Why certainty might be the real enemy of peace

Why certainty might be the real enemy of peace

Commentary by Paul Graves | FāVS News

I’m sure you know this cliché: “The first casualty of war is truth.” But here’s a twist on it that also makes sense: “The first casualty of certainty is truth.”

My initial Google search for this statement suggests to me that I may have invented it myself. It may even be true. So please hear me out.

An early 15th-century definition of certainty is the “full assurance of mind, exemption from doubt.” I’ve met numerous people whose sense of certainty embraces that exemption from doubt. I’m rarely comfortable in their presence, in no small measure because they often want to make their experience of “certainty” my obligation. And I’m certain I don’t want to be forced to be certain.

So, I’m prone to ask: What’s the origin of this intractable sense of certainty?

I suspect our desires for certainty are directed by what we fear and/or what we love. So, let’s consider fear and love as contributing to our deep desires for certainty.

I offer these contrasting statements as over-stated examples. But let them prompt your own examples. “Fear-certainty” keeps doubts from being expressed. “Love-certainty” encourages doubts to be expressed.

Fear-certainty depends on “either-or” choices. Love-certainty depends on “both-and” choices.

Fear-certainty rejects questions of accountability/transparency. Love-certainty welcomes questions of accountability/transparency.

Fear-certainty depends on intimidation of others. Love-certainty depends on persuasion of others.

Fear-certainty lies to manipulate others. Love-certainty seeks the truth that affirms others.

Fear-certainty requires an enemy. Love-certainty invites enemies to become friends.

Fear-certainty believes in the love of power. Love-certainty believes in the power of love.

Now, I know that these descriptions are not as clean as the words suggest. I’d like them to be, however. I’d like them to be more either-or, like the wonderful Native American story about the two wolves in which a grandson confesses to his grandfather about his internal struggle. The grandfather speaks of two wolves, one dark and evil, the other one light and good. The grandson then asks, “Which wolf will win?” The grandfather simply says, “The one you feed.”

I’ve liked this story for many either-or reasons. Then, I recently read an interpretation shared by Michelle Weimer, a personal coach. It reminded me to think more in both-and terms.

She found another version of the two wolves story that spoke of the good qualities each wolf possesses that we all need. The grandfather says to his grandson, “If you feed them right, they both win.”

He described the good qualities of the dark wolf – tenacity, courage, fearlessness, strong-willed and great strategic thinking. Then he spoke of the light wolf’s qualities – compassion, caring, strength and the ability to recognize what is in the best interest of all.

The new version of the grandfather’s summary? “Feed them both and you will be closer to living in peace, grandson.” A common synonym of peace is “wholeness.”

This is the language that speaks to me. I can see this grandfather’s view of the two wolves in a fuller way. They need each other, like healthy “liberals and conservatives” need each other when it comes to religion and politics.

Our current religious-political climate generates far more fear than love, like two wolves demanding to be fed without regard to each other. Certainty can be like the wolves: fear and love demanding to be fed without regard to each other. Yet, they each have values the other needs.

I could suggest how those values might work together. But please take on the task of figuring out for yourself how they might work together in your own life. Doing so, you feed your own certainty.

The views expressed in this opinion column are those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views of FāVS News. FāVS News values diverse perspectives and thoughtful analysis on matters of faith and spirituality.