What if there were no rhetorical questions?
Take a second and think about the following question. What if there were no rhetorical questions? This would then mean that the question itself merits an answer. It would mean our brains would need to engage in an activity to which most of our brains are not accustomed. We would need to answer all questions, regardless of how inane or pointless they may seem. It would certainly challenge the popular belief that there are no stupid questions. We only say that because we don't believe that all questions deserve an answer, so we can dismiss some of them without any further thought.
So what would happen if every question was meant to be answered? What would happen if we had to pause and think and come up with an answer? Play along with me as we go through some of the most famous rhetorical questions to see what would change if we dispensed with the rhetorical.
Q: What was he thinking?
A: This is one of my favorite questions that I have always believed is in no way rhetorical. This question is usually sprinkled (or doused) with a measure of disbelief. We ask this question when someone does something and we cannot understand their motives. So we ask the universe what that person was thinking, don't wait for the real answer, and make up our own narrative. Meanwhile, our disbelief in that person and their actions lingers and whether you realize it or not you trust that person a little less. You sowed the seed of doubt by asking the question but by not seeking an answer you do nothing to dispel the growing myth that this person doesn't have a clue what they're doing.
I'm not suggesting you stop asking the question; quite the opposite. What I'm suggesting is that you follow up with an answer. One of my favorite sayings is that everything happens for a reason. Sometimes the reason is that you make bad choices. Sometimes the answer to the what-was-he-thinking question is-nothing. Sometimes we do things without thinking. Sometimes we just make bad decisions. But that's not always the case. Imagine you're driving on the freeway at a mostly-legal speed when out of the blue some idiot cuts you off and causes you to engage in evasive maneuvers to stop from spinning off the road. This is a common time to emphatically and angrily scream the WWHT!?!? question at the other driver. You probably understand that they can't hear you, much less answer you, but what you don't realize is the question still needs to be answered, and that the answer will almost certainly change your perception of the situation. If the answer were because they don't like you, or someone dared them to do it you'd be understandably upset. But what if the answer was they were rushing to the hospital to be with a child who was involved in a life-threatening accident. Would you still be so angry?
So sometimes you ask a rhetorical question because the person to whom we would like to ask the question in its non-rhetorical form is not available to answer. In those cases, when your mind automatically formulates a possible answer, try to assume a noble, worthy answer. Don't assume the worst.
Q: How can he live with himself?
A: This is a question that we would never ask if we truly understood what it really means. It gets asked when someone has done something horribly wrong or has been the victim of some awful tragedy. The person asking the question falls into one of two camps. They are either sympathetic and wish to convey the feeling that they themselves would not know what to do were the situations reversed or they are expressing shame and disbelief that another person could commit such an act.
In the Book of Mormon, Nephi teaches us that there must be opposition in all things. We need contrast to sharpen our understanding of things and situations. We need to know how bad it can be before we truly appreciate how good it can be. So, with that in mind, let's ask the opposite question. Instead of asking "How can he live with himself" let's ask "Why doesn't he kill himself?" If we are truly interested in discovering how an individual is able to live we need to understand also why they won't die. I'm dead certain that no one reading this would advocate suicide but by asking how someone can live what you are really asking is why suicide isn't an option. It's a horrible thing when you frame it that way, but the point of this exercise is to make you uncomfortable asking rhetorical questions. I want to help you understand that not all questions are rhetorical even though you ask them without expecting an answer.
If you feel compelled to ask to ask this question, you should feel an even stronger desire to answer it. There is some force that is driving this person to go on in the face of extreme opposition. There is something giving them hope that things can be better and that they can be better. Rhetorical questions have a nasty way of objectifying the target of the question, but by expecting and seeking an answer you allow yourself to connect with people and that principle is at the heart of a Christ-centered life. The Savior himself distilled every commandment and law down to two simple principles: Love God and love your neighbor. Rhetorical questions disconnect us and stifle the bond of love. So ask questions, but make sure to seek answers.
On a side note, when the Savior taught the parable of the good Samaritan he asked a question at the end. Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves? (Luke 10:33). Whether or not you think this is a rhetorical question says a lot about where you are spiritually in your life.
Q: What I wouldn't give to have (fill in the blank).
A: This is deceptive because when we say it, it comes out as a statement and you don't hear the tell-tale raised inflection at the end to indicate that it is a question. So let's rephrase it. What would I give up so that I can have the thing I desire? Some of the most successful and happy people in the world are people who understand the answer to this question. This most definitely should not be a rhetorical question. We should spend our whole lives in search of the answer to this question.
In order to properly answer the question, however, you need to fill in the blank. If you desire a Big Mac, then the answer is simple. You would have to give up approximately one dollar. The smaller the prize, the easier the answer. The key is to allow this question to motivate and drive you to bigger and better things. To get that result you need to up the ante. What would you give up to have a two-week vacation in Hawaii? Once you know the goal it's not hard to then find out what you would need to do to get there. And once you know what's on the line it becomes a question of commitment. Can you give up what's necessary to get there?
But why stop at Hawaii? The Lord told Moses many years ago that his purpose was to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. Shouldn't that be our goal as well? Shouldn't we have our eyes fixed on the ultimate prize? To live with God and know him again is an awe-inspiring goal. A great Lamanite king proclaimed that he was willing to give away all that he had and all his sins to know God.
Our salvation depends on our faith and testimonies and our faith and testimonies depend on seeking and receiving answers to questions. Don't get caught in a rhetorical trap. Every question deserves an answer because every answer brings knowledge. Knowledge is power but knowledge is not found in the question. Again I encourage you to ask questions but ask with the intent to receive and answer.
