← The Alisa Childers Podcast
The Alisa Childers Podcast
#373 Why Smart People Fall For Online Manipulation | Phoenix Hayes
00:58:11
Loading summary
Transcript184 lines
- [00:00]
Alisa (Host/Advertiser)
Summer adventures are better with Minky Couture. From road trips to ball games, beach nights to backyard movies, Minky has you covered. Don't miss the Everywhere blanket. Water resistant, ultra soft and made for life on the go. Wherever summer takes you, bring comfort along. Minky couture.com the original best blanket ever.
- [00:30]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Because if you skip that one piece. Oh logic. That post enlightenment thing that is, you know, a white construct. Da da da da. No, that's the only thing of the four that you can actually test, verify, give counter examples to. So if you remove that, you have persuasion, but you don't necessarily have truth.
- [00:58]
Alisa (Host)
Hey friends.
- [00:59]
Alisa (Host, Sponsor Reads)
Welcome to the show. Today I'm sharing with you an in studio conversation I had with my friend Phoenix Hayes from neon faith.com we're talking all about how to engage with social media content without being manipulated or deceived. This episode is brought to you by weheartnutrition.com wonderful Christian supplement company. Go to weheartnutrition.com and use the code ALISA for 20% off your first order. I am so excited about this episode because if you haven't noticed, the social media landscape is pretty crazy. I, as I pointed out to Phoenix many years ago, noticed that you had to if you made a claim or you made a statement, you had to back it up with facts. Well, today people are all over TikTok, all over social media just making claims and not even having to back them up with facts. They're using emotional appeals, storytelling, framing and some of those things are not bad when they're in their proper place. But what we talk through today is how to assess a claim, figure out if what the person is saying is true and to avoid being emotionally manipulated to putting your feelings over facts. And also how to make a claim and how to make a case for something without you yourself manipulating others. Such an important episode. Here's my friend, Phoenix Hayes.
- [02:20]
Alisa (Host)
Phoenix, tell us what have you been up to? You've been busy and I know you have a heart for young people. So tell us what you're up to these days.
- [02:28]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
These days I am working for a ministry I founded called Neon and it's focused on next gen ministry. So specifically we're focused on creating free resources not only for young people. So those who are in the church attending youth ministry and those outside just with questions. But we also specifically want to equip youth leaders and youth pastors and those who are in young adult ministry. Craig Groeschel, amazing pastor, amazing entrepreneur, always talks about when you make the leader, everyone, when the Leader gets better, everyone gets better. And so that really resonated with me and I thought, well, how can we impact the next generation better and do what we can as a church to help serve stem the so called Exodus. We're often hearing about of young people raised in the church. We've got 18 years in the church, but then not coming back within a year of finishing high school until maybe years later. It's like many of them, the reasons are broad. It could be apathy, it could be rebellion, it could be just scheduling conflict. But we studies show that a big portion of it is intellectual doubt. And if they haven't been given answers to these questions before they leave, many of them never get round to finding a safe place to actually ask them. Well, that's great, let's get them asking. But what do you do if the youth pastors can't respond and they're overwhelmed and they don't know what to do? So we really wanted to see what we could do to help equip the frontline workers, the people who are there every day building those relationships and those connections in a way that online apologists can't do. Like we're disconnected from them, just equipping them so that they can then take all that knowledge and sow it into their young people.
- [04:24]
Alisa (Host)
I love it. And we will put a link to that in the show notes so that people can check out everything that you're working on and offering on there. But you know, you mentioned the intellectual doubts and it got me thinking about the topic that we're going to really discuss today, which has to do with how do you, how do you reason without being manipulated? Right. Because we are living in a time. So back in like 2016, when I started my blog, I remember you had to be airtight on your arguments. Yeah, I, I remember writing blogs and if I didn't provide a citation or a resource, if my logical reasoning wasn't sound, an atheist would call me out in the comments there. You just couldn't get away with stuff like that. Yeah, Fast forward to 2026 and we're living in a time where people can go on TikTok and literally just say stuff. Yeah, they can just say stuff. And nobody expects for them to give a citation or a resource or any sort of a reasoning to come to the conclusion that they have. And it's been kind of discouraging, I'll be honest, because you, you see all these videos and you're like, that's already been debunked so many times. But Nobody cares. The video has millions of views and hundreds of thousands of likes because it's appealing to them in a different way. And so that's kind of what we're going to talk about today is yes, what, what is sound reasoning? But more importantly than that, how do we do that? How do we have discussions with people, how do we make our case? And, and how do we also avoid being manipulated? How do we avoid coming to a false conclusion because of some other way that we were persuaded that really wasn't sound from a logical perspective. So maybe start with framing. What is the difference between framing and an argument?
- [06:05]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
So framing is the pre rational work you do with the person that you're speaking to. The. I'm sorry, it's not the pre, it's pre rational. So it's things that you say to the person that you're going to make a case to, going to make present an argument, present your point to before you launch into your argument and just go cold turkey. This is what I think and this is why you're wrong. Everyone knows that it's better to prime your audience a little more. And we're not talking about being on a stage in front of a huge audience. Just this is relationship building and this is dropping some questions or comments to ease your friend or whoever it is into the place, into a place where they're going to be most receptive to understand why an issue matters. They don't have to agree with you at this point, they just need to care a little bit. So framing is simply using language or examples or questions to get someone to see why an issue, whatever it is, is relevant to them or, and why we should maybe talk about it or challenge it or investigate it a bit. And that's it. The argument follows after the framing. The argument is when you make a clear position for what you believe or what you're stating as the thesis and then it's followed by evidence. So that's the difference. The issue is that more and more people are relying only on the framing and then jumping straight to conclusion. I've done all this priming for my, for whoever's following me, whoever's listening, and then they jump to conclusion and they've never actually made a clear argument of this is what I'm claiming and this is the data to support what I'm claiming. It's just priming, priming, priming. Conclusion. Yeah, and people who are really good at it, particularly in the entertainment industry, often they, they get great buy in from their followers because they've been Pulled into a story. They've been pulled in with emotional language. Yeah, I really care about this now. And here's the conclusion. And they don't even realize that this middle step has been completely skipped. The actual clear argument and the evidence to prove it or disprove it.
