Shape of the Earth

A lesson from conversations with a plumber

I have a coworker who has a skeptical, conspiratorial mind. He is especially skeptical when it comes to government and politicians trying to make us believe something without question. Sometimes he is even skeptical of science at large—not as a science denier, but as someone who is skeptical that scientists are sometimes in cahoots with government and with people in power. For example, he is not necessarily convinced that the earth is round, but also doesn’t necessarily believe that the earth is flat. Now, before you start scoffing and writing him off as an ignorant flat-earther, let me continue. At a young age, he is already a brilliant plumber. And let me tell you, to be a good plumber, you have to be smart. You have to have intelligence to read prints and know where to find pertinent information in order to correctly lay out where floor penetrations need to be, and how a piping system needs to be laid out to function properly. You need good memory, interpretive ability, math skills, an understanding of physics, problem solving, the ability to learn from mistakes, and other cognitive skills. He’s not an ignorant or unintelligent person.

I’ve worked with him almost every day of the past two years. We’ve had many conversations spanning a variety of topics. He is not only a good plumber, but he is also a good teacher. I have learned much from him and have grown to respect him deeply. So, when he first brought up the questions about flat earth vs. round earth, I initially tried to bring up support and proof for a round earth. But as the conversation popped up over a span of several weeks, I realized I cannot prove to anyone that the earth is round. I can certainly explain why I am not convinced that the earth is flat and offer information for a round earth, but I personally can’t prove it or change anyone’s mind.

This led me to the revelation that whether we agreed that the earth is flat or round didn’t matter. What we believed about the shape of the earth didn’t affect how I interacted with him each day. I didn’t need to prove that the earth was round or for him to believe the same as me for me to be able to respect him or know that he is an intelligent person. I can acknowledge his intelligence and his capabilities as a fellow human without agreeing with him about everything. And the same for him; he respects me and listens to me even if we disagree or aren’t completely on the same page about something. Through my friendship with him, I have learned the importance and the goodness of acknowledging other peoples’ intelligence, their perspective, their experience, their humanness. If a conspiracy theorist or science denier or someone I disagree with intellectually tries to begin a conversation with me, I keep in mind what I’ve learned through my coworker. It helps me stay calm and think more clearly and treat them better. My initial feeling is still to prove something, however, I have grown in my ability to let go of that feeling.

I wonder if we all approached each other in this way, how would our conversations change? How would our relationships change? Of course, there will still be people who like the feeling of being right all the time (even if they might be wrong), the feeling of superiority. But for those of us who want to be the best versions of ourselves, how much do you think would change for the better? Would acknowledging others’ intelligence, and acknowledging that they do have different perspectives and different life experiences, and therefore have different insights, would acknowledging all of this lead us to a place of curiosity, a desire for learning and growth and healing, a place of greater humility? From a western Christian perspective, would shifting from a belief of “I’m always right” to one of “I want to learn from you” change how our faith is informed and constructed? Change it for the better? How much potential for healing could be opened up?

Now, for those who would not acknowledge our intelligence or our life experiences or our humanness, we do not have to engage in fruitless conversation. If their disagreement leads to their supporting and driving a philosophy of harm and hate, then it is not a conversation worth having. This lesson I learned won’t always be doable or successful in facilitating a respectful conversation. You are the only one who can determine whether you are healed or healthy enough to engage in conversation this way. Boundaries can still be in place. We shouldn’t put our necks on the chopping block for folks who would harm us or influence others to harm us. But if the topic doesn’t affect how we interact with them daily, then why not approach the conversation with these acknowledgements?

As I begin sharing thoughts here, I ask you to hold these acknowledgments in mind. And when I interact with those of you who comment, I will also keep them in mind. I will be curious about you and want to learn from you. I have a lot of thoughts and ideas, and I am eager to broaden my perspective and inform my belief systems with others’ insights and perspectives. I can’t guarantee how often I will post at the beginning of this, but my goal will to eventually be able to post weekly. I appreciate you reading to the end and look forward to interacting with folks here.