Don McMinn

I have the privilege of working for an extraordinary man, Chuck Swindoll. He’s smart, kind, competent, fair, engaging…the list goes on and on. He’s the greatest person I’ve know personally. 

One of the things I love and respect about Chuck is that he insists on being called Chuck. Not doctor or president or chancellor (he held both positions at a major seminary), or even pastor; he wants his colleagues, friends, admirers, and even children to call him Chuck. I like that; it’s admirable and right.

Years ago I worked with a man who had an honorary doctorate and he insisted on being addressed as Dr., even by his wife when they were in public. Ugh…

In our culture we often overuse titles and postnominals. Why don’t we just use first names? Or, better yet, here’s a meaningful, egalitarian term that implies unity and solidarity.   

I like the term comrade. 

Because of its common usage in portrayals of the Soviet Union in Cold War films and books, the term has become strongly associated with Russo-Soviet communism, even though the Russian word is tovarisch, not comrade. Admit it: When you read the title of this post, what came to mind? Did you resist the term?

But the term comrade (which means “mate, colleague, ally, team member”) actually derives from the Spanish and Portuguese term camarada. Political use of the term was inspired by the French Revolution (following the Revolution, French titles of nobility were abolished), after which it grew into a common and preferred form of address between members of a group regardless of class, rank, or status. Indeed, in communist Russia, Nikita Khrushchev, premier of the Soviet Union, would greet a factory worker by calling him tovarisch, and the factory worker felt comfortable calling Khrushchev tovarisch.

But the word has been misunderstood and sullied by social and historical influences, so I’m going to use it sparingly. If I know you have read this post, I may, with a concealed smile, greet you as comrade. But when I stand before the congregation at my church, I’ll refrain.

Just call me Don, or comrade. 

Years ago, I observed that if left undirected, many conversations among groups of people are awkward, trivial, and unbalanced. This first became clear to me when I met with a group of older men who had been meeting together once a week for years. I assumed that because they had met so often that they knew each other well. But I soon realized that they had never talked about serious issues of life; they just repeated the same conversations about the weather, sports, and news. Two of the men were unaware they were both veterans of WW2.

I continued to meet with this group each week for several months. Once I became a trusted member, I started “orchestrating” the conversations by asking questions and encouraging everyone to respond. I started with simple, non-invasive questions like, “Where were you born and what was the first ten years of your life like?” Eventually we shared on a deeper level, “What’s been the biggest challenge of your life? What are your dreams for the next 10 years?” As the conversations deepened, so did the relationships. 

Currently, when I’m with a group of people (my family, friends, colleagues), I often initiate topics to discuss, and ask everyone to share their thoughts. Once you create a safe environment where people are free to share their thoughts, and then suggest a meaningful topic, good conversation ensues. 

Where do the questions come from? I make most of them up on the spot, based on the group. But there are hundreds of good ice-breaker questions. I recently Googled conversation starters and found these.

1. If you could dedicate your life to solving one problem, what would it be?
2. What is the most spontaneous thing you’ve ever done?
3. How many uses are there for a brick?
4. Who is the most famous person you have met?

Mary reminds me to not dominate conversations with my questions; sometimes people just want to chit-chat. But adding some direction and purpose to conversations helps deepen relationships and and leads to interesting conversations. 

The next time you’re with a group of people, try it.

Psychologist Arthur Aron has written 36 questions arranged in three sets. The questions become progressively more engaging and require a deeper level of sharing.

SET I

1. Given the choice of anyone in the world, whom would you want as a dinner guest?
2. Would you like to be famous? In what way?
3. Before making a telephone call, do you ever rehearse what you are going to say? Why?
4. What would constitute a “perfect” day for you?
5. When did you last sing to yourself? To someone else?
6. If you were able to live to the age of 90 and retain either the mind or body of a 30-year-old for the last 60 years of your life, which would you want?
7. Do you have a secret hunch about how you will die?
8. Name three things you and your partner appear to have in common.
9. For what in your life do you feel most grateful?
10. If you could change anything about the way you were raised, what would it be?
11. Take four minutes and tell your partner your life story in as much detail as possible.
12. If you could wake up tomorrow having gained any one quality or ability, what would it be?

