Ad Man

When I was leaving high school, I was trying to figure out the next step. What did I want to do? What did I want to be? What could I do? You know, just so I could figure out what college courses to take and what major to pursue. One possibility was architectural design, but one that someone suggested that really pulled at me was advertising. You see, I liked creative writing and I liked music and I liked art, so perhaps I could combine all those skills in advertising. Well, of course, that was an obvious direction ... until I was informed that I couldn't really do any of those very well. So I was off in other directions.

As it turns out, I would not have made a good ad man. The most simple function of an advertiser is to induce people to partake of the advertised product or service. So you have to be able to influence people toward your intentions. And how do you do that? Well, in my case, I try to use sound reasoning and clear logic and provide evidence and rationale. Seems like a solid approach. And it ends up being completely off track. The most effective way to get people to do what you want them to do is not by careful reasoning and argument -- not with truth and logic -- but with emotion. You need to get them to feel a certain way because, it appears, most people are more driven by their gut than their brains.

Consider the two approaches -- mine and my opponent's -- to an example subject. Is homosexual behavior a sin? "Well," I launch in, "here's what the Bible has to say. Chapter and verse. Context. Language. Overall content. Multiple places. And here's what we see in Church history. A constant perception. And here's what we see in nature and here's what we see in human history and ... there you have it. Clear as day." What do I get in response? "What do you have against love?" "I think it would be really sad that people who love each other wouldn't be allowed to get married." "You're just a hater and a bigot." I even get, "You're on the wrong side of history" even though I just gave the biblical and historical precedence for my view. Because, you see, it is not reason that prevails, but emotion.

We're naturally that way, I think. We naturally prefer feelings to thinking. Then feed us 60+ years of television ads -- 30 second blasts aimed at heart, not minds -- and factor in the negative effect of rational decision making that would often indicate that we shouldn't do what we feel like doing, and you end up with a natural condition aggravated over time to a serious problem. While the human being generally feels based on how he or she thinks about something, we tend to -- are encouraged to -- decide based on how we feel rather than how we think. Indeed, we are urged "Don't think about it; go with your heart", as if thinking is inferior to feeling.

So, you see, advertising would have been a poor choice for me. I think too much. I evaluate by argument and evidence, by reason and examination. I think that making a coherent, cohesive, well-reasoned, well-supported explanation of something ought to be convincing. It's not that I'm better or smarter than anyone else. I just think different than the mainstream. I am, of course, quite wrong in that. The majority of humans, given to the debased mind (Rom 1:28) rather than the transformed mind (Rom 12:2), are just not interested in arguments. They'd much prefer feelings.