“Now judge I had debts no honest man could pay

The bank was holdin’ my mortgage and they were gonna take my house away

Now I ain’t sayin’ that makes me an innocent man

But it was more `n all this that put that gun in my hand”

-Bruce Springsteen, Johnny 99

Why are so many people in America obese, depressed, addicted to drugs and pornography? From our mechanistic perspective we begin our explanation with, “Well, that’s because…” Be-CAUSE, or as the Middle English folks may have said, “by cause that.” Such statements tend to match a single phenomenon to a single cause. A poor diet causes obesity, for example. I’m a big fan of Jamie Oliver’s work to reduce childhood obesity and would be a fool not to recognize that a poor diet contributes to this national epidemic. But we need to openly consider other complexities that may exacerbate the problem per individual child. Human behavior is not mechanistic and is therefore not subject to the same laws of causality that govern the physical world. In light of this truth we need to take to heart the following:

1. People are not machines. We’re infinitely more capable and complicated. The adversity that caused Johnny 99 to go on a shooting spree could drive another person to start a software company.

2. Postulating causes for human behavior is natural. But postulating and attributing are two very different things. It is natural to form an educated guess. It is limiting to relationships to assume we know the source of another’s behavior.

3. Even if we could know with confidence why someone does something, this does not mean we now know what to do about it.

4. When human behavior persists despite an onslaught of effort and resources we may, in our disheartened state, concede that the problem surpasses our ability. Were we to be more inquisitive and less hasty to claim with conviction that we know the cause, I believe our efforts would prevail.

Best that we engage with people, behold and study them, serve their core needs to be seen, known, and empowered. Being authentically interested is the charge we must accept. Over time, with keen insight we may come to better understand be-cause.

There is much talk today about the negative, destructive messages that target youth. A recent study revealed that one out of every three rap songs references drug and alcohol use. The study did not say, but I wonder if the other two songs are about sex.

These messages abound through media such as music, ads, magazines, billboards and the Internet. Suggestions that drug use and sex are activities youth can and should participate in are ubiquitous—presented as sure-fire ways for youth to answer those questions that haunt their changing minds throughout adolescence: Who am I? What is life about? How should I relate to other people and the world we live in?

As adults our burning question ought to be: How can we best help teens sort through these messages and not fall victim to lies? Unfortunately, a common response is to simply be dismissive of the media. Many of us are inclined to deride it for its perverse presentation of reality; its seductive antics, propaganda and lies. “That’s ridiculous!” we may say in response to a music video that has captured the interest of a teen in our life. My concern is that such derision makes the object of our wrath forbidden fruit. That which we adults label ridiculous or stupid becomes enticing to youth precisely because we disparage it.

Perhaps I’m being too generous in thinking the majority of adults are attuned to the reality that the media are feeding feverishly on our youth. I suspect many adults, paralyzed by what they recognize on some level as an inevitable swell of propaganda beneath their feet, acquiesce to the surge of the media’s force. Such folks are inclined to underestimate not only the power of the media and its role in shaping young minds, but also the calculated, premeditated nature of these manipulations.

I want to offer a more helpful option to either dismissing the media as ridiculous, or denying its power. To begin I’d like to introduce the concept of “live ideas.” Live ideas exist within us as viable possibilities for how things really are. Since these ideas are alive and active, they help inform what we believe and do.

Imagine a teen coming to a crossroads at which he will need to make a decision. How does he go about doing this? What factors influence the decision he will make, and how might the media influence his decision? The media will guide a teen’s decision-making process insomuch as the media can introduce and sustain live ideas in teens. A music video, for example, may deliver the not-so-subtle message that if I have sex often and with many different women, I bolster my manhood and become a more substantive person. If I’m a teen I may believe sex will improve my social standing. Imagine these beliefs entering, living, growing, and thriving within the mind of a teen, like their own little Oz hiding behind the curtain calling the shots. The idea is now alive and will influence that teen’s decisions, worldview and self-perception.

Teens absorb dozens, even hundreds of these ideas. Live ideas produce live options. If a teen crafts his identity as a jock, the options put forth to him through the media may include: be arrogant, dismissive, cruel, and humiliating. He may not experience as a live option ballet, opera, chess, or volunteering at his local convalescent home. These are dead options because he has no live ideas that might furnish these options. Ideas are the seed. Options are the plant with all its branches.

So long as unhealthy, deceptive live ideas remain hidden they will grow. When we dismiss or deride the ideas they grow even more. To kill these ideas and cultivate true ideas that bear good fruit we need to bring the false ideas into the open. Live, lying ideas fully exposed will die. What happens when these ideas die? Teens enter the marketplace for new, better ideas to replace the old.

Crisis and conflict are central to this process. Where there is no crisis there is no conflict and no change. I believe our task is to bring teens into relationship with live ideas that are eating their soul. This creates the kind of conflict we’re looking for. If the teen is willing to let the idea die, and work through the ensuing crisis, a new idea will inevitably ripen and give true sustenance.

I was halfway through the class period when it happened. It was my fifth and last day with upperclassmen at a local high school. We were discussing sexual decisions, in particular the pros and cons of having sex at an early age versus the pros and cons of waiting.

The door opened and a girl entered who had not been present for any of the other four days. By looking at her I wondered if she was a proponent for some kind of minimalist clothing movement, for the distance from the hem of her skirt to the top of her tube-top couldn’t have been much more than 12 inches. She strutted passed me and sat at her desk.

