A place under the sun

Evolution is not promoted by the warm fuzzies of dripping oxytocin. Evolution is spurred by crisis, challenge and perturbation. Single-minded aggression has been the hallmark of many individuals in history who, while poorly tolerated by the sensitive masses, contributed great value to progress and development.

Those of us that progressed to tertiary education experienced the rigors and challenges of critique which spurred us on to learn, reason and become more aware of ourselves and the extended environment . In the surgical residency program this dynamic reached extreme proportions. Even brutal. In the junior residency phase we were subjected to prescriptive instruction with harsh undermining words if we messed up. On occasion we were also belittled by the Prof on the grand ward rounds where there were usually up to twelve people at a time. I remember the Prof asking me a question about a specific condition on a packed ward round. I responded “I feel that the problem …..” The Prof cut me short “Where do you feel it, in your trousers? You either know the answer or you admit that you don’t. I don’t want to know how you feel!”

And so I learnt. I aspired to the facts and to excellence in my vocation. Many challenges were to occur and not infrequently my self-esteem suffered. But I picked myself up and forged ahead. I was the better for the brutal challenges. It caused me to try that little bit harder. To be the best that I could be. Because at the end of the line there was a patient that depended on all that I was. I was indeed fortunate that within the residency program I had a mentor, a person to whom I have previously dedicated an article. But even my mentor was quick to take the gloves off if I slackened or messed up.

Despite the challenges there was still an atmosphere of mutual respect in the program. But you earned your respect. If you did not learn, better yourself and become a dependable member of the team you would inevitably be scorned until you threw in the towel and removed yourself. If you lacked the required self-respect to resign then the Prof would remove you from the program. Those that prevailed became a ‘band of brothers’ (there were no sisters!). We support each other and maintain mutual respect long after becoming independent consultants.

It is the nature of beBee to provide a platform for free interaction between many different people, from all walks of life. But there are challenges in that the subject matter is not all merely social interaction. There are professionals who emanate from academic environments similar to my own. We have been trained to be curious, questioning and critical of everyone and everything, since we are in pursuit of facts and authenticity. In addition, many have previously or continue to, manage companies. These individuals are in a very different space from those lay individuals who express general interest. Potential conflict may arise when the lay individual engages an authority in a specific field, with an article which is based on unauthenticated or non validated data. Even if the data is not validated, there is an expectation that a logical argument is presented. This is the manner in which we were educated and trained and it has borne much fruit in the progress of health, engineering and all manner of technologies. Underlying this interaction is the drive to contribute value to the subject at hand and to the engaging individuals. And indeed things can become robust and even aggressive in the pursuit of a mutually acceptable resolution at the expense of sensitivity. And here respect is earned.

Obviously this dynamic would not apply in the context of pure social intercourse and in exchanges of general interest. Here the emphasis is on non-judgemental respect, sensitivity and empathy. It is when the two worlds are melded in one that problems arise. The aggressive pursuit of factual authenticity may tread on the toes of personal sensitivity to the point that the ‘aggressor’ is perceived as inflicting a personal attack on the receiver.

I am not here to defend Phil Friedman or his ilk. He is more than capable of defending himself and could probably articulate it far better than I can. But since he has adopted a stance of ‘masterly inactivity’ in regard to the recent storm and outpouring of accusatory admonishment, I thought I’d fill the space.

Phil and I have tangled ‘robustly’ in previous exchanges. In fact at one point we agreed not to interact with each other again (we would be but ‘passing dirigibles in the night’ on beBee) It followed after I had previously stated publically that Phil did not manifest adequate sensitivity and respect for the less resilient. And then I crossed the line by prescribing how we ought to interact. Phil responded by asking me what right I had to prescribe to him how he ought to behave and what he ought to communicate. And he was correct. No one has the right to prescribe to another, what and how they communicate. And if we publish a scientific, medical, philosophical or financial piece and invite comment, we must be prepared to defend it rigorously or acknowledge that it is inadequate. This is not a personal attack but a call to up our game. The take-home message is, don’t enter the fray unless you’re prepared to get burnt. Rather stay with warm fuzzies and an abundance of oxytocin bonding and togetherness!

Phil has a strong academic background in philosophy, but additionally has been forged in the fire of finance and big business. This will all manifest in the engagement and may well indeed crowd out apparent respect and sensitivity. But as Phil had indicated to me previously after we had a pretty heated exchange, if you can’t take the heat then don’t engage with him in his comment section (in fact that is the topic of one of his articles). Similarly he has made it clear and in fact demonstrated that if his engagement in comments on someone else’s article becomes undesirable, he will gladly discontinue the engagement. But if you can take the heat and stay the distance, then Phil's engagement with you ultimately becomes a value contribution - for I have indeed upped my game on several occasions in consequence. Finally in defense of Phil I feel that the beBee community should be aware that this individual that you have labeled with all manner of derogatory adjectives, has shown poignant empathy and compassion to some members of this and other SM platforms, which I personally bear witness to.

None of us is perfect. We’ve all messed up and will continue to mess up, hopefully less so as we reflect upon more of life’s challenges. There are some among the recent detractors on Ali 🐝 Anani, Brand Ambassador @beBee triad of articles who have written disparaging comments directed at me on one or two of my own past articles – untrue and/or inappropriate. But that’s the nature of things and I accept this without the need to rally the troops and 'stone the heretic'!

I do not wish to see censorship and ‘filtering’ on beBee. I believe that if we transcend our respective subjectivities through awareness of the bigger picture, we can establish a mutually agreeable mode of interaction. It’s not ‘us’ and ‘you’ but a supportive collective (connective, as Phil corrected me) in which there is a place for everyone under the sun.