When setting a perimeter, or at least when I have discussed the practice with others, it has been accused of me that I merely wish to surround myself with people who think like me, an echo chamber if you will. That my quest is for the blind follower, the faithful zealot, or the naive child to nod and smile along with my ramblings. It has been inferred that I seek an egotistical validation from an adoring public. While I can understand where this misunderstanding stems from, it couldn’t be further from the truth.
I think the biggest misconception is that most believe if you agree on values, then you automatically agree on other sweeping ideals; however these are mutually exclusive and in most cases wildly nuanced concepts. One can be identical in their principles and values, while still experiencing a myriad of ways to disagree on the how, what, when, and why these values are to be adopted, instituted and disseminated. As a society, we have adopted a notion that we must be inclusive of any and all value systems, principles, and moralities. It has also been inferred that morality is ‘subjective’, I would make a point to disagree with this, but this is probably another article entirely. So for the record, let me explain in more depth the purpose of setting a perimeter and how to do so while inviting healthy mental conflict and expansion.
First and foremost before you may set a perimeter you must first determine where your principles lie. What hills are you willing to die on, so you can look yourself in the mirror with honor? Most I have talked to, aren’t willing to have this conversation with themselves, but it is the most imperative of all conversations. It sets the foundation for all other interactions. As the saying goes, “stand for something or fall for anything”. Are you based in courage? Does your core primarily focus on self-preservation? Do you know what you would do if these principles are attacked? Self-reflecting on these concepts sets the tone for who you surround yourself with, and conversely who you do NOT surround yourself with.
In order to properly set a perimeter, you do need to set some ground rules. Those you take council with must share similar values and priorities, otherwise you run the risk of being led from your path and put on someone else’s. For example, I wouldn’t take council from a mass murderer, we fundamentally do not align. Any guidance from that person would fall outside of my perimeter.
Now onto the separator of an echo chamber. Echo chambers occur when we understand our principles internally, determine the immovable moralities we believe in, but don’t take the next step – council. We ruminate with ourselves so long that it sounds good to us, but we haven’t applied any external pressure. Taken a step further, the internet is a cornucopia of echo chambers. With the right searches you can find any number of groups, chats, forums whose single mindedness can be harnessed to make you feel like the next einstein, reinforcing your chamber of agreement.
Once you believe that your principles are strong enough to move you with conviction, it must be tested. Take these principles/thoughts and discuss them with your closest circle, be selective. If you are concerned with a bruised ego or vulnerability, maybe start with the more placating in your tribe, but eventually the point is to take them to the skeptic. As Jordan Peterson says, you should be pursuing the growth of being wrong. Your goal is not to be right, if you have a principle that you are devout to, but it is evil or malignant, then perhaps it isn’t the best principle? Seeking council in others will insure it is properly challenged, it encourages objectivity. On the other hand, echo chambers are the death of objectivity.
Summarily determine what you believe in, challenge it with your council, seek the growth of being wrong, then adopt accordingly. It is okay to be devout to a system of values or morality, but always remember to be fluid in the practice and open to criticism. Without this there is no growth. Make sure the source of criticism is credible and applicable to your tribe. Never love the sound of your own voice so much you create an echo chamber for the monologue.
