“The most important voice to speak and be heard is the lone voice.”

–Maxim 2

This is a deceptively simple statement, I feel. At its most obvious interpretation, it is straightforward – we should listen to people who hold unusual views, or at least uncommonly expressed views. The “lone voice of dissent” should not be dismissed. But does that mean it should be accorded the same weight as the views that are held by most people? There we fall into the same sort of ‘false balance’ that the media have often been accused of in cases like climate science, treating fringe ideas (like “the climate is changing but it’s not because of what humans are doing, and nothing we do can change it”) as worthy of equal time and prominence as mainstream ideas (like “the recent rapid climate change is a result of human activity, and if we have any hope of halting it we must change our behaviour”). Certainly, the lone voice of dissent should not automatically be able to halt a considered and discerned position that has been reached, or is forming, among the rest of a community. Why then would be be encouraged to ensure that the lone voice speaks and is heard?

I can see several reasons. One is simple fairness. Just because a view is unpopular doesn’t mean it should be dismissed, and all views should have space to be heard. It is, in some sense, more important for the lone voice because that voice might need encouragement, people being unwilling to voice what they know are unpopular views. Similarly, we admit, as Quakers, a wide range of views on many topics. We should know what range of views exists so that we understand ourselves collectively. Still, neither of those is quite what this ministry is getting at, to me. As I have said before, I do not claim any special insight or authority as regards the meaning of my written ministry, short or long (except those that are actually expressing my views that I have been moved to share). Still, reflecting on this one I can see clearly a critically important reason for its advice that I do not think is so obvious and simple.

Every view that anyone holds has a reason behind it. It might be that they have looked at a situation or a problem differently from others, and come to a genuinely, soundly reasoned and logical view that differs from others. It may be that they have received inspiration that is different to that others have benefited from. It may be that their different life experiences have led to a different viewpoint. It is always good to understand these different viewpoints, and we may learn a lot from it. If someone has a view that is very different from the prevailing view, it may also be very stressful for them, or even distressing – think of the difficulties found in some cases when Britain Yearly Meeting embraced same-sex marriage, for instance. It is important to hear that view, and to understand where it has come from, in order to best give loving support to the person, even as they disagree with us.

Most important, though, from my own experience, are the cases where all seem to agree – until one person speaks to disagree. In another environment, they might be jeered down, told to stop, urged to go along with what people in general want. But in an environment that allows people to be heard, such as a Quaker Meeting for Worship for Business, two things can happen. These things can change the course of a decision, or how a group approaches a problem.

Firstly, as that person continues to speak and be heard, others will understand why they have a different view. It may be that the reasons resonate, that people are struck by them, and they change their minds. A different way of looking at a situation may lead others to change their conclusion, and the decision of the whole group is changed – just by listening to that lone voice.

Second, sometimes even more important, that ‘lone voice’ speaks, and then another joins it, and then another. What had seemed to be a lone voice turns out to be the voice that allowed those who already agreed with it to speak it, to let people know what they think, when they were discouraged from doing so by the apparently overwhelming consensus. That one person disagreeing gives others permission to disagree, and the different viewpoints that lead to the various people having this view can quite shake up a discussion.

In any given case, either of these might occur. It is just as possible that neither will, but we do not and cannot know in advance. It is therefore incumbent on us, both in order to understand the range of views that exist and to be sure that we have considered things as thoroughly as possible, to ensure that the lone voice is heard and given the audience that is needed to give whatever might happen a chance to happen.

Put simply and in short: sometimes the lone voice is right, and sometimes the lone voice isn’t alone. We have to give it a chance and find out.