Extremly relevant and engaging
☆
☆
☆
☆
☆
“Episode 19 which was on Libertarianism and Theology was recomended to me by a friend as I have similar views as the guest Mithell Strahan. In all honesty I did not know what to expect as many times in popular culture I have seen this conversation become unproductive and polarizing, this even happens in my own experiance talking to my friends and family about things of this nature. Due to this I have spent considerable time contemplating and reflecting on how to have productive discussions about important issues. This is important to me because I believe that one of the things plauging society and religion is an inablity to understand each other, leading to a polarizing world. The episode that I watched did an impeccable job of exploring the topic in a productive and fair manner and essentially embodying the things things that I have been thinking about. Below I will go into detail about which principles I believe the show embodied but if you dont read it, the take home message is that I greatly enjoyed the podcast and I greatly respect how the hosts approached to topic in an unbiased and open minded manner.
I want to leave the review to express the respect I have for the hosts and how they handled the topic, as I said above, there is a need for fruitful conversations like this one and I am glad for their ministry. From all the thought and research that I have done on the topic the principles that they embodyed were:
1. They acknowladged their relitive ignorance on the topic - I believe this is an imperitive in any healthy, productive and respectful discussion, I like to say that the best thing that you can ever know in life, is to know what you dont know. It is okay not to know much about certain areas, as long as you are aware of your shortcomings, I dont think there is anything wrong with ignorance in a certain field, but when ignorance becomes arogance that is when it becomes destructive. From the very begining they outlined the boundries of their knowladge and then tried to increase their understanding through conversation.
2. They remained open-minded - This is more uncommon than one would intially think, it is common to enter a conversation with an open mind, but it is rare for it to last to the end of the conversation. Throughout the podcast they explored the views at hand without any undeclared bias, engaging with what the guest was saying, instead of just engaging with how that fits into their preconceived worldview.
3. They challanged the topic at hand through questioning not asserting - Instead of challanging the guest and then assuming that their challange nullifies the guests worldview, they present their challange and ask the guest what he made of it, allowing the guest to explain their postion more thouroughly. This allows for a fruitful conversation that is mutually benifical instead of getting bogged down in fighting over details.
4. They respected the guests evidence - When evidence was presented that was contary to the hosts worldview, they essentially accepted the argument on the condition of the evidence indeed being true. They showed trust and respect in conditionally accepting the argument being made. Of course if the evidence is later proven to be invalid, then the conditional support is implicitly withdrawn. This is not done often in popular culture, leading to a more polarizing enviroment. In order to have a conversation where the goal is to understand and explore anothers worldview, you need to be willing to accept their evidence, their presupputions and their foundational beliefs. For example, as a christian trying to understand a muslim persons arguments, in order to explore his beliefs and worldview fully, I would need to imagine the Koran being true and that Muhammad was indeed a prophet, only then can I understand the belief that stems from that. Likewise if someone wanted to understand my worldview as a christian, they first need to imagine the bible being accurate and that Jesus did indeed come to earth, die and resurrect. Without this, we see a lack of understanding on all sides leading to an overall negitive enviroment. The hosts did well in exploring the guests worldview because they were willing to enter into his worldview.
5. The conversation was not aimed at conversion - At the end of the conversation, both hosts stated that they had learnt a lot and it seemed to me like they had even changed their own views slightly but that was not explicitly stated. I think this is a good thing because how it manifested itself throughout the conversation, there was an unrushed way of exploring, without the pressure of having to make a radical decision. Change takes time and the presentation of many perspectives, if it is rushed it affects either the quality of the new worldview or the likelihood of change actually occuring. Psychologically when you feel overwhelmed with new information and need to stake your claim, you will tend to stake your claim on your previous opinion, regardless if the evidence actually points in another direction. This is a hard tendancy to beat, the two theories that I have explored are either you try and be mindfull of your bias, and force yourself to change (this does not seem very healthy because sometimes our intutition is right but just cant be articulated) and the other option is what the show seemed to do- remove the pressure to change. There is no need to accept the guests worldview immediately and thus no need to feel pressure to stake a claim, leading to a more open minded exploration of the topic, whilst reserving the oppertunity for the evidence to make a impact on your life when you are ready.
I could keep going about the things that you did well, but at some point it just becomes babbling, so I want to leave it with a thank you for engaging with topics in the manner that you have been. I respect both of you guys and hope for your continued growth in your development and in your ministry. God Bless!”
Shaun van Eyssen via Apple Podcasts ·
Australia ·
07/19/18
More reviews of Burn the Haystack
☆
☆
☆
☆
☆
“Hey guys, love your podcast. I want to know your thoughts on Messianic Judaism? There is a large SDA church in France that embraces it, but would love for this to be talked about more.”
LadyJane95 via Apple Podcasts ·
Australia ·
11/03/18
☆
☆
☆
☆
☆
“Love it, thank you Josh and Jessie for the relevant, fresh and raw gospel.”
Frankie Yates via Apple Podcasts ·
Australia ·
03/16/18
☆
☆
☆
☆
☆
“I’m a little ashamed to admit, I’m really bad at listening to podcasts. They’re generally not my thing, but when I heard of Burn the Haystack I guess I was feeling up to trying something new and I’m SO GLAD I DID! This is the only podcast I’ve ever faithfully followed and I love how it expands my...”Read full review »
Crackattack97 via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
01/18/19
Do you host a podcast?
Track your ranks and reviews from Spotify, Apple Podcasts and more.
See hourly chart positions and more than 30 days of history.
Get Chartable Analytics »
See hourly chart positions and more than 30 days of history.
Listen now
Links
Genres
Artwork or description wrong?
Request an update »
Updates may take a few minutes.
Do you host a podcast?
Track your ranks and reviews from Spotify, Apple Podcasts and more.
See hourly chart positions and more than 30 days of history.
Get Chartable Analytics »
See hourly chart positions and more than 30 days of history.
