31 I like to think the system was written for times like this in order to change. Correct. Listen. You know, it's who's paying attention and who's making them a squeaky wheel.

CSJ: 04:41 Well we'll see, but I would very much be interested in getting a kind of a barometric reading of our listenership about where you think this is and how alarmed you are, if you are alarmed or how jubilant you are, if that's your response. And so the more people that we get to respond to this, the more of a real survey we'll have. I don't presume anything. I think Jefferson is a crossover figure. I was thinking about him today. David, you know, he's really a radical libertarian and so he's a tea party guy. He's a Pat Buchanan guy in certain moods, but he also is a progressive. He's a man of the enlightenment. It would be almost impossible to say what Jefferson would actually think if he popped into the world in 2018. I think that it's a mistake to presume that we know what he would be by now since of course he died on July 4th, 1826 on the 50th anniversary of the signing of the declaration — of the writing of the declaration of independence.

DS: 05:37 So let's go to the show. And I didn't really credit this fellow as much as maybe I should have during it. But the beginning of our first segment of the, of the show is, is about five features of better arguments. I have to credit Eric Lou, a former speech writer and policy advisor in the Clinton administration. And this comes from a presentation he did at the Aspen Ideas Festival, co-hosted by the Atlantic magazine and the Aspen Institute.

CSJ: 06:04 I want to go to that festival. I also want to say to people, I just came off my 17th trip up the Wendover death march on the Lewis and Clark cultural tour. I was not drowned. I did not have a heart attack. I did cough up a lung a couple of times, but I want to invite people —

DS: 06:18 What a wonderful image.

CSJ: 06:19 I want to invite people to come to the humanities retreats this winter, January 13th through 18th, Water and the West. It's the book club you always wanted. January 19th through 24th, Shakespeare Without Tears. And then our cultural tour in March, March second through eighth, John Steinbeck's California. So go to Jeffersonhour.com to get details on these. These are filling up fast. I want people to just come and have the book discussions they have always dreamed of having in a beautiful serene, retro kind of resort just west of Missoula. So look for all of that. Steinbeck's, California, Shakespeare Without Tears, and Water and the West. Let's listen now to this out of character edition, with the great Dr Joseph Ellis, of the Thomas Jefferson Hour.

DS: 07:13 Good day citizens, and welcome to the Thomas Jefferson Hour, your weekly conversation with or about President Thomas Jefferson. Seated across from me this week is the creator of the Thomas Jefferson Hour, Mr Clay Jenkinson. I'm your host, David Swenson, and it's good to see you Clay.

CSJ: 07:31 Back from the annual Lewis and Clark cultural tour in Montana and Idaho. Not drowned. I didn't die on the Wendover death march and I just want to say before we go on, these trips, these cultural tours are so much fun. The next to our winter retreats at Lochsa lodge west to Missoula, one on water in the west and one on Shakespeare without tears. And then there's the John Steinbeck tour of Monterey and the Central Valley of California. I just love these tours, David and people can find out more about them at Jeffersonhour.com

DS: 08:01 And I'm glad to see you back. Safe and sound.

CSJ: 08:06 Tan, rested.

DS: 08:06 In one piece. Not drowned

CSJ: 08:06 Not drowned.

DS: 08:07 And at peace with Becky. She didn't get after you this time.

CSJ: 08:13 Well, the thing is she see she continued with her daughter Jessie and so I don't know if Jesse's even alive, but I know that I was in a kayak and I very much —

DS: 08:22 I hope she heard that almost love letter that you read to her.

CSJ: 08:26 I read the letter aloud at lochsa lodge on the final night and I was crying because I love Becky and the people realize that this is — we've had what, 20 years of working together. We're kind of moving in slightly different directions now, but they saw like we're brother, sister love.

DS: 08:45 She was able to take your abuse for 20 years and you were able to take hers.

CSJ: 08:49 Ditto honey.

DS: 08:51 No, no. There was a time. So, um, we live in some pretty, what's the correct word?

CSJ: 08:57 Volitle, let's call it volatile.

DS: 08:59 And a couple of things I've run into that I wanted to talk to you about, one I can't credit, um, because I can't remember what it — It was, uh, you know, it was how to, how to better argue points with different political thoughts. And the statement of the article was, it's not a good place to start a political conversation with, who did you vote for? It's much better to start from a point of what do you believe in, what do you stand for? I thought that was good advice. I mean, pretty simplistic, but good advice.

