In polarizing discussions it is even more important.
Understanding many viewpoints doesn’t mean full agreement. Just that one has taken the time to move past “I can’t understand how or why some one can believe that”.
Until you can understand why someone has their view, it’s risky to draw judgements and conclusions. Literally from one’s own lack of understanding.
Holding many simplified models in mind, despite each of their gaps with reality, is as helpful in engineering, physics and navigating life, as it is in politics.
If we don’t understand why they hold their views, we inevitably leave valid (real, or in their best experience real) concerns, or knowledge we take for granted, but they don’t have, both totally unaddressed.
We have to understand others well, in their terms, to effect change.
And, of course, to learn from others when they see something, however sharply or dimly, that we have missed. Generally people with differing views, do see something we don’t.
Unfortunately, expressing frustration or impatience with viewpoint intransigence, faithfully reveals we don’t understand the views we are critiquing. Don’t call people “deplorables”. That is footgun credibility suicide.
Understanding, respect, and patience; none are optional.
Make everyone your ally in figuring out a way through any mess.
Pete Buttigieg in the hot seat of Fox News interviews is incredible at this. He also becomes disarmingly likable as a result. Credibility armor upgrade achieved. One wonders why something that works so well, is so rare.
Steven420•3mo ago
Nevermark•3mo ago