- [08:28]
Alisa (Host)
Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Yeah. Well, and so I remember back when I was studying progressive Christianity and they were really good at the framing and they're really story driven. And you relate with a lot of the stories. They would tell stories of growing up in evangelical culture, the 80s and 90s, and there was a lot of kind of weird going on. And at that time, I remember some of that as well. So you would relate with the story and then very often, not in every case, but very often they would jump straight to the conclusion and you find
- [08:58]
Alisa (Host, Sponsor Reads)
yourself going, yeah, yeah.
- [08:59]
Alisa (Host)
So therefore. Yeah, right. And that's the step that gets skipped. Yeah. And so I like that you've separated those two, because framing is important. Like, I find that when I can relate with somebody through story or through maybe my story, then there may be more apt to want to hear what I have to say. But we want to be careful to make sure we're also looking for that argument. Right?
- [09:23]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
That's right.
- [09:24]
Alisa (Host)
So let's talk about logic, because we're kind of in a postmodern culture, which I even, you know, said I think it's. It can't. I mean, obviously there's a lot of negatives to that, but one of the positives to being in a postmodern culture is that it is very story driven. So people are more apt to be open to hearing where you're coming from if you frame it like a story. But we still want to make sure we're bringing in logic when we are frankly living in a time when people aren't just maybe unaware of logic, but they're actually shunning logic. Like, I have been in the position many times when I'm trying to have a discussion with somebody and if I bring anything logical in, they'll say something like, oh, no, no, no, you're just stuck in like the post enlightenment rationalism. Like, you need to let that go and realize that, you know, there's more to it than that. And so they want to actually oppose logic. Do you find that to be the case in your discussions as well?
- [10:19]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah, I find that when you frame persuasively enough, whether you're using it illicitly or not, because there, you know, there, there is a healthy way to use Framing and a negative way to use framing, and we'll talk about that in a minute. But depending on how it's done, you can do it so that your audience or. And I just keep saying audience, but I don't mean you're actually on a stage talking to people. Just the person you're dialoguing with no longer cares about the logic or the evidence because you've used so much emotionalism and so much speculation and so much conspiracy theory language, or like, you've riled up enough emotion that they're ready to jump straight to action. What are we gonna do?
- [11:09]
Alisa (Host)
That's right.
- [11:10]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
This isn't okay. And so anyone who wants to hit the brakes and say, wait, wait, wait, Logic, that's no fun. We're like, no, no, no, we're hyped up. You've made a mob. We're ready to go. It's very difficult to hit rewind and say, no, no, no, just hit pause for a second. Are the things. Is it true that the things I'm saying are backed up with data or evidence or what that point when you're really ticked off about something, you. You don't really want to know anymore, you just want to deal with the emotion.
- [11:39]
Alisa (Host)
Yeah. And do the action point. That's a good point.
- [11:41]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah.
- [11:41]
Alisa (Host)
So why does logic. Do you think, why. Why do we need to fight for logic? Because, you know, it's like when you're in a situation where somebody isn't, you know, I. I've had this discussion because in apologetics, of course, you know, we. We begin with, what is truth? What is the nature of truth? And if you are defining truth as. As something that's relative to each person's experience or environmental upbringing or socioeconomic status or maybe even ethnicity or biological sex, if it's just relative to each individual person's experience, well, then it can come off as very arrogant to bring in some kind of a logical argument. Like, even when it comes to truth, you know, famously, apologists are the kind of people that will say, when somebody says, well, there is no truth. And we say, well, is that true? And we're trying. But. But I. What I try to help people understand, especially in our apologetics world, is that very often when you point that out to people, even if they can see what you're saying, they don't care. Yeah, they do not care. Discouraging that you've just pointed out that they're actually refuting themselves, because that's just. It's like you're on two different wavelengths as Far as how you're thinking. So you know, God is a God of order, of course, and you can't avoid logic. But how can we maybe bring logic back in in a way that is not going to be so off putting to Wow.
- [13:00]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
I think unfortunately, the people who love logic tend to be less creative. So you've automatically got this issue where it's presented as though they're somehow opposites or they're in conflict with each other, that you can't be emotional, relational, artistic, creative and logical. It's not because they're incompatible. It's just that those who tend to be more mathematical, analytical, logical, they just tend naturally with their personality to embrace that more than the other side. And so you create these stereotypes where the two can't walk alongside. Occasionally you get unicorns, where, I mean, you're a classic unicorn, where you have the creative, you have the music, you have the communication skills. I think of myself as a bit of a unicorn that way too, with my graphic design and the film and things like that. But there's this side that also likes logic and clarity and order in its rightful place. So being able to present clear, coherent arguments. I mean, first off, even the word argument is off putting because it automatically sounds combative for no real purpose.
- [14:11]
Alisa (Host)
Right?
- [14:11]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
We're using it in the sense not because we just love, not chaos. We love like the angst of argumentation. It's because that's, that's the word for making a statement, backing it with data and then making a conclusion. That's just definitionally what an argument is. Whereas we don't think of that when we talk about arguments. So in a sense, we've already got the language working against us. Like, well, let me present an argument to you with logic.
- [14:38]
Alisa (Host)
It's like we don't want to argument with that sentence.
- [14:42]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Don't lead with that. Don't lead with the word argument or the word logic. Just do it. Just use the logic. Right, because people are using logic even when they come to their emotional conclusions. Believe it or not, it's just bad logic.
- [14:59]
Alisa (Host, Sponsor Reads)
Quick pause to tell you about good ranchers. You know, I didn't realize how much time and mental energy I was spending on grocery shopping until I stopped doing it. At least when it comes to my meats. Now I get almost all the meat that we eat in our home from good ranchers. This is 100% American meat, sourced from local farms and ranches and then delivered straight to my door. It's simple, high quality and it just makes life so much easier. And they just came out with customizable boxes. The second I heard about this, I went on goodranchers.com went to my account and I switched my box so where I could pick and choose what I want in each box. So visit goodranchers.com today and start your plan with free meat included in every order, plus 100 off your first three orders with my code Alisa. Or if you just want to try it out, get $40 off your first order with my code ALISA. Go to goodranchers.com today and use my code ALISA. Lisa goodranchers.com, american meat delivered.
