Dually Noted

     The word "duly" is the adverbial form of the adjective "due," meaning proper, correct, or appropriate. Thus, "duly noted" is the equivalent of "appropriately recorded" or "correctly observed." I have on very rare occasions seen people spell this phrase as "dually noted,"containing the adverbial form of the adjective "dual," meaning "consisting of two." Completely unrelated is the word "duel," as in Duel of the Fates from Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace, arguably one of the greatest scores in movie history.

     As I said, this infraction is highly infrequent, so it's not a huge concern of mine, but I think it leads to a good discussion.

     When two people get into a debate, discussion, argument, or whatever, it's generally not because they agree over something, right? Nor do they tend to address two completely unrelated topics. The cause of an argument is usually that more than one person contends for more than one perspective on an issue. Arguments and debates, by nature, consist of disagreements. Is that bad? Not at all when handled properly. The problem is that so rarely are these things handled properly.

     But what's "properly"? That's a whole other perspective right there! I'm sure you've realized by now that I'm in the running for The Most Opinionated Man in the World Award for the fourth consecutive year, so I'll tell you my perspective and dub it absolute truth. In lieu of this post, though, I feel obligated to acknowledge that I actually don't know everything and that my opinions are just that.

     I'm going to repent of my earlier statement that "duel" is unrelated to this topic. This is actually a pretty good place to bring it up. I feel like in your average, everyday, run-of-the-mill, ho hum argument, participants' intentions are to note things both duly and especially duelly (sic. Made-up word). Somehow, somewhere, the English language became corrupted to the point that "argument," "contention," "debate," and even "discussion" turned into nasty things where people let their emotions get the best of them and make unkind remarks sometimes having nothing to do with the matter at hand. (See my post, "Can I Axe You a Question?", http://the-angel-in-the-marble.blogspot.com/2015/11/can-i-axe-you-question.html). Arguments are now seen—or at least treated—as duels, wherein only one contestant will emerge victorious and the others (if they emerge at all) will be a bloody, shameful mess. Causes are advocated and defended, and no ground may be won by either side until it all goes down. No one can relinquish their ideals or reconsider their platform. Those who do so are seen as weak, tyrannical, wishy-washy, flip-floppy, and lacking in moral fiber. 

     Now, changing your platform just to please your audience is another story, but earnestly seeking truth should be the goal in any discussion—in all of life, for that matter. That's when things become "duly noted."

     I guess what I'm trying to say is that the end goal is to reach "duly noted" (the discovery of absolute truth), and "duelly noted" is the most common strategy for arriving there (even though no one ever gets there this way). So my suggestion is that instead of dueling in debates, we try dualing in debates. That may or may not be a made-up word as well. Bear with me.

     In John Stuart Mill's book, On Liberty, he says that "even if the received opinion be not only true, but the whole truth; unless it is suffered to be, and actually is, vigorously and earnestly contested, it will, by most of those who receive it, be held in the manner of a prejudice, with little comprehension or feeling of its rational grounds." I understand this as saying that even if we hear the truth, we won't believe it until it's been argued, and I believe that. Debate is a healthy, essential part of a balanced, American breakfast. Truth is truth, not perception, but it is interpreted and accepted through perception and perspective.

     In life, there are things that are good and others that are bad. We also have sections of things that are good, some that are better, and a few that are best. Lastly, we have things that are neither better nor worse—just different. So how do we sort them out? By listening.

     That applies both to listening to the person with whom we're speaking, which will enable a trusting relationship and bond of openness, and listening carefully to the Holy Ghost, who reveals all truth (Moroni 10:4-5). We can't begin to qualify somebody else's intelligence or relationship with God; that's personal territory. But we can hear what they have to say and treat it as something valuable. Everything in this world that interests at least one person is therefore technically interesting, because it has the capability of interesting someone. If we don't understand it, that's the perfect opportunity to hear something new and to learn from other peoples' experiences. Desmond Tutu said, "Differences are not intended to separate, to alienate. We are different precisely in order to realize our need of one another."

     Only by seeing things from another perspective (dually noting) can we begin to understand the truth. And hopefully part of that discovery will be that truth is far more subjective than we thought. From a religious standpoint, yes, there is absolute truth. God exists, we are His children, murder is wrong, etc. But when it comes to the gray areas, the only way to move forward is to move together, treating all perspectives as equally valid and worth discussing. In matters where what's right is evident and we just don't know how to accomplish it, then again, only through dually noting can we trust each other enough to figure things out. That doesn't mean we have to agree, but sometimes it means we have to let things go.

     Sometimes dually noting means that we discover we're wrong or that we discover that either way is equally acceptable. Regardless, be happy that you've now discovered the truth! And be happy that the people around you are happy, too. Applaud them in their search for truth, even if they may be slightly ahead of you in one category or another. We're all still just travelers, trying to find the right road. We can do that separately, or we can do it together. We can duel, or we can dual.

     Above all, we need to be wise enough to seek truth without self-interest, wherever it may be; patient enough to hear each other out, even if we disagree; kind enough to help and support others in their quest for truth, realizing that we're not the ultimate authority but merely fellow seeker; and humble enough to accept the truth for what it is, giving credit where credit is due—or, in other words, making sure that credit is duly noted.

Today has a double bonus! The first is a short video (one of my favorites) about realizing you don't have all the facts, found here: https://youtu.be/dbFiB7oiQs4, and the other is a talk given by an Apostle entitled, "Loving Others and Living with Differences:" https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/10/loving-others-and-living-with-differences?lang=eng. Enjoy!