Introduction

 

My grandmother loved to use her pressure cooker for meal preparation. She, however, wasn’t as attentive as she need be. The pressure would build up in the cooker. The little lid on the top would start to shake. And finally, if my grandmother wasn’t paying attention, that lid would shoot straight in the air and hit the ceiling. As children, my brother and I loved to watch this happen.

 

When leading in a polarized time, we can be like my grandmother and not notice the pressure build up until there is an explosion. Or we can notice when the temperature is going up and take action as a leader to lower the temperature.

 

We are living in a time of intense anger. Professor and author Karthik Ramanna calls the time in which we live, “The Age of Outrage.”

 

This intense anger is cementing barriers between people within the workplace, the political arena, the community, the family, and the church.

 

A certain type of leadership is required to lead in this age of outrage. This blog is a third in a series titled Leadership in a Polarized Time. It will explore the first step leaders are to take to address moments of outrage. That is, leaders Lower the Temperature.

 

Overview
There are 3 root causes of outrage, and in a time of outrage, all 3 are at work simultaneously. 

 

We live in an age of outrage. This is a statement from professor and author Karthik Ramanna. In the cover summary of his book, The Age of Outrage: How to Lead in a Polarized World, it reads, “People are angry with the world—in some cases, rightfully so—and now view companies as they do governments, as targets of their wrath and potential forces for social change. Managing outrage has moved from being an occasional leadership challenge…to a necessary and critical leadership capability, like strategic thinking or finance acumen.”¹

 

While Ramanna’s book is written for those in business leadership, the situation in which we as the church find ourselves is the same. Being able to address outrage is no longer an occasional leadership need. It is now a capacity that is required in all areas of leadership.

 

So, what causes this outrage? For Ramanna, “Outrage can stem from multiple causes”—all of which are rooted in human fears.

1. Fear of the Future: A decision affects a particular stakeholder’s economic and social prospects—perhaps depriving them of a future they had taken for granted.
2. Fear that World Leaders Can’t Be Trusted: An historical grievance that makes the stakeholder suspicious of the decision-maker’s motives.
3. Fear of the Other. A perception that the decision-maker is in some sense removed or alien to the stakeholder in terms of values and interests, siding with some other inimical stakeholder group.²

 

While there has been reason for outrage in the past, usually based on one of the above causes, we are at a moment when all three causes of outrage are at play simultaneously.

 

In addition, the concerns “are being collectively amplified through modern communion technologies, which enable people with shared ideas and goals to form information bubbles and reinforce each other’s fear, grievance, and identities.”³

 

Turning Down the Temperature—Knowing How Outrage Is Triggered and Knowing the Time, Place, and Practices That Address the Triggers

 

Knowing How Outrage Is Triggered
When people act aggressively, they will seek a moral justification for their aggressive behavior.

 

Let’s start with three definitions offered by Karthik Ramanna.

• Aggression: “Any behavior directed towards another individual with the proximate intent to cause harm.”
• Harm: “Something inflicted on a victim that is ‘not just’ in the sense that it violates their humanity and civil rights.”
• Averse Situation: Aggression is a reaction to “An event, social encounter, or condition that a person perceives as compromising their well-being.”⁴

 

Ramanna notes that there are two “inputs to aggression.”

• “The person encountering the aversive situation”
• “The circumstances of the situation.”⁵

 

The Person

A person brings baggage to an aversive situation. This baggage drives behavior and is physical (gender in that men are more prone to aggression than women), psychological (from issues of self-esteem to personality disorders), and environmentally learned (the beliefs, attitudes, and values about behavior that a person brings to the aversive situation) in nature.⁶

 

Ramanna reminds us, when people “act aggressively, they will often try to seek a moral justification for the display of the aggression.”⁷

 

The Situation

There are situations that encourage aggression and situations that discourage aggression. The setting of the aversive event, situations that are perceived as frustrating one’s goals or aspirations, as well as “temperature, smell, noise, and space” can trigger aggressive behavior.⁸

 

The personal characteristics and situational quality combine in aversive situations and lead to aggression in three ways:

• Mood and emotional response
• Cognitive decisions
• Ambient conditions that arouse the person⁹

 

Ramanna makes the observation that “there are more nerves going from the brain to the eye than from the eye to the brain, which implies that a lot of what we perceive is in fact the product of what is going on in the brain than in the real world, and the input from the eye is less the basis for what we see than corroboration from what we think we see.”¹⁰