- [15:57]
Alisa (Host)
Yeah, because I've had to think about this a lot. When I was in my faith crisis, one of the first arguments, you know, to use the word we're not supposed to use.
- [16:05]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah.
- [16:05]
Alisa (Host)
That was really persuasive to me, just to kind of show me that God exists, was the cosmological argument, which is, is set up in syllogistic form. So if anybody's unfamiliar, a syllogism is where you have a series of statements and then you have a conclusion. So you have premises and then conclusions. And so the cosmological argument, at least the one that, that was formulated in the way that I understood it, was premise one is everything that begins to exist must have a cause.
- [16:31]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah.
- [16:32]
Alisa (Host)
Premise two, the universe began to exist. And then if those two premises are true, then it must logically follow with the conclusion that therefore. Therefore. Right. So everything that begins to exist must have a cause. The universe has a cause. Therefore, I mean, the universe began to exist, therefore the universe had a cause. Now that's, that's all very like, heady, but like, when I really think about it emotionally, for me, I'm thinking, that makes sense. Things don't just pop into existence out of nothing. That doesn't. That's not something anybody's ever observed.
- [17:06]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah.
- [17:07]
Alisa (Host)
I mean, that is just established. Right. Things don't. Everything has to have a cause. Yeah. Right. Even just me moving my arm is caused by my neurons in my brain telling my body to move and my nerves and all of this. And then that goes back and back and back. And so scientifically, even then looking at things like the Big Bang, and we know that the universe started. It started from somewhere, it's not eternal, it's not self existent. And so it had to have a cause. Well, then you start to think through, well, like what kind of a thing, what kind of a something. Yeah. Could cause a universe to explode into existence out of nothing. Will have to be really Powerful. It would have to be intelligent because of how finely tuned everything is in our universe. The law, you know, the gravitational pull and all of this stuff is just perfect. And then, you know, you think about. It would have to be so great power, intelligence. It would have to be outside of space, time and matter because it's causing space, time and matter to come into existence. So, like, what I'm doing right now is just talking about thinking it through in a more just emotional way even to go, well, what does that sound like to you? Yeah, that is beginning to sound a lot like the God of the Bible. Now, of course, the cosmological argument isn't going to prove the God of the Bible, but it rules out some other kinds of gods, like a polytheistic God or like a pantheistic God, you know, couldn't exist. So it's something that I would love to see people get better at is just not eschewing the logic, but thinking like, let's really think this through. Like, why does this matter? Yeah, why is this important? So when does something like persuasion, like if you're using emotional language or you're maybe, you know, you're not saying, I'm going to present you with a logical syllogism now, and here's where I want you to land. But if you're doing, you're presenting it more like, hey, let's think this through. When does something like persuasion become manipulation? How do we know the line between those two things?
- [18:59]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah, so these. That's really important because I want people to be able to identify certain red flags. When people are, in a way, they're. They're hitting pause on answering a question and they're delaying. Delaying because they're priming. They're priming you with. They're trying to prep your ears so that you're going to receive their next statement a certain way. That's okay up to a point. So framing that is done ethically, we'll say is when you are stating a problem and why it directly affects someone without overstating the case. You're not using alarmist language. You're not using hyperbole. You're not appealing to emotion yet. You're just simply saying, hey, this is a cause for concern. Let's say a good example of this would be back when. Well, in most seat belt advertisements, okay, how do you get people in the 70s and 80s to care about wearing a seatbelt?
- [20:03]
Alisa (Host)
You show them bloody crash scenes in driver training. That's what you do. That's what we. I don't know what you had to do in New Zealand.
- [20:09]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
No, I didn't have to watch.
- [20:11]
Alisa (Host)
We had to look at crashed cars with blood all over them, bloody bodies on the street like kids now have it so much easier.
- [20:18]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Oh my gosh, we had.
- [20:19]
Alisa (Host)
Yeah, they traumatized us into that.
- [20:21]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
They did.
- [20:21]
Alisa (Host)
To answer your question.
- [20:22]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Wow. Well, that's good to know. I wasn't thinking of that, but what
- [20:26]
Alisa (Host)
I do you love how quick I was to answer that.
- [20:28]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
That speaks to a trauma core memory. So most seat belt safety advertisements, they have a pretty good record of this. They would lead with not just the statement seatbelts matter, but they would say something to the effect of seatbelts save lives. Well, immediately you've got my attention. What do you mean they save lives? And then it follows that with data to back up the statement. But what they've done is rather than just launching into you need to buy a seatbelt because. And then data, they're giving you more of a background situation of, hey, this situation. They may bring up a case example of a family that was traveling on the highway and little Johnny wasn't wearing a seatbelt and did, okay, now I care. So they have primed you to then care about their argument, which is, we want you to install a seatbelt or use your seatbelt. And then they follow that up again with data. But the priming was using a real life situation to get you to care, get you to listen. They might even use language like imagine you're driving down the road and someone cuts you off suddenly and you slam on your brake and your child in the back. They are, they are appealing to your emotion, but it's not illicit, it's not unethical, it's a real genuine concern. Now, when that tips over into alarmist language like imagine, of course, it could be anything political, it could be anything to do with climate change or the healthcare system. When people start saying, if A happens, then we're going to go into World War 3, or if B happens, then our economy's gonna collapse if you don't listen, it's very extreme or anything to do with you know what and they don't want you to know. Like all that kind of prep language of panic, fear, suspicion, they're priming you too, but they're priming you so that you now accept whatever their statement is from a certain perspective. It's not, oh, now you have my attention, it's oh, now you have my fear or my panic or I'm ready to take action on without fully hearing out yeah.
- [22:39]
Alisa (Host)
Because sometimes fear is appropriate. Right. Like I, as I'm teaching my kids, both of them now, my son's almost old enough to get his driver permit. My daughter already has hers.
- [22:48]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah.
- [22:48]
Alisa (Host)
I remember sitting with my son and he's kind of learning to drive on our little 4x4 that we have a four wheeler.