CSJ: 09:37 Jeffersonian too. Look for the common ground. So when he would write a letter to somebody that he was at odds with, he was a master at this, and he would do everything in his power on the first page to show common ground. They understood each other's children —

DS: 09:52 Artificial good humor.

CSJ: 09:53 And he would — so then there'll be as establishment of harmony and a common understanding of what it is to be an American and a common goal. We all want peace or we all want a balanced budget or we all want a mix between states' rights and federal authority, and once he had done everything in his power to find as much common ground as possible, then he would say, 'now my friend, we may disagree, but if we do, we disagree as rational friends, I have a different view of the alien and sedition laws than you do and I'm going to play it out. I might be wrong, I probably am wrong, but these are my own convictions. They're honest convictions. There's no posturing in them,' so you see what Jefferson was doing. He was constantly putting in disclaimers. He was saying that he might not be righteous, he might not know everything. He might need to be better informed, and he also wanted to make sure that he didn't break with people he cared about just because they had serious, sometimes really serious policy disagreements.

DS: 10:51 Well, I know it's really difficult sometimes in, using your word, the volatile times that we live in to understand those who you disagree with and disagreements are pretty severe. I mean, if they're turning into violence, so as I say at Jefferson Hour, I'm very proud when people say, well, what's the show about? And it's — what it is, is it's about civil discourse. We can disagree without flying into some rage or passion. So I thought, okay, well what can we do to help people with that?

CSJ: 11:23 You know, I've been trying to self restrain myself, David, because we do live in a very interesting moment here and we're all stirred up. I think there's a national, chaotic energy that's floating around. Everyone's worried, everyone's angry, everyone's upset, frustrated, suspicious. There's a whole anxiety that's really deeply woven into everything now that happens. I think it's having a really erosive effect on our national fabric, and so I feel like it's my duty to the extent that I can as a humanities scholar who spent a lot of time studying the past to try to ratchet things down, to place them in a historical context to make sure I check my own politics and my own opinions as much as possible to be aware that, I mean, I think the key Jeffersonian insight is that the other guy has a point. Boy, that's hard to remember. So if you take someone like Michael Savage or Sean Hannity and you're watching, I mean this to be centrist, whoever it is that you're watching or listening to. You need to think, 'that person has a point. I may disagree. There may even be some serious disputes about facts on the ground, but that person has a legitimate point of view and why do I think that my point of view is so much more legitimate than hers,' that way madness lies, and so legitimizing with respect, with real respect, points of view that are not your own, is almost the key to being a mature human being and all of us fail. I know I do. This just happens, but we have to check it. We have to — at no point in my lifetime has it been more necessary, I think, to self restrain when you think you're right.

DS: 13:11 Agreed.

CSJ: 13:12 It's hard though.

DS: 13:13 Really hard.

CSJ: 13:13 Really, really hard.

DS: 13:14 In that spirit — I came across an article that was published in the Atlantic by Conor Friedersdorf. He was at an Aspen Institute and a gentleman by the name of Eric Lou, who used to be part of the Clinton administration, presented five features of better arguments.

CSJ: 13:33 So there are five things we can do to make our arguments — and you don't mean an argument in the sense of shouting at each other about our, our disputes are our conversations more civil —

DS: 13:42 And it's a little, it's a little simplistic, but I thought I would go through it and maybe have you comment and see what you think — or give Jefferson —

CSJ: 13:49 I'll provide a Jeffersonian comment.

DS: 13:50 Okay, so number one, take winning off the table. Rather than seeking victory, the goal should be truth-seeking with a reinstitution of civility in service of achieving it. Participants are charged with arguing in order to better understand.

CSJ: 14:08 That's one hundred percent Jeffersonian — is try to find in the other point of view that what you think is legitimate. Bend over backwards to try to see what doesn't really ring true to you. But above all to say we're friends here. We're both Americans here. We need to get through this together.

DS: 14:28 Funny you should say we're both Americans here because I think that sort of our — in our nature as Americans as we go into, we are right. We're going to convince the other guy you are wrong. I mean it takes a certain vulnerability to go in and say, well, maybe I am wrong. Maybe the point of this is not to win, but that single approach I think would really further things. It's difficult to do.

