Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to listen when you disagree

urbanconfessional.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 192 posts

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#41

Post by whiddershins »

justratsinacoat wrote: post #36
whiddershins wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was hard for me to resist the urge to downvote this comment. Yes, everything you are saying has merit, but overall I completely disagree with the main thrust of your point. If listening and understanding other people isn't the first step to working through these problems, nothing is. And I am unwilling to just call the problems unfixable, throw my hands up, and resign myself to a world full of such misunderstandin…

>I make a serious effort to nurture relationships with people who hold beliefs very different from mine, some of these beliefs I even consider ethically flawed, or counterfactual. And yet I get so much out of talking and especially listening to these people explain their beliefs to me. I feel grateful to have the opportunity to see the world through other lenses, and I have learned and grown as a result Honest questi…

I have changed opinions on certain topics, for example my thoughts about gun control and libertarianism are more nuanced than years ago.

I can articulate many viewpoints extremely clearly which I don't happen to hold, which means if I am in a debating mood I can much more precisely debate someone, rather than simply dismissing them.

I repeatedly realize my own opinions are sometimes based on unexamined assumptions, which no matter how many times I realize it and try to root it out, keeps coming to my attention over and over.

I repeatedly am reminded that almost everyone believes they are acting morally, and it is humbling to try to understand the morals of the person who seems so "immoral."

I often am floored when I realize just how different my lived experience is from the person who has formed such a puzzling belief, and it massively broadens my perspective to learn about those narratives.

These are just a few things off the top of my head, I bet I could think of many more.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#42

Post by zzalpha »

chki wrote: post #20
zzalpha wrote: post #5

Eh, perhaps I'm cynical, but listening to someone, and coming to understanding regarding how they might have developed there beliefs, sounds nice, and it's very compassionate, but I question if it's actually a step toward compromise, or simply understanding. After all, for an increasing number of issues, in the end, the beliefs themselves are so polarized they leave no room for compromise. To this woman, it doesn't m…

I don't see how this wouldn't be a step towards understanding another person: more information should always help you to grasp somebody else's line of thought. I think you are right that understanding is really far away from compromise, especially if your conversational counterpart is obviously having a very non-rational standpoint. But isn't it still better to "understand" them and wouldn't it be easier for you to w…

I think it depends on how you define "better".

The situation is better in that the listener has a more empathic, more thorough understanding of the speaker.

In that sense there was a positive exchange of information and understanding, which is great.

Beyond that, though, what has been accomplished?

I know that sounds hopelessly utilitarian, but in the end, when it comes to issues like, say, abortion, I fail to see how this kind of understanding is valuable unless it further leads to a coming together of minds to form agreement or compromise.

Now, you mention that "wouldn't it be easier for you to work out something if you don't think the person you are talking to is actually just crazy or unintelligent"?

My claim is that it doesn't matter. That whether or not I understand the other person, the very nature of the disagreement and the very fundamental principles upon which the two positions rest, makes compromise impossible.

After all, how do you compromise with someone who believes, run down to their toes, that abortion is equivalent to the murder of a child? You can't. That belief system doesn't make room for even entertaining the idea of compromise.

And the clever thing about modern politics and rhetoric is that they've taken issues that you wouldn't think would be wedge issues, and transformed them into wedge issues by building entire moral edifices around them.

The result is that when you debate someone about something as dull as, say, tax policy, it's no longer about debating facts and ideas, but rather debating values and culture and beliefs. And when you debate those values and beliefs, what you're actually doing is attacking the very things that define who that person is.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#44

Post by whiddershins »

Joeboy wrote: post #40
whiddershins wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> To me, history demonstrates that it's simply idealism to believe that people can, in aggregate, come together on complex, polarizing issues. Just look at how much the majority opinion on dozens of topics has changed over the past few decades. Marijuana legalization. Gay marriage. Mass incarceration. Lots and lots of change happens in the hearts and minds of lots and lots of people without force being involved. Peo…

> Just look at how much the majority opinion on dozens of topics has changed over the past few decades The new majority opinion is held by a largely different set of people than the one from a few decades ago. People born in the 19th century still mostly think what they thought before, they're just too dead for it to matter.