- [22:54]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yes.
- [22:55]
Alisa (Host)
And it has a roll bar on top. And so I've told him, I want you always wearing your seatbelt because if we've rolled this into a ditch, for example, if you're wearing your seatbelt, it'll just roll and you'll be fine until it stops and then you can get out.
- [23:08]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah.
- [23:08]
Alisa (Host)
If you're not wearing your seatbelt, it could cut your arm off or your head off. And I hesitated. Like I. But it's true.
- [23:15]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah. And that's true.
- [23:16]
Alisa (Host)
That is the truth. So what's maybe the difference between fear tactics that are, that are illicit, as you're saying, and an appropriate, like, hey, if you touch the stove, you're gonna get burned.
- [23:26]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah. I think anything that becomes unnecessarily extreme or panicky. So I mean, that's, that's a legitimate case of if your son happens to roll the vehicle and he gets trapped between the bar. I mean, people don't survive that often. But if you go from. Often it's the slim, thin end of the wedge type panic, where if you do X, then like I said, the whole economy is going to crash.
- [24:04]
Alisa (Host)
Right.
- [24:04]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
The whole infrastructure's down.
- [24:06]
Alisa (Host)
It seems to me like those kinds of things, like the economy is going to crash or World War III is going to happen. There would be so many factors, other factors that would have to also be playing at the same time that you can't predict.
- [24:15]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
That's right.
- [24:16]
Alisa (Host)
That's maybe when it becomes more of an illicit fear because it's like, well, that's not necessarily an outcome that could happen from this maybe.
- [24:23]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Right.
- [24:23]
Alisa (Host)
I don't know.
- [24:27]
Alisa (Host, Sponsor Reads)
Speaking of critical thinking, if you're a parent, you're going to want to get Foundation Worldview curriculum because we have to teach this stuff to our kids. Because in our culture today, even our youngest kids are presented with thousands of competing truth claims every single week. And if you want to teach them how to sort and sift through those claims, the Biblical Worldview curriculum from Foundation Worldview is the way to go. This is one we did in our home. And it taught my son to answer questions like, what is truth? Who is God? How did life begin? And what does it mean to be human? How can I tell?
- [24:59]
Alisa (Host)
Right. From wrong.
- [25:00]
Alisa (Host, Sponsor Reads)
And what I love about Foundation Worldview is that this curriculum can be easily implemented in the home, church or Christian school. So if you want to be intentional to teach your kids to think Critically, go to FoundationWorldView.com today and use the code ALISA for 10% off any family, church or Christian school license. Again, FoundationWorldView.com use the code ELISE, Lisa
- [25:24]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
or even a really good tell is when a person just keeps framing their position. Framing, framing, framing the what ifs, the this could, the maybe, and what about this? And speculation and guessing and maybe. But then there never is an actual claim made right? What they're doing is now it's moved from priming the audience to consider the claim. There's never actually a claim. It's just ongoing framing, priming, prepping to receive a conclusion. And they have bypassed the okay, now I feel like you're going to be more receptive to the statement I'm going to make. Here's the statement, and now here's some data to support the statement. And therefore, here's my conclusion with that. Instead, it's just 30 minutes of priming, 30 minutes of framing, and then maybe a conclusion at the end, maybe not. But what they're relying on is the 30 minutes of prime work gets the audience to create their own conclusion. And they've just bypassed so many steps in what it takes to actually make an argument. And amazingly, and this is what's so incredible about it and powerful about it, is it does persuade, you're persuading without actually making a clear statement ever. And that's really concerning. Because if that's all it takes, if just appealing to emotion and asking questions and telling a good story for the what ifs and maybes is that powerful to persuade us, we have a really big problem. And the people who are best at it are very good communicators, very entertaining, very good at piecing together different pieces to put together something that's plausible. And plausibility then trumps probability. It certainly trumps evidence and data. And so because we're so emotionally driven and narratively driven, we willingly give up the requirement of, okay, but what's actually your claim and where's your data to support it? We're so caught up in the whole framing part because it's entertaining, we get caught up in it. We feel like we're a part of something. And yeah, you're right. What? What is that? What?
- [27:44]
Alisa (Host)
Yeah, you know, I was thinking about this. Yeah, I was thinking about this when you were talking earlier about kids leaving Church after high school. And some of the reasons, and one of the reasons that occurred to me, and I mean, again, I don't have data for this. This is just something I. I think about and kick around in my own mind. But I think also it could be just a lack of community. And I think community can go both ways. So community could be the reason that they're leaving, but also community could be the reason they could follow an illicit premise to an illicit conclusion. Because it's a group of people that they feel, you know, that they fit in with and that they get a sense of identity with. And so there can be a lot of even manipulation that can happen from that perspective too. And, you know, I was thinking about this as I was studying deconstruction. I mentioned how a lot of people would be really opposed to logic because they'd say, well, you're just, you're just caught up in the post enlightenment deal. But then, you know, I was taking philosophy at SES and I learned that objective truth goes way back. In fact, of course, even, you know, Plato and the reason he came up with his forms, which, you know, philosophers later down in history refined that and made changes to it, but the reason that he came up with that in the first place was because the Sophists were relativists. They, they were not rooting truth in objectivity. And so Plato was trying to figure out, like, how do we do this? And so, you know, you're tracing back to Aristotle in some of your work. So talk about some of that because I think that's really important for people to hear. This isn't just some modern idea. Like logic isn't just a modern thing. Yes, there was a hyper rationalism in the Enlightenment. There was some negatives from that as well. But truth and rationality and logical logic is rooted in the character of God. So it goes back even before all of these guys.
- [29:26]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah.
- [29:26]
Alisa (Host)
But maybe trace it back to Plato for, I mean, Aristotle for us, because that, I mean, that's way before people are bringing in these modern ideas.
