SPEAKER_00 0:00

And once we've picked a team, everything gets filtered through that identity. Social psychologists have long studied that we're naturally drawn toward groups that reinforce our beliefs. And once we identify with those groups, it becomes much harder to evaluate information objectively. Sometimes we're not defending the truth, we're defending the side that we've chosen. What it do, what it do? It's your boy Andre Spruel, and you're tuning in to the middle of the fence podcast. Thank you so much for taking time out of your day. Whether you're you're listening, watching, or both. As I like to say, time is the most valuable thing on this earth because we can spend it, but can't make it back. So as always, thank you for your time. And I usually have a lot more energy in my intros. It's not because I'm tired or anything like that, maybe a little bit, but it's because we're talking about a serious topic at hand for this episode. So let's get into it. Over the past few weeks, the death of 18-year-old Nolan Wells has become one of the biggest stories in the country. Nolan was a black college football player from Mississippi who disappeared during a 4th of July weekend boating trip with three friends on Horn Island. After an extensive search, his body was found just two days later. And since then, the case has raised far more questions than answers. Authorities say they have not found evidence of foul play, and they continue to describe the investigation as active and ongoing. At the same time, an independent autopsy requested by Nolan's family concluded that both the cause and manner of his death are undetermined, adding even more uncertainty to the case. As a result, the story has grown it into a national conversation. Not just about what happened to Nolan Wells, but also about race, public trust and law enforcement, and accountability. Right now, no one has been charged in connection with Nolan's death, and investigators say the case is still active. So while the facts are still unfolding, the conversations surrounding the case have become much bigger than just a single investigation. And that's exactly what I want to talk about today. So this topic has obviously been national news, and there's some people that aren't aware of the situation. But this is something that I wanted to bring to light because I just felt it tied in so well with the podcast. Because throughout the episodes, I've shared experiences of what it's like being the odd kid out in certain social groups, and especially growing up in the tough terrain and going to private school and hanging out with uh friends and peers in the affluent acre side of things and what that looked and felt like. So when I heard this story, it just really, really resonated with me. And this is something where I always try to see both sides objectively, but sometimes right is right and wrong is wrong. And this is a case where race is unfortunately at play. Um and if you just take away the race side of things, just think about it. Whether you have children or not, your 18-year-old son goes to celebrate 4th of July weekend just like everybody else, he doesn't come back home, and his body is found two days later. How would you react? Whether that's your son, your brother, your cousin, your uncle, you would want to exhaust every extensive effort to find out what caused that. That is a human being that that passed away at 18 years old, that won't get to experience life and all that it has to offer. And of course, there's other examples, you know, where there's babies that end up passing away uh before being born, or the other end of the of the spectrum, where there's people that live until they're a hundred years old or longer and end up passing away. So um I understand that everything is different, but this is something where your lived experiences and how you grew up really shape how you view this. Because someone like myself that has been in those situations and have had my parents tell me, hey, you know, whenever you're in a social situation with kids that you go to school with, you're most likely going to be the only black person or minority in those spaces. So even though they're your friends, sometimes they may not all be your friends, and if something goes goes down, you may be the one to blame. I'm not just I'm not trying to go off on too much of a tangent here and you know, and like negate what the police are doing in order to make sure that they find the suspects that were at the root of why this happened and all that. But again, it's just being in those social situations and being the only minority in those types of situations, the way that you feel it and react to the story is just gonna be much, much different. Versus if you're someone whose family grew up being in law enforcement, or you grew up in a neighborhood where where you trusted law enforcement because they were doing their jobs the way that they were supposed to. You know, and there's so many factors at play. And it happened in Mississippi, a state that has historically been known for racism, even though racism is throughout the country and throughout the world. And, you know, it just makes you think like, what if this didn't get the national coverage? Would people care enough to push to find the answers that they're looking for? Because at the end of the day, this was a child whose whose life got taken away. And it wasn't because of natural causes or anything like that. And I'm not gonna sit here and jump to conclusions about what I think really happened, because that would just be me pushing my perspective and my lived experiences as to why I would come to a certain conclusion compared to others. But this is just a reminder that this type of stuff unfortunately happens and it goes beyond race and social class and all of that. And I wanted to take the time to highlight this because um this is again an example of how our lived experiences really show with how we view certain matters and how divided we