Introducing Less Certain

Navigating the Complexity of Ideas - Why this newsletter and what's it about.

Tēnā koto katoa! I'm excited to introduce you to my new Substack newsletter, "Less Certain," where I’ll aim to contribute insights and analysis that challenge our certainty and increase our flexibility in thinking and talking about everyday social, political and cultural issues. Join me in uncovering why being less certain about our ideas might just be the path to greater understanding and better more constructive conversation about the issues.

The Certainty Trap

Our ideas have never been the root of the problem, and disagreements are as old as humanity itself. What truly seems to be new and challenging is the unwavering certainty with which we hold and discuss our ideas. We've reached an unwavering conviction and clarity in our thoughts that often leaves us paralyzed when trying to bridge our differences constructively.

This is precisely why I'm driven to launch "Less Certain." My mission is simple: to present both sides of the story in a manner that validates both perspectives. It's not about pitting the left against the right or choosing sides; it's about recognizing that, in many cases, both viewpoints can coexist within our thoughts, conversations and debates.

Certainty is not only that you are right but that it's so simple that you can't convince other people not to understand or disagree with you. Your certainty oversimplified what are very complex ideas and concepts. It leads to wanting to look down on ideas, stances, or even inquiries that do not align with our own—especially when these notions touch upon beliefs we hold dearly. The most challenging issues arise when we embrace these beliefs so tightly that we fail to recognize their subjective nature altogether. So we don’t just disagree, but we judge each other and then hold the other to a lower moral standard.

An example: Golriz and Shoplifting

Let's start with an example: the case of Golriz and her shoplifting incident. Bryce Edwards summarizes public opinion very well in his NZ Politics newsletter of 17 Jan 2024 by explaining how the left contends it's a symptom of how women of colour are treated and navigate the political landscape, while the right argues it's a breach of the law unbecoming of a public official. In my view, both arguments hold truth.

On the one hand, it's essential never to employ our mental health as an excuse for improper behaviour. Drawing from my own experiences with a multifaceted background and a complex relationship with my own mental health and learning disabilities, I firmly believe that we must take personal responsibility for our actions, irrespective of our challenges and never use our diagnosis or situation as an excuse for shit decisions, legal or illegal.

On the other hand, it's equally crucial to acknowledge the unique challenges faced by women of color in the realm of politics and public policy. These challenges can sometimes push individuals into actions they wouldn't typically undertake, such as quitting their job, taking legal action against their employer, or, in Golriz's case, making a lapse in judgment like shoplifting.

Contradiction can and should coexist

The question that plagues us is: Why must we continually pit these ideas against each other? Can't we engage in constructive discussions considering both facets without reducing complex issues to a simplistic binary choice?

Join me in "Less Certain" as we embark on a journey to foster dialogue, promote understanding, and explore the intricate interplay of ideas.

Let's embrace the beauty of complexity and delve into the rich tapestry of perspectives that shape our world. Subscribe now to "Less Certain" and be part of a community that seeks clarity amidst the chaos.

#LessCertain #ComplexIdeas #IdeaExploration #UnderstandingComplexity