How productive arguments can bring us closer together | Bo Seo, Esther Perel, and Dan Shapiro
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 ноя 2023
- Bo Seo, Esther Perel, and Dan Shapiro share their tips for arguing better.
Subscribe to Big Think on RUclips ► / @bigthink
Up next, Political scientist Ian Bremmer on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict ► • Political scientist Ia...
In this compilation video, our biggest thinkers share their insights on debating, including how to get your points across effectively, hold your own in an argument, and disagree better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
►Get Big Think+ for Business
Guide, inspire and accelerate leaders at all levels of your company with the biggest minds in business. bigthink.com/plus/great-leade...
I made some friends after politely arguing with them 😂 Some books also helped me a lot like (‘Talking to crazy’). When I got my first job in sales (I am not a sales-person whatsoever!) my management decided to place me in a claim department 😅 I was talking to the most angry/upset customers but no one ever screamed or insulted me. I guess the main point is to empathise with a person you’re talking to and instead of treating them as your opponent with a different worldview treat them as a teammate with the shared goal - to find mutual understanding.
Nice username 👍
@@leonmeyers7009 thanks😉
I use to define arguing as fighting until I took a Logic course in school, now I know better.
When I find myself disagreeing with someone I try to keep calm and ask:
"With what certainty (from 1% to 100%) do you believe that?"
"Why do you believe that? "
"What if anything could change your mind?"
@@Dimitris_BalfNo. He's right. By asking open ended questions as such, he's not focusing on wether he's right, rather being curious. These questions help us to understand the other point of view, and eventually change our opinions if needed. "Think Again" by Adam Grant is a good book written about this.
It seems pretty clearly that his focus is on the other person. The common thread is "do YOU believe" and "YOUR" mind. I think you may have mistaken the questions as being questions he asks himself. I think he is saying that these are the questions he asks the other person. @@Dimitris_Balf
It's not the percentage of "rightness". It's the percentage of belief. Two very different things. I think that belief is not necessarily binary. Everything that a person believes is on a continuum from strong to weak belief that can be expressed as a percentage. @@Dimitris_Balf
Do not ask Why questions often. I suggest asking What questions instead. Why triggers defensiveness because it's asking for subjective feeling. What asks for objective evidence.
For example, instead of asking "Why do you believe that?", ask "What makes you believe that?"
WOW! This clicks on so many levels.
"We create the others in relationships and in communication. It's why we are not the same person with different people, because those people make part of who we are." ❤️❤️
I think I should watch this once every day for 2 weeks to get this in my head.
Do I'll check in with you
wouldn't be the worst how to spend once time
Now you should watch it again
I will send you notification every 2 week
You should also do the same so I can also see this again in 2 week
This should be taught in depth in our schools now. It is very relevant for our times to have basic fundamentals of this subject.
00:32 🛑 Disagreements often lead individuals back to primal instincts of belonging to tribes when feeling threatened, contributing to a tribalistic world.
01:38 💬 Thomas Hobbes highlighted how minor disputes can escalate, impacting not just relationships but also nations, leading to his suggestion of civil silence, yet underscoring the limitation of a life built solely on agreement.
03:11 🤝 Starting a disagreement with a bit of agreement helps navigate numerous differences between two people, preventing an argument from becoming an uncontrollable mass of conflicting issues.
04:11 🔄 Expectations color relationships, influencing how individuals perceive and communicate with others, contributing to the co-creation of each other within relationships.
05:50 🛡 Emotionally charged conflict triggers defensive tribal thinking, prioritizing group allegiance over substantive arguments, hindering the openness to opposing perspectives.
06:56 💡 Pre-debate exercises like considering opponent arguments and imagining a loss help mitigate certainty, fostering a moment of understanding and potential humility or empathy.
08:27 🧠 Depth in communication lies in acknowledging, validating, and empathizing with others' perspectives, promoting a shift from a confrontational dynamic to a collaborative problem-solving approach.
09:30 💔 Feeling alone despite communication leads to existential crises, emphasizing the importance of making others feel valued and heard during interactions.
10:04 🤝 Connection stems from acknowledging both similarity and difference, avoiding dominance, and recognizing that encountering others enriches our understanding more than solitary experiences.