- [29:34]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah. So this is fantastic. It's Aristotle. In his book the Art of Rhetoric, he says, now, the proofs furnished by the speech are of three kinds. The first depends on the moral character of the speaker. So that's the ethos. The second, upon putting the hearer into a certain frame of mind, that's what we're talking about now. He calls that pathos. And then the third, upon the speech, it's itself insofar as it proves or seems to prove what they're trying to say, and that's the logos. So people tend to think of logic as just being that third one, logos. The language does A, point to B, point to C. But it's like, no, the art of persuasion rhetoric involves so much more than that. And then Aristotle adds a fourth one, it's called kairos. And that's about taking into consideration the timing and the situational context in which you present it. So the this, all of these components matter. When you're a communicator, when you're in the media, when you're a politician, you're thinking to yourself, okay, I have an argument I want to make. I have a statement that I want to persuade people with. I need to use, I need to be situationally aware. I need to use the right language for the right audience in the right time and place. I need to get, I need to set the right emotional tone and I need to bring on people with strong credibility, like strong character, so that they're going to be listened to and trusted. So there's all these other components to persuasion, the art of persuasion, and basically anything that bypasses the logos and only relies on credibility, only relies on situational awareness, only relies on emotion. Now we're being unethical because you're relying on these other tactics of persuasion that do work, but you've bypassed the one thing that you can actually test and challenge. That's why it's so deceptive. Because if you skip that one piece, oh, logic, that post enlightenment thing, that is a white construct. No, that's the only thing of the four that you can actually test, verify, give counter examples to. So if you remove that, you have persuasion, but you don't necessarily have truth.
- [31:57]
Alisa (Host)
So we talked about, you know, a proper use of fear or persuasion. Like with the seat belt example. Seat belts save lives. It's true, they do. But maybe give us some real practical, maybe a practical example of a version of manipulative or unethical persuasion that we see.
- [32:14]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
So a really famous example that you can look up online is the way Camel used to advertise for their cigarettes. So at the time, they're trying to combat an industry that is beginning to realize, oh, these may not be the most healthy product for people. But rather than addressing the actual concern, they bypass that. And they came up with slogans like, more medical professionals smoke Camels than any other brand. Something to that don't quote me verbatim. And so they're relying on manipulative, unethical tactics to convince you not to look over here at the data and instead just trust us. It's relying on. It's a fallacy of authority saying, hey, if a medical professional is using our product, it's okay. But they've never actually proven that the product's okay. They've just made a claim that medical professionals use it. Yeah, they're appealing to the crowd. So they're saying, hey, if the, if more medical professionals use our product than any others, there's an assumption implied that therefore ours is better than all the others.
- [33:29]
Alisa (Host)
Yeah.
- [33:30]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
So these are just examples that they've since been called out on and they make a great case study of how the actual concern of how is this affecting people's health. As more research began to come in and people were beginning to connect respiratory issues with smoking, they bypass all that and they just launch into, yeah, but look at this person's credibility. And look, everyone's doing it. And look, so this is very unethical and illogical tactics for persuasion.
- [34:01]
Alisa (Host)
Yeah, you're right. It's kind of the adult version of everybody does it, everybody does it, so
- [34:04]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
it must be good. And they've bypassed the actual concern and skipped over the data. They've gone from prime to conclusion without ever stating the conclusion.
- [34:15]
Alisa (Host)
Yeah.
- [34:18]
Alisa (Host, Sponsor Reads)
Okay guys, let's talk about We Heart Nutrition. I have always been into supplements. I've always researched like what are the best kinds of supplements. And I love We Heart Nutrition because they're a family owned supplement company founded by husband and wife, Jacob and Kristen. They create research backed, highly bioavailable supplements that don't have those unnecessary fillers, artificial ingredients or shortcuts. And here's what makes them really special. And you know, this is what I love. They donate 10% of every single sale to pregnancy resource centers across the U.S. which supports women and families to choose life. To date they've donated over a million dollars and the quality is unsurpassed. So these are clinically studied ingredients, highly bioavailable in their forms. It's not cheap blends. They're third party tested for purity and heavy metals, which really is important to me, especially when it comes to my Omega supplement. They're non gmo, no artificial colors, fillers or preservatives. And everything is made in the USA with globally sourced ingredients. Every single night I take their magnesium glycinate, that is 100% magnesium glycinate. They don't add any hidden oxide blends, which a lot of companies do. And this supports, supports sleep and stress, muscle relaxation. It's gentle on your digestion. And it's in its true chelated form for optimal absorption. They have so many options for different phases of life. And if you're not sure where to start, take their 30 second quiz. To get personalized supplement picks for your life stage, go to weheartnutrition.com take the quiz and use the code ELISA for 20% off your first order. Again, that's we heartnutrition.com use the code ELISA.
- [36:01]
Alisa (Host)
Okay, so let's talk about tactics. How do we spot this in the wild? You're on social media, you're watching videos and. And again, like it's so depressing. I see this all the time where people are just kind of relating with you with some story and then boom, conclusion, no argument. A lot of times they're assuming motives. Maybe that's a tactic. But what are some tactics that you see, I think especially on social media, as people are trying to deconstruct Christianity on TikTok and places like that. What are some of the tactics you see?
- [36:32]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Definitely the assumption of motive. So they're acting as though they can assume correctly the mind of someone else and that's whether the person has said something or said nothing. When you go into mind reader mode in your tactic, there is nothing that the other person can do or not do to prove you wrong. If they're silent, you can mind read on why they're silent. If they speak, you can mind read on the motive for why they said that. That's the role they're playing. When you start reading into and inventing the assumption, it's bulletproof. When you bypass logic and you position yourself as well, maybe this, well, maybe that. Now this person can't do anything to defend themselves because you've positioned yourself as the mind reader. So immediately when someone assumes motive, stop listening. At this point, you are not presenting evidence. You are, you are literally inventing. You are playing fairy tale.
- [37:31]
Alisa (Host, Sponsor Reads)
Right?
- [37:32]
Alisa (Host)
I mean, I get that a lot online. Like people in the comments, instead of saying, hey, I disagree with what you said and I actually think you're wrong about this and your resources are trash or whatever, they don't say that. They just say, oh, you're just trying to make money or you're just wanting to be the most popular YouTuber or you know, they're just. And that's assuming motive. And unless somebody's really trained to look for the difference, it can be hard to spot for people.
- [37:54]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Right?
- [37:54]
Alisa (Host)
I think. So what are some other tactics?
- [37:56]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Well, and often just to follow up on that, there's the. And so What? So, okay, yeah, you made your whole video so that you would make money and so what?
- [38:08]
Alisa (Host)
Yeah.
- [38:08]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Is she wrong?
- [38:09]
Alisa (Host)
Is it wrong?
- [38:09]
Alisa (Host, Sponsor Reads)
Yeah.
- [38:10]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Is it like, not is it wrong to make something for money? But is the argument still wrong?
- [38:14]
Alisa (Host)
Yeah.
- [38:14]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
So often people do that. Like, well, you just said all that so that you would make money or so you'd be more popular. Okay, let's say I am.
- [38:21]
Alisa (Host)
Yeah.
- [38:21]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
You still haven't disproven me.
- [38:23]
Alisa (Host)
Right.
- [38:25]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
The hasty generalization. So because sample X did Y, all of X is going to do Y. Let's say when you're trying to make assumptions about an entire government, maybe, or an entire organization, let's say they'll take little, little snippets of actions that an individual did or that may be completely unrelated to the organization or the government that they represent. But because they did this little thing here and it led to this thing, well, now we can assume very safely that the entire system is also doing that. And it's like, no, that is, it's not the same thing. You can't assume the whole. From the sample.
- [39:18]
Alisa (Host)
That's good. I did an episode on the whole Candace Owens thing a while back and one of the things that really stood out to me, I watched her whole series on Brigitte Macron where she was claiming that Brigitte Macron was actually born a man and that there's this super secret kind of trans thing that happened and a whole bunch of other stuff. But one of the things that just, I guess a tactic that I saw was this, this every, it was like at the end of the whole series because I, I, I hung in for the whole thing.
- [39:47]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah.
- [39:47]
Alisa (Host)
And at the very end I was like, at best she's made a plausible case.
- [39:52]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Right.
- [39:52]
Alisa (Host)
Like if Brigitte Macron is a man, here's how it could have happened.
- [39:57]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah.
- [39:57]
Alisa (Host)
And that doesn't mean though, that that's evidence that she is a man.
- [40:01]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Right.
- [40:01]
Alisa (Host)
So I, I see that as one of the tactics where it's like speculation.
- [40:05]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah.
- [40:05]
Alisa (Host)
And, or even just making a plausible case.
- [40:08]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah.
- [40:09]
Alisa (Host)
Is seen as evidence. And that can be tricky.
- [40:11]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah. That's a phenomenal thing that I'm just seeing everywhere where there's a quote from someone who said poor evidence can make a great story. So. And that's what Candace Owens absolutely relies on in all of her episodes. Poor evidence. And then her gifted communication skills, her ability to piece different things together and provide a possible narrative, not a probable narrative, and then serves that up as though this is a conclusive explanation for what happened. And it's just you can't get to there from here. She has circled the actual evidence and data and is relying only on story to get to conclusion.
- [40:58]
Alisa (Host)
Yeah, yeah. Talk about falsifiability. Because. Or more importantly, unfalsifiability.
- [41:04]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Right, well, that's part of the. That's why this tactic is so brilliant. If you don't want to be, let's say, sued or actually challenged and critiqued. Because if you never prevent hard evidence, you can never be disproven. There's nothing to disprove.
- [41:21]
Alisa (Host)
Right.
- [41:22]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
So just keep relying on speculation, questions and possibilities and hunches and I believe statements and I feel statements. No one can disprove an I believe or an I feel statement because you may well believe them. You may well feel that that is unfalsifiable. So anyone that's relying on something that's unfalsifiable to build their case on, dismiss it. Because if they actually have something, something verifiable, they will present it. Yeah, but if you don't, then you're not going to present it. And now you have intentionally removed yourself from critique. And then this is the other tactic is when people do critique, make them the enemy. Truth is not afraid of critique. Truth invites pushback because truth is not. Truth is truth. So you can push back and critique and object and you have an answer. Well, if you're someone like, let's say Candace Owens critique, she jumps into the mind reader. She jumps into what's their motive. She filters in assumptions for why they would critique her. It doesn't matter why they critique her. Is the critique fair? It really doesn't matter the why. Yeah.
- [42:35]
Alisa (Host)
And with the unfalsifiability, it's actually a brilliant tactic.
- [42:42]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
It is.
- [42:42]
Alisa (Host)
It's very persuasive because I'll try to give an example. So, like, if I have a friend and I say, man, I wonder, I wonder. You seem to be away from your house a lot, you know, I wonder. I don't know. I mean, I'm just, just. I'm just asking questions. But don't you have like a lot of guy friends that are not your husband? I mean, I don't know. I'm not making a claim here, but I don't know. I mean, you're late. You come home late a lot. I wonder. So I've not made a claim yet. No, I'm just asking questions.
- [43:17]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah.
- [43:18]
Alisa (Host)
And I've not said anything that you can conclusively deny.
- [43:22]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Right.
- [43:22]
Alisa (Host)
Because I've not made the case, but I've certainly Implied that you're cheating on your husband. Right. Yes, but that's different than actually saying, I have evidence that you're having an affair and here's my evidence. Yeah, those are two very different things.
- [43:34]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Right.
- [43:34]
Alisa (Host)
And so that unfalsifiability is a huge tactic I see all the time. Yeah. One, one place you see that in the deconstruction movement is when they'll make claims. So there's a whole bunch of those tactics kind of wrapped into this. But we're assuming motive is in here. But when they'll say things like, oh, the church just invented the doctrine of hell to control people with fear. Like, you see that all the time. And there's never evidence for that. Like, you never hear somebody say that claim and then say, and here's my evidence. There was this meeting that happened in the middle ages and they said, you know, people are leaving the church. And we have the document from that meeting.
- [44:07]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yes.
- [44:07]
Alisa (Host)
That said, you know, if we introduce this doctrine, people will be too afraid to leave. Like that would actually be evidence for that doctrine.
- [44:13]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah, yeah.
- [44:13]
Alisa (Host)
But they're not doing that. They're just assuming the motive. Yes. And they're, you know, and, and it's hard to prove that wrong because they're not presenting any evidence for it.