CSJ: 14:55 So Franklin said, and Jefferson quoted him in his letter to his grandson in 1808. Franklin would say, instead of arguing, ask, followup questions to tease out that person's thought. 'Why do you feel that immigration is destroying America? Why do you feel that the trillion dollar deficit is going to lead to the death of American civilization? Why do you believe that Obamacare is the worst thing that was ever passed by the Congress of the United States?' Ask follow up questions and ask them with respect. You're not trying to trap somebody in some sort of a Socratic way. You're saying, 'what's the basis of your view of that?' And that will then maybe lead to some sort of a common ground.

DS: 15:35 I think that's, that's the trick, is finding a common ground to start from — take winning off the table.

CSJ: 15:44 Take winning off the table even though we all want to win.

DS: 15:46 Yup. "Number two, prioritize relationships and listen passionately. As one audience member put it, the most constructive and rewarding arguments they've ever had have involved people with whom maintaining a good relationship afterward was a high priority [an impetus] for speaking and listening carefully." Prioritize relationships and listen passionately.

CSJ: 16:10 I agree 100 percent. That's very Jeffersonian also. I mean, all these five points are straight out of the Jefferson playbook. You know, the usual example of this that we always hear is that Orrin Hatch and Ted Kennedy would argue in the Senate. Then they'd go out for a beer afterwards or that people can really be friends and say, 'look, when I get in the Senate, I'm going to really go after you and I'm going to say that you're dangerous. But afterwards you get it. We can go out for dinner and we care about each other and I understand that this is not personal,' and Jefferson's always saying this and he's always saying the friendship is more important than the dispute. Can we maintain the friendship because the friendship is about a whole range of things and the dispute is about tariffs or taxation or about policy, vis-a-vis France or Great Britain, and so Jefferson practiced this. Now I have to say some of his enemies thought that Jefferson was duplicitous, that he was very harmonious at a dinner party or in a conversation or over a glass of Bordeaux, and then he would go away and he and Madison would write vicious things later and so that they didn't see a one to one relationship between Jefferson's civility and then whatever he was doing behind the scenes. I think that's a fair criticism of a few moments in Jefferson's life, but his general attitude was friendship is more important than politics.

DS: 17:34 I'll give you the third and fourth points together. Three, pay attention to context, and four, embrace vulnerability. Says that most of these arguments are ageless American arguments. Things we've been talking about forever.

CSJ: 17:47 The whole basis of the Jefferson Hour is the agelessness of our national discourse. These questions have been racking American life from the time of Jefferson and Hamilton, from the time of Abraham Lincoln,, from the time of Andrew Jackson from the time of Theodore Roosevelt. This is the nature of it.

DS: 18:03 Embrace vulnerability. Extend the olive branch. Hard to do. And then finally the fifth point was, be open. You cannot possibly change another person's mind if you're not willing to have your own mind change.

CSJ: 18:17 Read that again, that's so important.

DS: 18:18 You cannot possibly change another person's mind if you're not willing to have your own mind change.

CSJ: 18:24 So I want to ask everyone who's listening, David, when is the last time that your opinion, your mind on an important subject was changed by a conversation? Because that's essential — we each — put it in more simp

lyrics

"Can we talk? Can we try to argue about where we are and where we're going and use the founders as a source of wisdom that might allow us to have a safe place to meet and to talk about this with civility, but with fervor?"

— Joseph J. Ellis

Clay and David discuss how to conduct better arguments, and also speak with author Joseph Ellis to talk about his new book American Dialogue, which will be released this fall.

credits

from 2018, track released August 21, 2018
jeffersonhour.com/blog/1300

license

all rights reserved

tags

about

Listening to America with Clay Jenkinson

The Thomas Jefferson Hour is a weekly radio program dedicated to the search for truth in the tradition of Thomas Jefferson.

Nationally acclaimed humanities scholar and award-winning first-person interpreter of Thomas Jefferson, Clay S. Jenkinson, portrays Jefferson on the program, and he answers listener questions while in the persona of our third president.
... more

contact / help

Contact Listening to America with Clay Jenkinson

Streaming and
Download help

Report this track or account

Listening to America with Clay Jenkinson recommends:

If you like Listening to America with Clay Jenkinson, you may also like: