On Discernment
Some thoughts about making choices, elections and politics.
My friend Mike is a genius, truly an original. He surprised me the other day with something of a riddle. He brought by these three pieces of driftwood:
“What would you say,” Mike asked, “if I told you that one of these cost $20, one cost $2,000, and one of them $200,000?”
I laughed.
I get that beauty is hard to define and also that Mike might be poking fun at a certain vanity I might have about recognizing “art” when I see it. But I wasn’t about to be tested as to which was “superior” or go into battle with Mike’s quick mind about how I/we go about making aesthetic decisions. Not then anyway and mercifully Mike didn’t press me on it.
I set the driftwood aside until I came across them the other day and the question came back to me, a little hauntingly. I had made a quick judgment immediately when presented with the implied question Which one is worth so much more than the others? But now I wasn’t so sure. Why this one and not that? I could see merit in all three pieces.
A simplistic answer to Mike’s riddle would be that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Which is “best” is the one you like best. But we don’t live our lives entirely subjectively. We make serious choices, we develop consensus, we weigh advantages and disadvantages, we try to align things to hopefully productive ends.
So “best, most valued or valuable” is both a feeling and something based on comparison.
What does it mean to discern, or to be discerning?
I Googled “discernment” just now and some sort of AI answer came up first, which I have to say is very weird, but also good; I assume it sifted through a lot of stuff in, like, .05 seconds.
Spiritual discernment
The application of discernment to spiritual things, deepened by the Spirit
Christian virtue
A virtue in Christianity, where a discerning person is considered to be wise and have good judgment
A gut instinct
Discernment can feel similar to a gut instinct, but it doesn't originate with us
Noticing what's pulling at you
Ignatian discernment is described as noticing what's pulling at you in your life
Discernment seems to be about not just making choices out of personal preference or by comparatively (objectively) weighting the (measurable) qualities of one thing against another. Rather it is about making good choices where “good” is defined by something outside of ourselves. If you feel drawn to something, you don’t need to be hearing voices but you do need to be paying attention to something other than yourself. It’s not personal and it’s not objective. It’s somehow informed or directed by something “other.”
Discernment often has a communal aspect too. In spiritual communities, a mentor or advisor or church group may be involved in deep “listening", attending to what the person seeking help with making a decision is saying. They work together until the answer or choice is clear to everyone.
Why is discernment important?
Everywhere you turn these days, someone is declaring this or that thing “good,” as in, not just personally preferable or measurably superior, but as “THE good,” virtuous, indisputably in the interests of all. Often, too often, any hesitation or disagreement provokes anger and censorship. Taking time to consider doubts, balance different views so you can make better choices is very hard.
It is also very hard to make genuine choices these days. We are directed (influenced) to do this, buy that, support this and not that. We “express ourselves” with “likes,” and purchases and votes. Everything feels like a popularity contest. We go with the flow. To our credit, this makes for pretty safe highways. To our detriment, this makes for pretty safe highways filled with fossil fuel burning vehicles.
Where it is hard to discern what’s right, many people seem to think the answer is to eliminate difference, focus on inclusion and equity: give everyone the same; the same territory, the same money, the same amenities, the same services, the same opportunities. Then everything will be okay, we think, everyone will get along when there is no difference.
But that’s not how life works. Even if we could deliver the equity goods, which is entirely doubtful, we are neither ants nor robots. We do not work tirelessly and unquestioning at tasks for which we are genetically predisposed. We do not reduce everything to the common denominator, relishing the grey homogenous middle above all else.
Spiritual discernment
The book of James has a rather forbidding definition of discernment.
If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him. But when he asks, he must believe and not doubt, because he who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind. That man should not think he will receive anything from the Lord; he is a double-minded man, unstable in all he does.
James 1:5-8 (NIV)
There are two definitions of discernment on the above noted website. (In some religious communities, discernment is highly regarded as an important part of the process of finding one’s way, one’s vocation or path, or calling.)
To discern means “to perceive or recognize the difference.”
According to Webster’s Dictionary, discernment means “the quality of being able to understand clearly.”
These are two quite different definitions and we should perhaps “discern” which is more correct, or useful.
To “understand clearly” suggests honesty, as in one honestly believing in whatever one believes in. One does not need to compare things to see something clearly. If you are part of cult, you see the superiority of your guru with absolute clarity. Clarity involves judgement, but not necessarily good judgement.
To “perceive or recognize difference” is an entirely other matter. It is comparative: this is different than that, not necessarily better or worse, but different. One can identify, and be respectful of difference without ranking or preference. The process of comparing things and noting their differences requires a kind of objectivity. Such measuring might lead to good choices in an instrumental or rational way, as a means to an end - this route is shorter than that route - but that is not what we generally mean by good judgement either.
Recall here one of the definitions our AI bot discovered:
a discerning person is considered to be wise and have good judgment
So good judgement is less subjective than clarity but more subjective than difference, and possibly more important that either when the things requiring our judgment are neither easy to follow nor easily measured.
America needs a third political party.
Today Americans are doing a lot of choosing but I don’t see a lot of discernment going on. There is a lot of asserting self-evident clarity and screaming about difference on both sides and not very much asking the higher power for guidance, or sitting in community and listening deeply.
We have heard: Harris is very competent, reasonable and rational and Trump is a nincompoop, schemer and con man.
And we have heard: Harris is a mindless bureaucrat serving an ever expanding state that demands compliance and conformity whereas Trump is a fearless advocate preserving individual rights against the control of privileged elites.
These are strikingly different views, yet neither is entirely wrong, especially from the perspective of the ones holding that view. It is far from self-evident that one deserves to come out ahead. They are significantly, but also merely different. Apples and oranges.
Having to choose between two relatively equal, if opposite, things short circuits discernment. One is no longer questioning, seeking in all humility for answers. Rather, one is forced to choose out of necessity, the lesser of two evils.
Everyone will vote of course, and the results will be contested. There will be bickering and finger pointing and law suits and maybe arrests but really little will change. The US economy will continue to be a juggernaut, trillions will be spent on armaments and throwing junk into space. We, the compliant masses, will be cloistered by “social” media, wringing our hands while watching the latest series and listening to podcasts.
Introducing a third choice might provide some relief, reinvigorate the process. Either/Or becomes What If? It might open the door to that famous “nuance” people who are concerned about openness and change are talking about.1
The Poll
If you’ve got this far, perhaps you’d like to return to the question at the beginning that I felt my buddy Mike was asking. Please weigh in with which you think is the most valuable driftwood piece, No. 1, 2 or 3.
Before voting, you might want to consider some history of Chinese scholar stones for context.
In his mid-19th century book Tanshi — or Chats on Rocks — Liang Jiutu stated that ‘in collecting, it is the choice of rocks that comes first. If the rock does not seem like a painting by the powers of nature, then you shouldn’t choose it.’
Official Substack polls ridiculously only allow two choices, so please use the comments to vote. From left to right, 1, 2 or 3.
Hey, thanks for reading. I hope you voted (in your election). Whichever way it goes, it’s going to be a great four years.
2028 or Bust!
From where I sit, I can’t say with any confidence that this really is any kind of answer. Having three parties is hardly working in Canada where the headless bureaucratic state has grown out of all proportion. The challenge for any third party would be to carve out something that has more than just clarity and difference. It would also have to be wise.