Thank you so much 😊
I think that the key starting point is to accept that you could be wrong - even about things that are most dear to your heart. You can't have an open mind without some level of self doubt. You can still have strong beliefs that you defend with passion. But there must always be that small crack (at least) into which you can allow another possibility.
I love arguments, we grow so much as people during constructive arguments. One problem is that some people have personality disorders (people in powerful positions especially), and that makes it quite difficult to get to any constructive progression of things... such people can also pretend that they are arguing constructively (as they are highly intelligent), and that you in the end agreed on something mutually "satisfying"... and then they'd do whatever they want anyway... So, one must be highly skilled in communicating with "difficult" personalities (any difficult personality, no matter the intelligence)... Another problem is that some people are so stuck in their ways that not much will improve when arguing with them, it takes years (and hours of meticulous search for the right words, comparisons...) with such people, as they simply have a very blurred vision of the vastness of life and natural differences between people's opinions and ideas, lifestyles (but it is possible to help them open, but it is a very big energetic investment...)... So, in general, we would have to raise children differently, conduct our relationships differently than we currently do, we would have to take care or our own intuition and intelligence (both emotional and intellectual)... but I'll say it again, when there is a possibility of a great argument, it is like the most wonderful concert (or series of concerts, as some topics cannot possibly be resolved in just one disagreement). I would like to also add, that women and men perceive language differently, so, one has to take that into consideration and find a middle ground...
That's the problem of modern world we are not agreeing to make argument work
I disagree 😊
There is nothing worse than to be alone in the presence of another.
8:05 Thank you for putting this into words.
If the parties cannot agree on objective reality then there is no chance for empathy.
Agreed. Some people flatly distrust sources like reuters, the BBC, WHO, scientists etc and prefer to get their news from a telegram group, which makes it somewhat challenging to argue a point
@@geoffwatchesso true. Reuters, media, BBC, WHO, and scientists never lie and never have a hidden agenda. Their narrative is also unbiased yet people doubt them.
@@geoffwatchesThe BBC is not infallible. Look up the Beachy Head Woman plaque debacle.
Counterpoint: until you express empathy, others will have no interest in acknowledging your perspective on reality.
I'm not saying you're wrong. I'd had several lengthy discussions with a hardcore Q-anon believer who is close to me personally, and there are serious limitations to what we can productively talk about.
But at the same time, I have been able to make progress in many areas, including politics, by expressing empathy for the deep frustration this person feels. They feel that the system is rigged against the little guy, and that justice demands radical change to help the most vulnerable. We are in pretty close to agreement on those points. Once we understand one another emotionally, then we can start discussing the questions of what sort of change will be effective, and what sort of change is likely to be attainable, and what the best means of pursuing it are...
In addition, by first building empathy and trust, he's much more willing to listen when I contradict his "facts." Without that foundation, he would have no interest in my attempts to reassert objective reality because he has no reason to believe I'm being objective unless he trusts me.
I was just having an argument about this exact topic, TODAY.
This is a good video. I have always had a hard time with arguments and didn't know how to approach someone when I disagree. This video had some good tips that I am going to try.
These Compilations are phenomenal videos.
As humans, we cant argue with people we dont know anything: it's like listening a language you have never learn. First, we need to learn the fundamentals rules, then we can figure out what happened. And about learning, the thing is always the same, forget your knowedge, be candide, be naive and you will know what you should know and what really matter. In this way, argue is a medium to confront our own narcissism and love for our own idea and way of thinking: just let it go, dont be harsh with yourself.
I think the background music adds unnecessary sensationalism. At least you could consider lowering the volume a bit👌
i agree opinions can hlp find solution instead of never ending argument
The video I needed to watch
You guys should leave the full interview up again for the public. I know you guys are trying to make money but some of this needs to spread more and make this world a better place. We need more Bo Seos'! Less flat earthers...
Tribalism is and was the source of every large scale conflict, by definition
Thing is not many people realise how trabilistic we are
It's hard to make the change when all you see is politicians literally behaving like little children, but it makes life so much easier being able to hear somebody out and understand their point before you shove your point down their throat
Interesting content, but the stressful music makes it hard to listen to the people
Turn the music down for the love of comprehension and focus
First strategy! Examine your validation seeking and alignments! I find that people repeat and cling, we are all perfectly capable of independent thought!