 

An important conclusion can be drawn. “Human cognition is not necessarily an unbiased, logical process of analysis.” While we have the capacity to think rationally, “but our capacity to perform it is easily overwhelmed.”¹¹

 

Some Theological Reflections

Remember, Ramanna states that when people “act aggressively, they will often try to seek a moral justification for the display of the aggression.”¹² In addition, he tells us that not every thought we have has been reached by an unbiased, logical process. Thirdly, he reminds us, “The more acute the discomfort, the stronger the aggressive reaction.”¹³ This reaction can be morally justified, yet may not be based on objective, logical and ethical thinking.

 

I think these observations call for us to broaden our definition of sin. Sin is more than a simple action we perform that is wrong. It is a condition of being human. Being a condition of being human, anything that is self-oriented or self-serving is sinful in nature. Our sinful actions are many times rooted in our reactions.

 

Theologian Paul Tillich writes about the 3 fears that people face in his book “The Courage to Be.” The fears are that of death, guilt, and shame. Facing those fears, I contend that we as humans have 3 survival reactions. With the fear of death, we latch onto self-preservation. With the fear of guilt, we latch onto self-justification. With the fear of shame, we latch onto self-righteousness. All three are self-serving.

 

Remember this, “You can’t use reason to convince anyone out of an argument that they didn’t use reason to get into. Neil DeGrasse Tyson.

 

The thing is, we can assume that we have reached our responses through an objective and rational process and conclude that our responses are morally justified.

 

Knowing the Time, Place, and Practices That Address the Triggers
You will never avoid all bad situations, the question is, will you make the bad situation better or worse?

 

What you do and say as a leader, knowing the time to act, and the place you act can turn down the heat of outrage. I want to offer you some things to consider as ways to turn down the heat. By attending to these things, one can address those who are overwhelmed and reduce the impact of being overwhelmed.

• Create a culture in your congregation of mutual respect and honoring each other’s integrity prior to a moment of outrage. This can be accomplished by worshipping together, serving together, playing together, and learning together. These build bonds and connections that have an impact on how those in your congregation will treat each other. I believe that they can create habits that carry over in difficult times.
• Establish guidelines for healthy and wholesome conversations prior to a time of outrage. In preaching and teaching, talk about faithful and helpful ways to communicate with one another. This could include Matthew 18:15 that stresses the importance of talking face to face with the person with whom you have a grievance. You can use Ephesians 4:15 about the need to speak the truth in love. Use 1 Corinthians 13: 1-7 to discuss what love is like. And for sure, use Luther’s explanation of the 8th commandment.
• You, as a leader, set the tone for the rest of the community. I know it is easy to get overwhelmed right now, so I encourage you to find ways to care for and calm your own spirit. Identify what you think is beautiful. Go to beautiful places. Look at beautiful art. Listen to beautiful music. Eat wonderful food. Care for and be kind to yourself. If you’re a rostered leader, spend time with good friends who aren’t pastors and don’t work for the church. Find places and times to laugh.
• When speaking with those overwhelmed by outrage and being aggressive, pick a time and place that is calming. Ramanna states, a “positive ‘ambient’ setting for discussing aversive situations—a cool, uncrowded, odor-free room with good acoustics—can greatly help outraged stakeholders engage with the people that outrage them.”¹⁴
• Lay the ground rules before the conversation. That is, establish rules of engagement. 
• Be particular. Make the conversation situation specific. Name the particular issue that is at the root of the outrage. Try to avoid addressing generalized anger and fear.

 

Next Month. In next month’s blog, I will look at “Making Sense of the Moment.” Each of these blogs follow the outline of Kartik Ramanna’s book, “The Age of Outrage.”

---

Endnotes:

¹ Ramanna, Karthik, The Age of Outrage: How to Lead in a Polarized World, Cover.
² Ibid., 5.
³ Ibid., 6.
⁴ Ibid., 35.
⁵ Ibid.
⁶ Ibid., 36.
⁷ Ibid., 37.
⁸ Ibid., 38.
⁹ Ibid., 39.
¹⁰ Ibid., 40.
¹¹ Ibid., 40-41.
¹² Ibid., 37.
¹³ Ibid., 38.
¹⁴ Ibid.