How to have a discussion

[Rev. Powell]

This is a really good article worth reading in full. The headline is that polarization is exaggerated; the right and the left agree on much more than they think they do.

https://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/political-polarization-is-exaggerated/

While the whole article is excellent, I thought these tips for how to approach a political or other heated discussion were exceptional and worth sharing.

"*Try to get your news from neutral and balanced sources, and use multiple sources. Avoid partisan sources, even if they make you feel good in the moment. Avoid echo-chambers as a source of information.

*Seek out the other perspective. Before you accept a position, see what those who disagree with that position have to say. Don't let one side tell you what the other side thinks and feels – let everyone speak for themselves.

*Apply the principle of charity. It is a good starting assumption that most people think of themselves as reasonable good people. And mostly we all want the same things – justice, security, liberty, fairness. We may have different priorities, experiences, and belief-systems, but there is likely far more of a core of commonality than you might naively assume.

*Listen. Don't simply talk (or write) at someone as if they are a representative cardboard cutout of the stereotyped "other side" you have been told about. Engage with what they actually say, and you may find a more reasonable and nuanced opinion than you assumed.

*Seek common ground. That is a good starting point for any discussion.

*Don't assume bad-faith on the other side. There are bad-faith actors out there, but it is too easy to just assume that about people who disagree with you. Give people the benefit of the doubt, and you will be right most of the time. Of course people may prove themselves to be bad actors, and then you can call them out, but make sure you don't go beyond the evidence you have.

*Keep in mind that in any exchange, your position may be the one that is wrong, or both sides may have something to learn from the other. We tend to think we are the one who is right in any disagreement, which means collectively we are all wrong at least 50% of the time.

*And of course – apply critical thinking as much as possible. Understand and avoid common cognitive biases and logical fallacies – but don't use these as weapons against others, use them to improve your own thinking."

[Allhallowsday]

I strive to achieve each of those suggestions. 
I also fail with certain subjects. 

[zombie no.one]

all good points... sadly it's very easy for 'debates' to become 'arguements' which result in vendettas where both sides get more pleasure out of trying to trip up the other, rather than genuinely striving for a credible search for some kind of truth

Also I'm not a fan of the current general internet trend of outright censoring and deplatforming of anyone decided to be spreading 'mis-information'... if someone is wrong or misinformed then educate them, openly... by censoring opinions you'll only serve to make the opinion holder double-down on their opinion and therefore more determined to express it.

This whole mentality is comparable to the 'Video Nasties' scandal. A perceived authority deciding what the lowly masses can and can't watch.... for their own safety, of course

a quote I read recently which I liked is: "The truth does not fear investigation."

[claws]

Also I'm not a fan of the current general internet trend of outright censoring and deplatforming of anyone decided to be spreading 'mis-information'... if someone is wrong or misinformed then educate them, openly... by censoring opinions you'll only serve to make the opinion holder double-down on their opinion and therefore more determined to express it.

The problem is those spreading mis-information rarely want to be "educated" with the truth. They know the truth but don't like the truth so they bend it to their liking.
Best example: Trump banned from social media. You can't reason with these peoplw, they are set in their ways. Discussions will only go in circles because no side wants to budge.

[Allhallowsday]

...The problem is those spreading mis-information rarely want to be "educated" with the truth. They know the truth but don't like the truth so they bend it to their liking...

Now that's truth. 

[zombie no.one]

I think the very concept of 'mis-information' itself seems a bit arbitrary... life is full of too many grey areas, most of which could do with exploring rather than shutting down due to disagreements.

what are you 100% sure of? you're alive, you need food when you're hungry, you need warmth/shelter, you need to avoid being hunted for food... virtually everything outside the most basic survival needs is a social construct of some sort.

If the majority of people insist on believing in and expressing something that is demonstrably and provably false, then my personal take would be, let them. doesn't mean I have to follow suit.... it's when people start enforcing something that is demonstrably and provably false that problems happen, but that cannot occur in the realm of normal debate or discussion, so it's all good.

[Alex]

Also I'm not a fan of the current general internet trend of outright censoring and deplatforming of anyone decided to be spreading 'mis-information'... if someone is wrong or misinformed then educate them, openly... by censoring opinions you'll only serve to make the opinion holder double-down on their opinion and therefore more determined to express it.

