‘Simple’ is an interesting word. It’s often desirable – many products, particularly software, will often sell themselves on making the complex simple.
Simplicity is your friend, complexity is the enemy. It’s a common message and one that holds true in many situations. It’s especially useful if you’re doing something like, say, diffusing a bomb.
But there is a dark side to the quest to make things simple, especially when it comes to sociopolitical issues. You’ll see this a lot on social media; someone will condense their argument on a particularly complex and controversial issue down to a few bullet points and then sign off with ‘This isn’t difficult’.
The problem is, saying something isn’t difficult and then expecting it not to be is like saying ‘This isn’t an affair’ when your partner bursts in on you and your lover naked in bed, and then expecting them to take you out for a nice lunch.
Facing up to complexity
Nuance and subtlety are a part of our world. You can’t put everything into a good or bad bucket. When we try to simplify every issue we’re making it harder to compromise, and I believe that progress is largely made up of compromise. Offering up a nuanced viewpoint is often seen now as a sign of moral weakness; a lack of conviction. Which is interesting, because that’s the kind of behaviour you’d expect to find in, say, a cult.
If we want to bridge divides and start making progress on the biggest issues of our time we need to be able to acknowledge their complexity. Doing so doesn’t undermine our arguments: if your claims only stand up because you’ve ignored half the issue by simplifying it then you don’t have an argument at all.
Simplicity is the antithesis of progress
To simplify a contentious issue is to deny the truth of the matter. This is why it’s the antithesis of progress; both sides are arguing over something that doesn’t really exist. It’s like trying to figure out how to decorate and furnish a baby’s nursery when one of you claims you’re not even pregnant and the other one is convinced, despite the scans, that it’s triplets.
Why do we often tend to simplify complex issues? Well, because they’re complex. Our brains don’t like that. We like being able to put things into one of the predefined categories that already exist: safe berries and poisonous ones; animals that will kill us versus animals that like a good tickle under the chin; people who like Lord of the Rings and people who are wrong.
Acknowledging the nuance of the situation makes this difficult. And because to acknowledge the full scope of any given scenario often means making uncomfortable moral decisions.
So we think we’re doing ourselves a favour, but really what we’re doing is lying to ourselves. We’re denying ourselves the information and understanding we need to do something about these issues.
A dangerous desire
Simple is great if you’re a set of instructions on how to use a bread maker. But it’s dangerous when it comes to issues like people’s rights, who should be able to speak – and say what – and our moral responsibilities.
After all, how can we carry on moving towards a more liberal and inclusive society if we can’t even tolerate or permit ourselves to acknowledge that some of this stuff is difficult? It’s not that hard to understand. Oh, wait, it is. But let’s keep trying.
Follow me on
Header photo by ÉMILE SÉGUIN on Unsplash
