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

91–100 of 192 posts

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#91

Post by throwanem »

justratsinacoat wrote: post #34
throwanem wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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,…

No, your response was totally justified, and it in turn informed mine. I think I said that contempt is easier than compassion, and I guess I demonstrated that, too. It's not always easy to keep a level head and remember that cruelty is almost never a constructive response to cruelty, and sometimes I'm really bad at it. Next time I intend to do better, and I'm glad I managed not to fail entirely at getting my point across in spite of doing a poor job this time.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#92

Post by woodandsteel »

enraged_camel wrote: post #18
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. It is the first step, but it only works if the other side is also willing to take it with you. If you are the only one changing your position, it is not a mutual compromise, by definition.

>It is the first step, but it only works if the other side is also willing to take it with you. If you are the only one changing your position, it is not a mutual compromise, by definition.

That's true. However, once the other person feels well understood, they often get more interested in trying to understand your side. And then, once you and the other person side each have a better understanding of what the other wants, it may be possible to come up with some third alternative that makes both of you happy.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#93

Post by flukus »

emcrazyone wrote: post #66
woodandsteel wrote: post #4

This is excellent. I think if there is one thing that might actually happen that could make the world a better place, it would be if people listened to each other more. A couple of hints. One is that I think the easiest way to start doing this is to practice active listening, which is just saying back to the other person the main ideas and feelings they are expressing. This a simple rule, though it can be hard to fol…

agreed.. I live by a motto that goes: First, seek to understand and then seek to be understood. Active listening definitely works for me!

Before you can lead you must learn to follow, John Snow.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#94

Post by kaybe »

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…

What I see frequently is that people vehemently disagree in an emotional debate. After exchanging a few arguments everyone sticks to their original position and nothing seems to have changed.

However, when the topic gets brought up again a while later, they have shifted their position closer to mine, but also insist that they've always thought that.

I really wonder what is going on there, but I can see the aggregate opinion shifting by talking while nobody thinks they 'lost' the debate (for all those who identify far too strongly with their opinions.).

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#95

Post by mpartel »

mgraczyk wrote: post #74

"When someone has a point of view we find difficult to understand, disagreeable, or even offensive, we must look to the set of circumstances that person has experienced that resulted in that point of view." This is great advice for getting along with people and treating others politely. However, I don't think it provides any insight into actually improving public policy or improving one's own beliefs. Of course we al…

Examining your own biases is certainly useful, but why not do both? I think the main value of the approach in the article is not to immediately arrive at answers but to promote a better culture of discussion.

It may be slow going on a larger scale, and I may be overly optimistic, but I feel that a person does not need very many instances of being genuinely listened to before permanently "converting" into a more accepting and empathetic human being, possibly even one that goes on to pay it forward.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#96

Post by js2 »

austinjp wrote: post #88
emcrazyone wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

agreed.. I live by a motto that goes: First, seek to understand and then seek to be understood. Active listening definitely works for me!

That's excellent. So succinct, so valuable. Thank you.

FYI, https://www.stephencovey.com/7habits/7habits-habit5.php

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#97

Post by groby_b »

mgraczyk wrote: post #74

"When someone has a point of view we find difficult to understand, disagreeable, or even offensive, we must look to the set of circumstances that person has experienced that resulted in that point of view." This is great advice for getting along with people and treating others politely. However, I don't think it provides any insight into actually improving public policy or improving one's own beliefs. Of course we al…

I'm curious - if you say "judge on facts and data alone, without listening", how will you know all the facts? How will you know you did not miss some data?

Sure, for some debates, there is a preponderance of evidence that a specific view is right. For many things in the public light, the debate is not that simple, though. Many of our hotbutton political issues are very complex and nuanced.

To stay with the article's example, there is no "correct" answer to "should abortion be legal". It is, at its core, a choice about ethics, and personal values. And any decision on the topic is a compromise. We will never compromise if we don't hear the other person.

And even if they have outmoded or irrational beliefs, how will we ever get in agreement if we just say "you are wrong"?

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#98

Post by js2 »

nornagon wrote: post #28

Fantastic essay. Listening in this way is an important part of Nonviolent Communication[1], which I'd highly recommend as further reading if this resonated with you. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonviolent_Communication

I've recently started reading Nonviolent Communication[1]. I am in awe of some of the examples in the book. It must take years of practice to be such an effective communicator.

1. https://www.amazon.com/Nonviolent-Communication-Language-Lif...

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#99

Post by kaybe »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #62
zzalpha wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ho…

It can still take the hatred out. A pro-life person could say, "I believe that life begins at conception (or when the heart starts, or when the brainwaves start), and after that, abortion is murder. But I also understand what a horrible position that puts many women in, and the real pain it causes in real lives. I still can't compromise - I believe abortion should be illegal - but I can understand why people are on t…

Both can then hopefully direct their efforts towards the real problem, need for abortion. If that can be reduced or even eliminated with more support and sex ed, both win. Maybe not in absolute terms, but it's something.

This might not always be possible for disagreements, but sometimes it can help to step back and consider the issue and it's implications for society from other angles.

Re: How to listen when you disagree

#100

Post by kaybe »

ellyagg wrote: post #60

It takes a lot of forgiveness, compassion, patience, and courage to listen in the face of disagreement. I can't help but find this condescending. Listening should only take a small bit of intellectual humility. On controversial subjects, people with whom you disagree almost certainly have valid points. It's not heroic to acknowledge them. It's a sign of maturity to be able to admit where your opponent's arguments are…

They might not be talking about the opposed option itself but the way controversial viewpoints are often presented: Full of emotion, and in a full-frontal attack if you're perceived to be not on their side. It can be hard to dissipate that and actually get to the quiet earnest exploration part.
Post reply on HN