How to listen when you disagree • Hacker News Board

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#31

Post by crpatino » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 9:57 PM UTC

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…

"belief" itself is a loaded word, and I think it muddles the discussion.

You're probably able to use a technical definition of "belief" along the lines of "falsifiable assertation". Most people don't see it that way; being conditioned to equate "belief" with "opinion that is factually wrong". Even for those of us that know the technical definition, we have to make a conscious effort to no fall back to the casual definion on our day to day lives. And from there, there's a slipery slope that goes down to "opinion I do not agree with".

It is much more productive to see this issue in terms of values. If is not that this person cannot see the facts, but that she assigns a moral meaning to those same facts that is different from the one you would prefer.

From there, it is Politics 101. If you want her to withdraw her opposition to abortion, you have to find some other issue X that is of comparable value to her, and either offer your support to make X happen or threaten to block her from achieving X.

This is not pretty, but in a democratic society, it leaves everybody more or less equaly frustrated with the compromise; while at the same time nobody's deepest needs and wants get ignored.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#32

Post by smcl » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 9:57 PM UTC

I'm sorry, it's possible that I am too cynical for this world, but this sounds embellished if not entirely fictional like the precocious toddlers* waxing lyrical on free speech and Donald Trump. After the author asked a single question the stranger poured their heart out on a deeply personal issue, conveniently vindicating the presence of a "free listening" booth at the RNC and giving an all-too-perfect story for the author to write up on his return home. The advice that (I think?) the author was trying to convey is fine - listen, empathise, understand, withhold judgement - but the story is nonsense.

* = What I mean is summarised nicely here: http://www.dailydot.com/unclick/woke-fake-kids-repudiate-don... - stuff like 'my 3 year old daughter caught a glimpse of todays trump rally shut down and starting crying "daddy why do they want free speech to die?"'

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#33

Post by whiddershins » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 9:58 PM UTC

zzalpha wrote: post #22

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…

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. People often change their views very gradually, over time, as they realize aspects of things which weren't apparent to them before. A big part of this is often empathetic discussions with the people around them.

I think you, and other commenters in this thread, seem to imply that the assumptive goal is to change someone's mind RIGHT NOW, or else just force them to do what you know is right, and ignore their wrongheadedness.

The civil war was a serious net benefit to humanity by outlawing slavery. But the underlying concerns of Southerners, which was the dismantling of their economy, was never addressed. This has led to generational poverty in the south which has never been fully undone, and created a fertile field for the southern strategy and Jim Crow, which are arguably continuing to affect us in the form of the current presidential campaign.

Force may have been necessary, but a deeper understanding might have made the aftermath of force far better.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#34

Post by justratsinacoat » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 9:58 PM UTC

throwanem wrote: post #16

zzalpha wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you could provide a counter-argument so we can have a discussion. Kinda making my point for me. :)

Just like you're making mine, and the article author's. Listening is a lot harder than contempt, but you might think about trying it some time all the same.

Jesus, read your comments in this thread again. Do you really think you're a champion of Listening? A guy made a rather cogent point about whether this protocol will actually help resolve issues or not (which the linked article doesn't make claims about one way or the other), and you responded with the soul of Contempt, reducing his argument to an implicit "eh, why bother".

edit: thanks for your response to 'zzalpha, helped me understand your position, and my response above seems a bit harsh in light of that. That said, I'll leave it up because the expository rant came afterward :P

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#35

Post by basseq » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 10:00 PM UTC

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 think understanding matters. It may not lead to compromise, but it'll get you closer than just ignoring dissenting worldviews.

And it's healthy. So much of the hate and anger around, say, politics today is predicated on not understanding and actively refusing to change that situation. We dismiss and actively insult those who we disagree with: idiot, racist, bigot, naive, liar, insane, greedy.

You may never compromise on a polarizing issue because any middle ground is either non-existent or functionally equivalent to full capitulation. That's life. But if you shut down, ignore, or insult those who disagree with you on one issue, they're not even going to show up to the table on the next issue where compromise is more feasible.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#36

Post by justratsinacoat » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 10:00 PM UTC

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…

>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 question -- exactly what do you get out of talking and listening to people explain 'ethically flawed' or 'counterfactual' beliefs to you? What have you learned? How better to deal with people of that sort? I realize this sounds sarcastic, but whenever I've been in that situation I've only come to the sinking realization that the discussion I am trying to have with this person is fruitless at best and damaging to us both at worst.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#37

Post by joyeuse6701 » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 10:00 PM UTC

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…

X person opposes your view...It is absolutely imperative to understand this person for the purpose of either compromise or annihilation. Know thine enemy. In the process you'll come to know yourself.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#38

Post by Snargorf » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 10:01 PM UTC

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 discussion must end immediately. But that's not true at all. It's exceptionally hard, sometimes, to meet clashing beliefs with entirely soft voices and polite manners. You don't have to suppress everything you want to say. You can let it out. So can the other person. It's good. (Obviously it shouldn't raise to a degree where people are screaming continuously or acting violent).

Maturity doesn't just mean always speaking softly. It can also mean being able to make and reject points forcefully, and not wilt like a delicate flower if the other person does the same.

The real key is that people need to not be so delicate. Accept the natural difficulties of clashing belief systems. Just stick in there, let the acrimony happen, don't give up. Eventually - 10 or 20 or 30 minutes later - you'll get to something meaningful simply because there's no way to talk that long without both people having a lot of time to make real points.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#39

Post by hexane360 » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 10:01 PM UTC

wrsh07 wrote: post #24

ploxiln wrote: post #17

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

You might be making a joke about active listening, but it's actually really effective. Try it out next time you disagree with someone -- it is a good tool to prevent you from talking over or past someone.

Just not like this: https://youtu.be/65GbpVZTgAk

Or god forbid: https://youtu.be/TChRv8m79zs

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#40

Post by Joeboy » Thu, Aug 04, 2016, 10:04 PM UTC

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

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.