I believe this way done by design my consultants, and they did a fine job, but we have to stop viewing politics almost as a sport. In reality, until we get a viable third party, there’s really no point to all this arguing and debating. If you’re someone who has let their political leanings become their identity, even in a small way, please reconsider what you organize your life around. There’s a better world out there. We are giving the powers that be exactly what they want. They want us to argue and be divided. Put the maga hat down, the Biden poster, whatever, and live your life.
Music is too distracting. CLOSED.
People on the left and right need to watch this
Esther is sooooo good.
Side switch excercise 6:45
The background music is so distracting. My anxiety is through the roof!
People keep saying how we are divided but the general population has never been so in tune with key issues. Violence is down. Numbers of wars are down.
We have an elite that divides to conquer. That's it. The general human has never been so peaceful.
Are naturally passive people always the ones to make concessions in an argument?
Let's agree to disagree
music is not suitable and distracting
So it isn’t about getting into someone’s head and hurting their feelings?
I would much rather watching the speakers than the stock footage. Awfully distracting and doesn't add any value.
It's because the speakers are pausing and the editor is cutting out the "bad spots" instead of showing thu cuts it's hidden via the stock footage.
You might already know this but as a person that used to work on stuff like this I wanted to comment.
Stock footages keep people engaged because you’re not just looking at 1 person all the time.
The editing is the only reason I watch this channel
just listen to it brother…
@@peytondobbins8244 You never knew if they're going to throw some graphs in.
The problem is if you engage like this with people who have zero interest in actual ideas, you lose, because they turn everything into a zero sum game.
This video is like trying to explain chess theory to someone who plays chess against a toddler who flips the board. Its based on a naive premise, that somehow if you play well enough, you can win, or convince the toddler to follow "rules". The real problem is the board flipping. Linking identity to ideas.
Realise how your Ego immediately blamed everybody else but yourself? Chances are that you are not listening and not giving them enough reassurance that you heard their point for them to listen to you in return. I've been there and I've had the same opinion that you now hold.
They changed the thumbnail
❤
How can we fix it, I'm willing to learn and help Amen
i'll have to agree to disagree with those shoes, bro
everything falls into its place when you ask one question
Do you condemn Israel?
Based
epic
the problem is that the fundamental thing i keep falling back on is reality, while the opposing side falls back on conspiracy. it's really hard to find a middle ground when the discussion boils down to facts and make believe.
Then your job is to understand their point of view so much so that it becomes real enough for you to believe too so that you make them feel worthy. You don't have to believe it in the long run but it sounds like the person is worth more than a thought process.
Dude's sneakers are lit
So basically it's cooperation vs competition. How come that we work on those issues individually trying to resolve conflict with the finest instruments and on the other side we keep building highly conflictual society? This type of content are helpful and I enjoy watching them but at the same time they're problematic cause they give people a false sense of control when the reality is that, on a higher level, society goes in an other direction. Why we can't speculate on societies? What type of society we would like to live in?
that aggressive musical score in the background just detracts from the video. it's so annoying
You're missing the point that there is a whole movement of anti intellectualism, arguing in bad faith based on wilful ignorance
I can´t believe one of these Guys is actually called Dan Shapiro lmao
why to argue
The B-rolls are very distracting to the message.
They have debate teams in schools in America so why are they so bad at it?
I came here for a good argument.
No you didn't.
HA!, A class on how to argue, isn't that ironic. Just Irony. Pure Irony. And the smart peoples comment below! HAA !!!! Irony!
At least you were attracted to the video - but you need to actually watch it instead of maintaining your closed off mind. There is hope for you.
Being able to comprehend and belive in FACT might be a good start. Looking at you MAGA
It's like all these videos are for Americans.
Guy in the blue shirt is the least interesting.
incorrect - maybe if people stooped believing things that were wrongs and were just good Christians we'd all get along greayt
There’s no such thing as a productive argument. Thats like saying kind aggression.
why do you think so?
That depends entirely on your definition of what an argument is.
Wow. You are completely wrong. I had an amazing, productive argument with a friend a couple of years ago, and I still think back on it often.