- [44:23]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Right.
- [44:24]
Alisa (Host)
So you just kind of have to go with, well, that feels right. Or that doesn't feel right.
- [44:27]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah.
- [44:27]
Alisa (Host)
Going on vibes and feelings.
- [44:28]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
It goes on vibes and feelings. And the very people who will most likely accept that and be persuaded by it are the people who already emotionally have emotionally moved away from the doctrine of hell. They don't like it, they don't understand it, and now you've given them a reason to validate that position. You have not given them evidence to validate their decision, but you've given enough inference and possibility for them to say, okay, yeah, that sounds right. Yeah, yeah, that sounds right.
- [44:58]
Alisa (Host)
Yeah.
- [44:58]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Is that confirmation bias?
- [44:59]
Alisa (Host)
Can you talk about the role of psychology? Because I feel like people really use psychological tactics in some of these spaces.
- [45:08]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah, well, a big one is everybody is so skeptical of institutions now and authority figures and, and that's partially fair. We have seen abusive systems and we have seen cover ups and we have seen situations where the small who are fighting for truth are silenced and cover
- [45:30]
Alisa (Host)
up culture that Mike Winger is exposing.
- [45:32]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Exactly. All those things. That is a real thing, but it isn't. It's built into everything. It's not a. This is always the case. So people are a little more skeptical of these big authorities. Anything with Power, anything with size, anything with money. The psychology is we're not going to be duped again or we're not going to let them get away with this again. We need to be. We are the vigilantes. We are the ones ready to call out and riot and cause a ruckus and all these things. So there's a sense of purpose, it's a sense of empowerment to say, I will not be duped, I will take action. And people are so desperate for purpose and meaning that they will cling to it almost every, anywhere where it's presented. And even more than that, we're so disconnected from one another. Connected technologically, but disconnected relationally. So when you're presented with a voice that is validating your suspicions and then in the comments, you're coming alongside like minded people, you're building a community. Even more points if that voice uses language. Like, but we know, we know. It's like the. We're in the. No, no, it's we don't know. But we. No, no. Anything with we language is, creates what they call an in group out, group psychology. So it's very cult leader language to create a sense of loyalty and bonding. So these are more psychological reasons to hold fast to whatever your leader or influencer is saying. Because now you're not just giving up your idea, you're giving up a community. It's just a lot at stake.
- [47:20]
Alisa (Host)
Yeah. So what would be the ethical way to persuade? I mean, because we want to utilize the types of tactics that will persuade for truth and for goodness. So how do we do that without falling into the trap of being manipulative or fear based or something like that?
- [47:38]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Right. Well, there is no ethical way to persuade without providing a clear proposition, clear data to support that proposition and then inviting critique. You need those three things. So everyone's got the priming down. Like you can prime your case, prime your audience, prime the person you're trying to persuade. If you want to use extreme language and hype up emotional, you know, connection, all those things, you can. I wish people wouldn't, but I get that there's an entertainment piece there and we only have so many seconds to get people to listen. So fine, I would say that's getting unethical when you have to use hyped up language to get people to pay attention. But maybe you do. That is okay if you can then follow it up with a clear statement, evidence, and then invite pushback. If you can't do those three things, you have not given a case at all. You are now just persuading you are not offering truth. It's just persuasion.
- [48:41]
Alisa (Host)
So when, when you're asking for pushback, though, I feel like there, there are certain qualifications for that because, for example, my frustration with progressive Christianity now, it's, it's changed a bit now, it's progressed a bit. But when I first started talking about progressive Christianity, they weren't making the case for anything. They were just tearing down.
- [49:00]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Right.
- [49:00]
Alisa (Host)
So if you invite pushback at that point it was like, oh, well, what about that? Oh, you answered, well, what about that? Well, what about that? Well, what about that? And so it was never like, okay, here's why I actually think you're. I'm playing the role of the progressive, like, and you're me.
- [49:14]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah.
- [49:15]
Alisa (Host)
You know, here's why. I think your argument is false. You referred to this person in church history, but actually I think you mischaracterized them. And here's why you're like, there's none of that. It was just like, well, what about this? And then it was just like, like it felt like you were just like playing whack a mole.
- [49:28]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah.
- [49:29]
Alisa (Host)
And so how do you invite, you know, I guess what's, what's the word? The type of pushback that would be like authentic pushback, actual critique and not just let me just try to poke a hole in everything was from some kind of a hyper skeptical place.
- [49:44]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah. What they have to do is specifically address a positive claim you made. So they can't just do the what ifs. What ifs? What ifs. We can be here until the cows come home of what ifs. That's why, I mean, in the, in the courtroom, they don't make cases on what ifs.
- [50:02]
Alisa (Host)
Right.
- [50:02]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
You will be there all day.
- [50:03]
Alisa (Host)
Yeah.
- [50:04]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
It's what is the claim and can you prove it or disprove it? That's it. Yeah. Not. We don't play what ifs.
- [50:10]
Alisa (Host, Sponsor Reads)
Right.
- [50:11]
Alisa (Host)
That's good.
- [50:12]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah. So that's a good place to start.
- [50:13]
Alisa (Host)
Okay, let's, let's do real practical for people who might feel overwhelmed. Maybe they haven't taken a logic class, they're not really versed in critical thinking. What are some very practical questions that we can ask ourselves when something comes down our social media newsfeed that makes a claim and we're not sure, like, is this doing the framing and then straight to the conclusion, or are they actually presenting evidence? What are some questions that we can remember to say, okay, here's what I need to ask when I watch this.
- [50:48]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Honestly, the first one is what is the claim? Yeah, because often they never get to it.
- [50:53]
Alisa (Host)
Right.
- [50:53]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
It's just. I mean, you'll see politicians doing their speeches and they're talking and we need to be concerned about this and da, da, da, da, da. Okay, we need to be concerned. But that's not a claim. What's your claim? Why should I be concerned? What's the claim? And then how did they support the claim if there's no support for the claim? You're just. Just saying things, but you're not giving data or evidence or any. Any kind of link for someone to go verify if the claim is something we really should be worried about. And then, and then the third would be, have they respond to.