My experience is different. Anecdotally, in New York City, I know dozens of people who used to be uncomfortable with same-sex-marriage who now consider it a great thing and a right.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#45

Post by mVChr »

I think there's even more value to it than this. Consider the whole pursuit of philosophy. You must be able to leverage your intellect to deeply contemplate things you don't believe are actually true in order to determine the root foundations for what you believe, if in fact you still do believe them after honest and critical analysis. If you close your ears to anything you disagree with then you may miss a small but important detail that in overlooking has lead you to a premature and incorrect conclusion. Or on the other hand be able to further whittle away to the true core of your beliefs. Whether for this cause or the one in the article the result is probably the same however, understanding and love.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#46

Post by zzalpha »

whiddershins wrote: post #33
zzalpha wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If listening and understanding other people isn't the first step to working through these problems, nothing is. So I'll make a counter-point: let's say we're back in the old slavery days. I'm sure Abe did his fair share of listening and talking with folks from the South. But eventually, there just ain't no compromising and something had to be done. And so it was done. Ultimately, I think, for some issues, there is si…

>> To me, history demonstrates that it's simply idealism to believe that people can, in aggregate, come together on complex, polarizing issues. Just look at how much the majority opinion on dozens of topics has changed over the past few decades. Marijuana legalization. Gay marriage. Mass incarceration. Lots and lots of change happens in the hearts and minds of lots and lots of people without force being involved. Peo…

Just look at how much the majority opinion on dozens of topics has changed over the past few decades. Marijuana legalization. Gay marriage. Mass incarceration.

Joeboy beat me to it, but I'll reiterate: that's not compromise. It's just change. Don't confuse the two.

And for those on the "losing" side of that change, there's an incredible amount of consternation.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#47

Post by smcl »

Snargorf wrote: post #38

I've actually found it works a lot better if both people just allow the contentious statements. Just let each person say, "Oh that's ridiculous because..." and the other replies with "You're totally missing this point..." Even if people raise their voice or scoff, it's fine. The key is to just keep going . If you go on long enough, the points do start sinking in. Too many people assume that acrimony means that the di…

I hit "vouch" here as your post was marked as "Dead" even though it was pretty reasonable. I don't necessarily agree that people should be so eager to lock horns on contentious issues, but you're certainly not saying anything that should be hidden or censored or anything.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#48

Post by AnimalMuppet »

ploxiln wrote: post #17

So you're saying, basically, we should "put words in their mouth".

That is very much not what woodandsteel is saying. Instead, it's "put their ideas in your words in your mouth".

I recall someone's rule for argument (though I don't remember whose rule it was): Once you can restate someone's position to their satisfaction, then you can disagree with them as much as you please - but not before. This rule eliminates the disputes that are a total waste, because one side is arguing against a position that the other side doesn't actually hold.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#49

Post by AnimalMuppet »

whiddershins wrote: post #12
zzalpha wrote: post #5

Eh, perhaps I'm cynical, but listening to someone, and coming to understanding regarding how they might have developed there beliefs, sounds nice, and it's very compassionate, but I question if it's actually a step toward compromise, or simply understanding. After all, for an increasing number of issues, in the end, the beliefs themselves are so polarized they leave no room for compromise. To this woman, it doesn't m…

It was hard for me to resist the urge to downvote this comment. Yes, everything you are saying has merit, but overall I completely disagree with the main thrust of your point. If listening and understanding other people isn't the first step to working through these problems, nothing is. And I am unwilling to just call the problems unfixable, throw my hands up, and resign myself to a world full of such misunderstandin…

> It was hard for me to resist the urge to downvote this comment. Yes, everything you are saying has merit, but overall I completely disagree with the main thrust of your point.

Well, you did a good job of actually living out what you are saying, by not downvoting, and instead responding with a calm and reasonable reply.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#50

Post by munificent »

ploxiln wrote: post #17

So you're saying, basically, we should "put words in their mouth".

Oh, dear. I hope you're kidding with this comment.

But on the off chance that you aren't, no, that's not what the commenter is saying. You don't put words in their mouth, you put your interpretation of their words in their ears.

Active listening, and reflecting back what the speaker says to you in your own words is the human equivalent of an ACK and checksum in networking. It gives them an opportunity to validate that you correctly understood what they were trying to tell you.

In practice it goes beyond that. Often, even though all you're trying to do is say the same thing in your words, the unintended color of your own perspective is enough to give them a new way of looking at their own situation. It can be a powerful tool to change someone's thinking.

Post reply on HN