SET II

13. If a crystal ball could tell you the truth about yourself, your life, the future or anything else, what would you want to know?
14. Is there something that you’ve dreamed of doing for a long time? Why haven’t you done it?
15. What is the greatest accomplishment of your life?
16. What do you value most in a friendship?
17. What is your most treasured memory?
18. What is your most terrible memory?
19. If you knew that in one year you would die suddenly, would you change anything about the way you are now living? Why?
20. What does friendship mean to you?
21. What roles do love and affection play in your life?
22. Alternate sharing something you consider a positive characteristic of your partner. Share a total of five items.
23. How close and warm is your family? Do you feel your childhood was happier than most other people’s?
24. How do you feel about your relationship with your mother?

SET III

25. Make three true “we” statements each. For instance, “We are both in this room feeling … “
26. Complete this sentence: “I wish I had someone with whom I could share … “
27. If you were going to become a close friend with your partner, please share what would be important for him or her to know.
28. Tell your partner what you like about them; be very honest this time, saying things that you might not say to someone you’ve just met.
29. Share with your partner an embarrassing moment in your life.
30. When did you last cry in front of another person? By yourself?
31. Tell your partner something that you like about them already.
32. What, if anything, is too serious to be joked about?
33. If you were to die this evening with no opportunity to communicate with anyone, what would you most regret not having told someone? Why haven’t you told them yet?
34. Your house, containing everything you own, catches fire. After saving your loved ones and pets, you have time to safely make a final dash to save any one item. What would it be? Why?
35. Of all the people in your family, whose death would you find most disturbing? Why?
36. Share a personal problem and ask your partner’s advice on how he or she might handle it. Also, ask your partner to reflect back to you how you seem to be feeling about the problem you have chosen.

In the past ten years I’ve led groups of friends on annual trips to Paris, London, Europe, the Mediterranean, Baltic States, Russia, and North Africa. We’ve never had a malfunction or bad experience; just memorable, life-enhancing moments. I call these trips — Travel with Friends.

In July 2021, I took 18 people on a once-in-a-lifetime trip to one of the great historical and geographical countries in the Southern Hemisphere — Peru. Here’s a short video about our trip.

Travel takes time and money, but it’s worth the investment. You’ll be stretched and challenged, and you’ll learn more about the world in which you live and the life you live in the world.

Soon, I’ll announce a trip scheduled for October, 2022.

During World War II, the American military asked mathematician Abraham Wald to study how best to protect airplanes from being shot down. The military knew adding extra armor would help, but adding thick metal to the entire plane would make it too heavy to fly. Initially, their plan was to examine the planes returning from combat, see where they were hit the worst – the wings, around the tail gunner and down the centre of the body – and then reinforce those areas. They concluded that since planes coming home from battle have bullet holes everywhere but the engine and cockpit, it would be best to put armor everywhere except the engine and cockpit.

“But Wald realized they had fallen prey to survivorship bias because their analysis was missing a critical element: the planes that were hit but didn’t made it back. As a result, the military was planning to reinforce precisely the wrong parts of the planes. The bullet holes they were looking at actually indicated the areas a plane could be hit and keep flying – exactly the areas that didn’t need reinforcing.” [From BBC article]

This phenomenon is called survivorship bias. It happens when we only consider things that have survived or been successful and ignore those that have not. It is the logical error of focusing on successful people, businesses, or strategies and ignoring those that failed. We are tempted to think most success is due to particular characteristics that can be easily emulated.

Survivorship bias tends to distort data in only one direction, by making the results seem better than they actually are, which can lead to false conclusions and bad decisions.

Here are some more examples.

• In its advertising, a gym might feature clients who’ve toned up quickly as a result of going to their facility but, of course, they never show those who signed up but had little or no results.
• We often admire and are tempted to emulate people who have “beaten the odds.” For instance, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, and Michael Dell all dropped out of college but eventually became billionaires. Before following their example, students should consider the millions of students who dropped out of college but never got ahead in life (data shows that most college graduates eventually have higher income and better positions). 
• In the world of investing, survivorship bias is very prevalent. Poorly performing funds are often closed down so they’re not represented in the data and significantly distort performance figures.

To avoid survivorship bias, simply ask this question: Are we only considering examples that represent success or does the data also include instances in which the system failed? For instance, consider the three examples from the previous paragraph. It’s obvious that only one side of the story is being considered. So analyze the data sources and don’t be misled.

Here’s a must-read article

Conversations are the life-blood of relationships. Lucy Folks wrote an insightful article titled How To Have More Meaningful Conversations. In the article, you’ll be able to download Arthur Aron’s 36 questions that lead to deeper relationships.