Only when you have asked all the questions will you have all he answers. Wouldn't that be nice?
So what would happen if every question was meant to be answered? What would happen if we had to pause and think and come up with an answer? Play along with me as we go through some of the most famous rhetorical questions to see what would change if we dispensed with the rhetorical.
Q: What was he thinking?
A: This is one of my favorite questions that I have always believed is in no way rhetorical. This question is usually sprinkled (or doused) with a measure of disbelief. We ask this question when someone does something and we cannot understand their motives. So we ask the universe what that person was thinking, don't wait for the real answer, and make up our own narrative. Meanwhile, our disbelief in that person and their actions lingers and whether you realize it or not you trust that person a little less. You sowed the seed of doubt by asking the question but by not seeking an answer you do nothing to dispel the growing myth that this person doesn't have a clue what they're doing.
I'm not suggesting you stop asking the question; quite the opposite. What I'm suggesting is that you follow up with an answer. One of my favorite sayings is that everything happens for a reason. Sometimes the reason is that you make bad choices. Sometimes the answer to the what-was-he-thinking question is-nothing. Sometimes we do things without thinking. Sometimes we just make bad decisions. But that's not always the case. Imagine you're driving on the freeway at a mostly-legal speed when out of the blue some idiot cuts you off and causes you to engage in evasive maneuvers to stop from spinning off the road. This is a common time to emphatically and angrily scream the WWHT!?!? question at the other driver. You probably understand that they can't hear you, much less answer you, but what you don't realize is the question still needs to be answered, and that the answer will almost certainly change your perception of the situation. If the answer were because they don't like you, or someone dared them to do it you'd be understandably upset. But what if the answer was they were rushing to the hospital to be with a child who was involved in a life-threatening accident. Would you still be so angry?
So sometimes you ask a rhetorical question because the person to whom we would like to ask the question in its non-rhetorical form is not available to answer. In those cases, when your mind automatically formulates a possible answer, try to assume a noble, worthy answer. Don't assume the worst.
Q: How can he live with himself?
A: This is a question that we would never ask if we truly understood what it really means. It gets asked when someone has done something horribly wrong or has been the victim of some awful tragedy. The person asking the question falls into one of two camps. They are either sympathetic and wish to convey the feeling that they themselves would not know what to do were the situations reversed or they are expressing shame and disbelief that another person could commit such an act.
In the Book of Mormon, Nephi teaches us that there must be opposition in all things. We need contrast to sharpen our understanding of things and situations. We need to know how bad it can be before we truly appreciate how good it can be. So, with that in mind, let's ask the opposite question. Instead of asking "How can he live with himself" let's ask "Why doesn't he kill himself?" If we are truly interested in discovering how an individual is able to live we need to understand also why they won't die. I'm dead certain that no one reading this would advocate suicide but by asking how someone can live what you are really asking is why suicide isn't an option. It's a horrible thing when you frame it that way, but the point of this exercise is to make you uncomfortable asking rhetorical questions. I want to help you understand that not all questions are rhetorical even though you ask them without expecting an answer.
If you feel compelled to ask to ask this question, you should feel an even stronger desire to answer it. There is some force that is driving this person to go on in the face of extreme opposition. There is something giving them hope that things can be better and that they can be better. Rhetorical questions have a nasty way of objectifying the target of the question, but by expecting and seeking an answer you allow yourself to connect with people and that principle is at the heart of a Christ-centered life. The Savior himself distilled every commandment and law down to two simple principles: Love God and love your neighbor. Rhetorical questions disconnect us and stifle the bond of love. So ask questions, but make sure to seek answers.
On a side note, when the Savior taught the parable of the good Samaritan he asked a question at the end. Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves? (Luke 10:33). Whether or not you think this is a rhetorical question says a lot about where you are spiritually in your life.
Q: What I wouldn't give to have (fill in the blank).
A: This is deceptive because when we say it, it comes out as a statement and you don't hear the tell-tale raised inflection at the end to indicate that it is a question. So let's rephrase it. What would I give up so that I can have the thing I desire? Some of the most successful and happy people in the world are people who understand the answer to this question. This most definitely should not be a rhetorical question. We should spend our whole lives in search of the answer to this question.
In order to properly answer the question, however, you need to fill in the blank. If you desire a Big Mac, then the answer is simple. You would have to give up approximately one dollar. The smaller the prize, the easier the answer. The key is to allow this question to motivate and drive you to bigger and better things. To get that result you need to up the ante. What would you give up to have a two-week vacation in Hawaii? Once you know the goal it's not hard to then find out what you would need to do to get there. And once you know what's on the line it becomes a question of commitment. Can you give up what's necessary to get there?
But why stop at Hawaii? The Lord told Moses many years ago that his purpose was to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. Shouldn't that be our goal as well? Shouldn't we have our eyes fixed on the ultimate prize? To live with God and know him again is an awe-inspiring goal. A great Lamanite king proclaimed that he was willing to give away all that he had and all his sins to know God.
Our salvation depends on our faith and testimonies and our faith and testimonies depend on seeking and receiving answers to questions. Don't get caught in a rhetorical trap. Every question deserves an answer because every answer brings knowledge. Knowledge is power but knowledge is not found in the question. Again I encourage you to ask questions but ask with the intent to receive and answer.
Only when you have asked all the questions will you have all he answers. Wouldn't that be nice?
Comments
Post a Comment