A few moments later I posed to the class the question, “What are some reasons teens choose to have sex?” Without hesitation, though she hadn’t been present for any of the other discussions, the aforementioned girl raised her hand.

“Because it’s natural,” she said. Her tone was unmistakable. She wanted to skirmish. I recognized this and responded with a good deal of enthusiasm, “You’re absolutely right! Sex is as natural as breathing.” I went on to amplify the truth embedded in her statement: sex is natural. She wasn’t expecting this. She expected a fight. I think part of her hoped I would launch into a monologue about the risks of sex at an early age. Stunned, she sat quietly.

After this we discussed other reasons teens choose to have sex. We then explored the potential drawbacks to this decision. I just asked questions and facilitated discussion among the students.

Then I switched gears. “We’ve discussed the reasons why some teens have sex, and some of the potential drawbacks to that decision. But why would someone choose to wait for sex?”

The same girl raised her hand. I would be lying if I said I didn’t fasten a mental seat belt before calling on her.

In place of the venom that laced her previous statement there was stone-cold sobriety. “I think I would have more respect for myself,” she said. That was it. The room was quiet. I was stunned. I think a good number of her classmates were, as well.

I may never know whether this interaction created any lasting positive change in the life of this teen. But by honoring her statement, oppositional though it was, we didn’t get bogged down in resistance. This freed her to consider alternatives to her position. Had I increased the resistance she would have been stuck.

I’ve heard stories about hunters who discover the carcasses of two deer, their antlers locked together. Unable to separate themselves, the creatures eventually died a tragic, prolonged death. You and I do well not to lock horns with teens. Teens, like the girl in the class, will square up to us and invite us to resist them. Doing so would have devastating implications for our ability to create change.

Teens need to process their ideas. They need us to listen without reacting. Whenever possible, find the truth in a teen’s statement that you can support. You don’t have to agree with him or her in entirety. But by doing so in part you keep alive the conversation and make possible a deeper connection. What can happen in time is that we earn the right to share our valuable thoughts and opinions–and teens just might listen to what we say.

You’ve probably heard someone say, usually in reference to a meeting he or she attended, that someone at the meeting “had an agenda.” But I don’t think this is exactly what we mean. Everyone has an agenda. We have a sense of what we would like to do, and perhaps a sense of order for how we would like these things to unfold. It is a rare situation in which we can honestly say we have no agenda.

But when we say someone “has an agenda,” we tend to mean that he or she has an idea of how he or she wants things to proceed to the exclusion of input from others. Though others are in the room, the person driving the agenda does not welcome or allow the opinions of these people to mold ideas or alter the course of the conversation. Questions in this setting are a sham, not an earnest solicitation for ideas.

We all cross over from knowing how we want things to go to insisting things go a particular way. When we begin to ramrod our agenda we begin to view others as obstacles. Their questions, suggestions, and comments are of little worth to us at best, gadflies at worst.

I took my four-year-old to the beach last summer for her birthday. My goal was to let my daughter lead our time. The following was my agenda:

1. We’re going to the beach.

2. We’re staying at the hotel where I made a reservation.

3. We’re returning the following afternoon.

I knew somewhere in there we would eat, sleep, play, and read. But I didn’t know when, where, or in what order. If these were business meeting agenda items, I would have succeeded in completing each one.

So on the way to the beach I asked her, “Do you want to check in to the hotel, or go to the beach?” At lunch I asked her what she felt like eating. After dinner I asked her what she wanted to do before it was time for bed. I didn’t have to ask very often. She was more than happy to voice her wishes. If ever she seemed at a loss for what to do, I offered some options. I can’t say I succeeded in reaching my goal with perfection. There were many times I so wanted to do something other than what she wanted. I could feel the heat of my own volition rising to the surface. I was mostly successful in curbing these desires. My hope was that, over the course of a couple days dedicated exclusively to daughter-dad time, my child would sense the profound respect I have for her and her abilities. She is not “in my way,” and therefore not an obstacle to my agenda.

I grieve to think of the times I’ve treated my children and others as barriers to my objectives. We cross the line when we say, “my agenda ought to also be your agenda.” We take a figurative stapler and attach the agenda to another person’s chest. “There,” we say, “this is what you’ll be doing.” We are saying without equivocation, “I know what you want to do, but if I honor that it will detract from what I have planned.”

But we learn best when we can ask questions, raise associations no matter how oblique, and know there will be another there to help us make sense of it all. Many raise the concern that where boundaries are too vague, people wander. This is true. Boundaries are important. But keep in mind that where purpose drives direction there is no need for establishing rigid boundaries. Everyone knows where we’re going. Straying to the right or left isn’t an option. But what we want is the freedom to sort out what we view through the window.

Try this in a conversation, a meeting, or while teaching. Determine the entry point for the topic, have a sense of where you’d like to finish, but leave the process open for others to enter with their own ideas. I’ve conducted weekend retreats in this manner. This is still how I form agendas, or what I prefer to call “items for our conversation.” Everyone knows what we we’re doing and what we hope to accomplish. I intentionally leave the content open-ended so that everyone can contribute toward driving the time. Leaving agendas open creates a vacuum into which human creativity and brilliance can enter. This will make for much more meaningful, enjoyable and fruitful interactions.