can be when at when at the end of the day it's all about coming together and realizing, again, that no matter what side of the fence you grew up on, we're all more alike than we think. It's okay to ask hard questions. It's also important not to mistake unanswered questions for answered ones. So, why do people look at the exact same story and walk away with completely different conclusions? I don't think it's because most people are dishonest or anything like that. I think it's because most people are simply human. Whether we realize it or not, every single one of us sees the world through a lens that has been shaped by our life experiences. Psychologists refer to this mental framework as schemas. They're essentially shortcuts our brains develop over time to help us make sense of the world. The experiences we've had, the communities we grow up in, the stories we've been told, and the moments that have shaped us all influence how we interpret new information. Think about it. Someone who has experienced racial discrimination may naturally be more skeptical when they hear about a case like this. And someone whose parent was a police officer may naturally be more inclined to trust an investigation until proven otherwise. Someone who has repeatedly seen institutions fail may begin with skepticism. Someone who has generally had positive experiences with those same institutions may begin with trust. Neither of those starting points automatically make someone irrational. They're simply starting points. But here's where I think we have to be very, very careful. A lens can help us notice important things, but it can also keep us from seeing other things. History can explain why we react a certain way. It doesn't automatically prove that our reaction is correct. And I think that's a distinction we don't talk about enough. This brings me to what I believe is the real challenge. Okay. I don't think the mistake is talking about race. I actually think race should be part of many conversations. Ignoring history doesn't erase history. Ignoring people's lived experiences doesn't make those experiences disappear. But I also don't think race should become the conclusion before evidence has had a chance to speak. Researchers have also studied something called motivated reasoning. Instead of asking what's true, our brains often ask, what fits with what I already believe. That's not because we're bad people, it's because our brains are wired to seek consistency. But if we're not aware of that tendency, we can start interpreting every new piece of information as proof that we were right all along. And that can be very, very dangerous because eventually we're no longer following the evidence, we're asking the evidence to follow us. I think this is where our culture struggles. Because some people say race shouldn't be discussed at all. Others act as though race answers every question before the investigation is even complete. And personally, I don't think either extreme serves us well. History should shape our awareness, history should shape our empathy. History should influence the questions we're willing to ask. But evidence should shape the conclusions we're willing to reach. Those are two different things. And I think we've started confusing them both. The more I thought about this, the more I realized. This isn't really about one story. In fact, we do this all the time. A police incident happens, a celebrity is accused of something, a politician makes a controversial statement, a court case goes viral before the facts are fully understood. And then you see people that start to get divided into teams. And once we've picked a team, everything gets filtered through that identity. Social psychologists have long studied that we're naturally drawn toward groups that reinforce our beliefs. And once we identify with those groups, it becomes much harder to evaluate information objectively. Sometimes we're not defending the truth, we're defending the side that we've chosen. And maybe that's one of the biggest challenges of our time. Not that we disagree because disagreement is actually healthy. The challenge is that we've become uncomfortable with uncertainty. We've become uncomfortable saying, I don't know yet. But maybe that's exactly where wisdom begins. Not with having every answer, but with having enough humility to admit when we don't. Maybe curiosity is stronger than certainty. Maybe asking better questions is more valuable than rushing to better answers. Because history can teach us important lessons, but history shouldn't prevent us from listening to new evidence. And evidence shouldn't cause us to ignore history either, because both matter. The challenge is knowing when each one should lead. As I said at the beginning, this episode wasn't about deciding what happened to Nolan Wells. That's for investigators to continue examining as more evidence comes to light at the time of recording, of course. This episode was really about us, about how we think, about how we process information, about the lenses, about the lenses we all carry into every difficult conversation. Maybe the goal isn't to become colorblind. And maybe the goal isn't to see every story only through the lens of race. Maybe the goal is to acknowledge history without becoming trapped by it. To stay curious without becoming naive. To seek justice without abandoning evidence. And to remember that asking difficult questions and waiting for honest answers don't have to be opposites. Because if we're truly searching for the truth, then we should be willing to let the evidence challenge our assumptions, no matter which side of the fence we started on. Thank you so much for tuning in to this episode. And if you like this episode, please be sure to like, comment, subscribe, and follow us on YouTube or your favorite podcast streaming platform. And as always, no matter what side of the fence you grew up on, we're all more alike than we think. My name is Andre Sproul. Catch you guys next time.