After organizing a successful meeting between blue urban liberals and red conservative rural folk in 2017, journalist Monica Guzman began to see political polarization in the USA as “the problem that eats other problems, the monster who convinces us that the monsters are us”. She vowed to do something more about it. The result is her book I Never Thought of It That Way: How to Have Fearlessly Curious Conversations in Dangerously Divided Times. There are many lessons we can take from Guzman’s work. Here are some of her key themes.
Humans have an instinct for “sorting” – finding and huddling around people who are like us. Sorting makes us happier, less bothered, more content and more linked. But when this is carried too far and you are surrounded by people with the same set of perspectives as you, it’s harder to grasp any others. When we share opinions only with people who agree with us, our opinions get more extreme.
If your group identity is “us” then the others are “them” or “they”. Almost by definition they represent opposition, evoking wariness and suspicion. Taken too far, othering makes hate easier and reasonableness harder, and creates negative, and often inaccurate assumptions about them.
“Bridging” is what we do when we step out of our silos and try and see things from a different point of view. Bridging takes patience, humility and courage. The more you mingle with the other side the less prejudice you’ll feel against them.
To bridge effectively you need to arouse your curiosity. You need to ask “What am I missing?” Seeking out and listening to other people’s perspectives can lead you to a “I never thought of it that way” (INTOIT) moment.
INTOIT moments which challenge our ideas and bridge us to a perspective we are not already leaning toward, are surprising and sometimes uncomfortable.
To give yourself the best chance of experiencing an INTOIT moment you need more than curiosity, you need to interact with people from outside your silos. Conversation is the most powerful tool for understanding people across divides. A valuable conversation requires time, and willing minds on equal footings. Without them the conversation is unlikely to yield INTOITs.
Techniques for achieving good conversations include active listening and observing body language to check progress.
A barrier to a genuine conversation is the assumptions we make about people. Assumptions are how we navigate a complicated world in which we can’t know everything about everyone. When you see the two people in the main image above you spontaneously make assumptions about them. All we can do is to try to notice the assumptions we’re making and ask why, because assumptions can harden into lies. Turn them into questions and you’ll get closer to the truth.
Another barrier is insistence on your own perspective. That leaves no room for others. Insisting on your own point of view is not conversation but competition and no one wins. When the same point is repeated over and over it’s a sign that you or they are insisting rather than conversing. Time to take a breath and clarify why this point is so important to you/them.
Further you need to understand that many people’s views are formed by intuition rather than cold logic. Understanding where that persons perspectives comes from is valuable in understanding why they hold that view.
To have a chance at really hearing other beliefs we have to value truth more than our own opinions and show a measure of humility. The common problem of course is our desire to “win”. How many times have you persuaded someone against their strongly held opinion? Most likely never. And just because you are good at rhetoric and argument doesn’t mean you have persuaded. The other person may have just given up.
If you want to stay curious and better understand the other person it’s better to be flexible and not necessarily try to win. That doesn’t mean giving up your convictions but rather being open to explore them. Exposing yourself to the new, the old, the different, the surprising will keep your opinions sharp and useful.
It’s worth reflecting on times when you may have changed your own mind on a long held belief. It probably didn’t happen overnight. More likely it took a lot of time to consider the evidence and peel away your own internal resistance. In other words one conversation is unlikely to change your or their mind but it could generate an INTOIT moment that kicks off a journey of re-evaluation.
But what if you try these conversations with the other side but they don’t respond in kind? Have a closer look to check that you aren’t trying to win rather than gain an understanding. Trying to change people’s minds when you don’t understand them never works and is never worth it.
Here are some conversation tips: acknowledge points of agreement, listen longer and avoid jumping in with your response, say “I don’t know” when you don’t know.
But the most powerful question to understanding the other side is: “where are you coming from?” -not literally, but in terms of understanding the other person’s life experiences, which have moulded their views. Everyone has their reasons. They may not be reasons you like or agree with, but they are there. And they can explain a lot including about you.
If we can share our experiences in a conversation it can help our mutual understanding. The sign that we are there is when we can say “I see where you’re coming from”. Studies have shown that people respect moral beliefs more when they are supported by personal experiences, not facts.
Another powerful way we build a bridge with the other side in a conversation is to genuinely articulate the strongest argument of their side to check your understanding and to invite them to do likewise.
Guzman sums up her recommended keys to having curious conversations with people you disagree with: “When you want to explore why they’re wrong, explore what you’re missing. When you want to determine whose view wins, determine what makes each view understandable. When you want to discover why someone believes something that confounds you, discover how they came to believe it. When you want to know what their problem is, try to know what their concerns are. When you want to demand why they don’t care about what you care about, learn what they care about more. When you want to trap them into saying what you want to hear, free them so they say what they honestly mean.”
Guzman believes that if we follow through with curious conversations, we will discover that the differences between us are not as significant as you might imagine. This is the same belief as author Hanno Sauer who concluded that there are more things that we share with each other than divide us, and that the political divides that separate us run less deep than we think.
Guzman’s book has given us the tools to narrow that divide.
The writer is a co-author of Court of the Grandchildren, a novel set in 2050s America.
Main image credit: AI-generated
For posts on similar themes, consider:
Let’s Talk More about Climate Change
How to Talk about Climate Change