The problem is those spreading mis-information rarely want to be "educated" with the truth. They know the truth but don't like the truth so they bend it to their liking.
Best example: Trump banned from social media. You can't reason with these peoplw, they are set in their ways. Discussions will only go in circles because no side wants to budge.

I could be wrong here, but wasn't trump banned for his encouragement of violence rather than his inability to tell the truth?

EDIT: Yeah, I googled it and got this

TWITTER has banned President Donald Trump's account, citing "the risk of further incitement of violence" following the deadly insurrection at the US Capitol.

And

In a Facebook post, Zuckerberg said the company was banishing Trump for using the platform to foment a violent riot in Washington, D.C., a day before. Zuckerberg deemed the events "shocking" and a "violent insurrection against a democratically elected government."

[Allhallowsday]

I think the very concept of 'mis-information' itself seems a bit arbitrary... life is full of too many grey areas, most of which could do with exploring rather than shutting down due to disagreements.
what are you 100% sure of? you're alive, you need food when you're hungry, you need warmth/shelter, you need to avoid being hunted for food... virtually everything outside the most basic survival needs is a social construct of some sort.
If the majority of people insist on believing in and expressing something that is demonstrably and provably false, then my personal take would be, let them. doesn't mean I have to follow suit.... it's when people start enforcing something that is demonstrably and provably false that problems happen, but that cannot occur in the realm of normal debate or discussion, so it's all good.

You're being too philosophical.  Not everybody agrees THE BEATLES were great.  Saying they were the greatest songwriters of all time is not only hyperbolic but a matter of opinion.  Nonetheless, I am 100% sure THE BEATLES were great. 
I am 100% sure that murder is evil.  I am 100% sure that rape is evil.  I am 100% sure that torture is evil.  I am 100% sure war is wrong.

[zombie no.one]

You're being too philosophical.  

not the first time someone's said that to me  

Not everybody agrees THE BEATLES were great.  Saying they were the greatest songwriters of all time is not only hyperbolic but a matter of opinion.  Nonetheless, I am 100% sure THE BEATLES were great.  
I am 100% sure that murder is evil.  I am 100% sure that rape is evil.  I am 100% sure that torture is evil.  I am 100% sure war is wrong.

yeah but these are all still technically opinions, from which many long and interesting discussions could arise (e.g. is murder in self-defence still murder? what really constitutes rape?)

feeling hungry and cold is not an opinion.*


*in my opinion  

[Allhallowsday]

...

Not everybody agrees THE BEATLES were great.  Saying they were the greatest songwriters of all time is not only hyperbolic but a matter of opinion.  Nonetheless, I am 100% sure THE BEATLES were great.  
I am 100% sure that murder is evil.  I am 100% sure that rape is evil.  I am 100% sure that torture is evil.  I am 100% sure war is wrong.

yeah but these are all still technically opinions, from which many long and interesting discussions could arise (e.g. is murder in self-defence still murder? what really constitutes rape?)
feeling hungry and cold is not an opinion.*
*in my opinion  

I am 100% sure that we are indeed more than animals.  We have culture.  I do not think a long or interesting discussion would result from the premise of "Is murder evil?"  Self defense is not murder.  You wrote "100% sure", therefore I will assert in absolutes, not matters of law. 

[RCMerchant]

I always have a point , but it's on the top of my head!



-that there is a pinhead joke! A joke, son!

( say that in a Foghorn Leghorn voice- it helps a little.)

[zombie no.one]

I am 100% sure that we are indeed more than animals.  

interestingly the biggest chunk of my 1st year philosopy degree course was centered around this exact topic... so you can state you're 100% sure, but I can assure you countless people have devoted years to studying, writing about and discussing this without coming to such firm conclusions. (not suggesting you are 'wrong' btw...)

[RCMerchant]

And some people are just insane or idiots.

At an extreme level- try having a discussion with Ted Bundy, or a debate with Adolf Hitler.



(Ah Ha! Got my Hitler quota filled!)

[Allhallowsday]

I am 100% sure that we are indeed more than animals.  

interestingly the biggest chunk of my 1st year philosopy degree course was centered around this exact topic... so you can state you're 100% sure, but I can assure you countless people have devoted years to studying, writing about and discussing this without coming to such firm conclusions. (not suggesting you are 'wrong' btw...)

"More" certainly is not intended to suggest "better". 

[RCMerchant]

^ Sometimes- in fact most of the time, I think we are less than animals.
I think sometimes we're too complex for our own good.
Of course I wonder if crabs think fish are flying.