- [51:30]
Alisa (Host)
I think you got objections. You skipped the second.
- [51:32]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Did I?
- [51:33]
Alisa (Host)
Yeah. So what is being claimed?
- [51:35]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
What is being claimed? The second question is, what evidence has been presented to support the claim?
- [51:39]
Alisa (Host)
Yes.
- [51:39]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
And then third, what is it verifiable? So the evidence that they bring, for example, an anonymous source, is not a verifiable claim. An anonymous source can't be tested.
- [51:52]
Alisa (Host)
True.
- [51:52]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Okay, so you can make claim, then you need to present evidence to support the claim, and then that evidence needs to be testable. If you don't have those three, you've got someone out there trying to persuade you of something with no support.
- [52:08]
Alisa (Host)
Well, and what's interesting, too, is I'm just not to, you know, harp on the whole Candace Owens thing, but one of the things that was frustrating to me is that there would be, like, a claim made that there would be evidence for, like, let's say the claim is. The claim is there were some Egyptians, planes that were at this place at this time, and that's verified. Yeah. But that doesn't necessarily mean that this thing over here is connected to that.
- [52:32]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
That's right.
- [52:33]
Alisa (Host)
And so that can be tough too, when you have actually, like, some minor claims that are made within the larger claim that might actually be verifiable, but there's nothing to connect them. So I guess that would go to the second question, like, what are the reasons to support this being connected to that?
- [52:48]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah.
- [52:48]
Alisa (Host)
And that's where I think it just takes a lot of practice to think critically and go, okay, not just what is the actual claim, but what is the overall argument being made that that claim is being held within? Maybe.
- [52:59]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah. Because often there are a dozen other explanations for why that verifiable piece of evidence happened.
- [53:07]
Alisa (Host)
That's right.
- [53:08]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
So in that case, you make a claim, you present evidence, the evidence has to be causally connected to the Claim otherwise. I mean, you. You can just come up with anything when the implications are going to impact real lives. That's the other thing that just drives me crazy is these aren't inferences for inanimate objects or for industries or, like, vague things. We're making inferences about specific people. And these inferences will have real harm, real impact. And you haven't backed it up with data.
- [53:47]
Alisa (Host)
Right? In the case of the Candace Owens
- [53:49]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
attacks on people, yeah, unfortunately, she is a textbook example of every manipulation tactic there can be done. Not only avoiding verifiable arguments that can be tested and falsified, relying on psychology to manipulate, and then thirdly, she uses entertainment tactics to keep you hooked. For the next episode, it's very tune into. Tune in next time for the next sound bite from my anonymous source or this piece of evidence. So it's very bait and switch. Bait and switch. Bait and switch. So she employs all three.
- [54:23]
Alisa (Host)
Yeah. All right, so final question here. What is at stake? I mean, some people might just think live and let live. If people want to believe what they want to believe, what do you care? You know, why does this matter so much? Why do you care so much that people reason well and come to good conclusions? I mean, if somebody's got a big popular YouTube channel and they want to spread some conspiracies, who cares if people are entertained by it?
- [54:45]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Yeah. The concerning thing for me is that it reveals a huge weakness in the way we look at information and the way we value truth. So if there's a group that's really excited about a conspiracy theory and they want to follow along for entertainment value and just, you know, maybe this happened, fine. But I think it reveals a much more concerning issue, is that people are bored. And when people are bored, they want to invent crisis. When people are used to having information fed to them, they no longer use their critical thinking or discernment. And this is something that they need in every facet of their life. When they give up their rational thinking, they're more prone to be deceived. Now, if it's something just. This is just a fun podcast that we're watching, fine. But what if it's something far more important? You've got a politician, you've got a teacher in your classroom, you've got a pastor in your pulpit who's using these same tactics to lead you somewhere and you can't identify it. That's a big problem, and that's where we are. So, one, the Bible already warns us that at the end times, it will be days of mass deception. So the Christian in particular is warned not to be deceived. You need to understand how deception works, how manipulation works, and when people are making a claim, what it requires to back up that claim so that you are not deceived. So this is just. You don't want to be duped. Learn how to critically think through what people are presenting to you. Number two is, honestly, I think this is what it means to be human. So what I mean by that is one of the there's only a few things that separate humanity from animal, right? One of them is consciousness, rationality, morality, and of course, being image bearers of God. But what's encompassed in being an image bearer of God and having that human value and dignity is our ability to process reason, critique, and have moral awareness. And when we give up our ability to reason through things, we are giving up one of the core pieces of what it is, what distinguishes man from beast. So, and we see that when we see mobs start moving together and they have given up their critical thinking skills and they're just moving on instinct and emotion. That is what an animal does. So that, that grieves me personally because you have given up such an incredible gift of just thought and processing and testing.
- [57:29]
Alisa (Host)
That's so good. All right, let people know where they can connect with Neon and where they can connect with you.
- [57:35]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
They can connect with me@phoenixhays.com and I'm on the different socials. They can connect with what I'm doing for NextGen ministry@neonfaith.com and we're looking to build out resources over time. And I'm excited to see what happens there because we really want to help the next generation do better.
- [57:56]
Alisa (Host)
Love it. Love it. Well, I want to thank my guest, Phoenix Hayes. Check out Neon Faith. And just a little teaser, Phoenix is going to be having a book come out pretty soon. She's going to come back to talk about it in the future. So let's remember as we pursue Christ to keep a sharp mind, a soft heart and a thick skin. We'll see you next time. The road that's narrow and the gate that small.
- [58:33]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
Don't give up.
- [58:34]
Alisa (Host)
It's gonna be worth it.
- [58:37]
Phoenix Hayes (Guest, Neon Faith Founder)
All.
- [58:42]
Alisa (Host/Advertiser)
Summer adventures are better with Minky Couture. From road trips to ball games, beach nights to backyard movies, Minky has you covered. Don't miss, miss the Everywhere blanket. Water resistant, ultra soft and made for life. On the go. Wherever summer takes you, bring comfort along. Minky couture.com the original best blanket ever.