Send Wilk a text with your feedback! (incoming msgs only - I can't reply)
Julia Minson didn’t get into the science of disagreement through politics or conflict resolution. She got into it through ballroom dancing. She and her now-husband trained together for years—same music, same coach, same goals—and spent most of that time in conflict. The question that stuck with her: how can two people share all the same information and still misunderstand each other so completely? That question became a PhD, a research lab, and eventually a book.
In this conversation, Julia and Wilk go deep on what her research actually shows about how people engage—or fail to engage—across disagreement. The headline finding: receptiveness is invisible. You can be thinking hard, genuinely considering the other person’s view, giving it real weight—and your counterpart has no idea. Because they can’t read your mind. That gap between internal receptiveness and visible receptiveness is where most conversations fall apart.
Julia’s book is How to Disagree Better, available at disagreeingbetter.com. You can also follow her on X at @juliaminson or connect on LinkedIn.
Julia Minson, Ph.D. is a Professor of Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government and the author of How to Disagree Better. She is the founder of the Constructive Disagreement Lab and of Disagreeing Better, LLC—a behavioral science consulting firm offering speaking and training on effective management of disagreement and conflict. Her research focuses on the psychology of disagreement: how people engage with opinions, values, and judgments that conflict with their own, with applications across government, education, healthcare, and media.
Book: How to Disagree Better — https://www.disagreeingbetter.com
Website: juliaminson.com
X (Twitter): https://twitter.com/juliaminson
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/julia-minson-5b511b150/
The world is a better place if we are better people. Be grateful for all you’ve got. Make every day the day that you want it to be!
Please follow the DTH podcast on:
Facebook, Instagram, Twitter(X) , YouTube, Substack
Subscribe to us wherever you enjoy your audio or from our site. Please leave us a rating and feedback on Apple podcasts or other platforms. You can share your thoughts or request Wilk for a speaking engagement on our contact page: DerateTheHate.com/Contact
The Derate The Hate podcast is proudly produced in collaboration with Braver Angels — America’s largest grassroots, cross-partisan organization working toward civic renewal and bridging partisan divides. Learn more: BraverAngels.org
Welcome to the Derate The Hate Podcast!
*The views expressed by Wilk, his guest hosts &/or guests on the Derate The Hate podcast are their own and should not be attributed to any organization they may otherwise be affiliated with.
[00:00:00:00] Wilk Wilkinson: Most of us think we're pretty good listeners. We sit there, we nod. We wait for the other person to finish, and then we say our thing. Julia Minson has spent 25 years studying what's actually happening in those moments. Turns out listening is enough. You also have to signal it. Today she's going to show us exactly how. Stick with me. Welcome back, my friend, to the Derate the Hate podcast. I'm your host, Wilk Wilkinson, your blue collar sage calming outrage and helping to navigate a world divided by fog and those who would spread that fear, outrage and grievance. The Derate the Hate podcast is proudly produced in collaboration with Braver Angels, America's largest grassroots cross partisan organization working toward civic renewal, this podcast amplifies the mission that we share to foster a more respectful and united America where civic friendship thrives even when we disagree. Each week, through the power of story, conversation, and connection with incredible guests, we work to build bridges instead of barriers, not to change minds on the issues, but to change how we see one another when we differ. Because friends, it really is about bettering the world one attitude at a time. We did not create the hate, but together we can Derate the Hate. So be sure to subscribe wherever you get your podcast, share it with a friend and visit Braver Angels to learn how you can get involved in the movement to bridge the partisan divide. Friends, I am so incredibly grateful that you have joined me for another powerful Derate the Hate episode. So let's get to it. Julia Minson is a professor of public policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and the author of How to Disagree Better. She's also the founder of the Constructive Disagreement Lab, and a behavioral science consulting firm that works with organizations across government, education, health care, and media. But here's what I love about her story. She didn't come into this work through some abstract academic interest. She came into it through competitive ballroom dancing. She and her husband, now married over 25 years, were competitive dance partners. They trained together for hours every day, shared the same music, the same coach and the same goals, and they fought constantly about it. That disconnect between two people sharing all the same information and still managing to misunderstand each other, is what sent her down a 25 year path, figuring out the science of disagreement. What she found is that being receptive isn't the problem, showing it is. And that distinction changes everything. Let's get into it with my friend Julia Minson. Here we go. Julia Minson. Welcome to the Derate the Hate podcast. I am so excited to see you today.
[00:03:33:12] Julia Minson: Thank you. It's great to be here.
[00:03:36:04] Wilk Wilkinson: I got to meet you a little bit in conversation out in Seattle when I was out there a little while back, our friend Mary Beth Stibbens introduced us and we got to talk a little bit there. And now I've got you here on the Derate the Hate podcast to talk about the work that you've been doing, about your book, How to Disagree Better. And I'm just incredibly excited to have you here today.
[00:04:02:21] Julia Minson: Yeah. Thanks. You know, that was such a great conversation with Mary Beth. Like, I wish we had recorded that one because I remember that was really fun. So let's hope we're having as much fun today.
[00:04:12:16] Wilk Wilkinson: That's right, that's right. Yeah. I do remember we both said that it was like, good grief, we should be we should be recording this. But I have no doubt that this conversation is going to be just as good, because now I've actually had the opportunity to look more into the work that you've done. I know a little bit more about you. And, and, and I've had the opportunity to read the book How to Disagree better. So I'm very excited to dive into that, because when I think about the work that I've been doing now with Braver Angels for several years, the stuff that we do here in this bridge building space, a lot of it centers around how we interact with those that we disagree with. And I think what we're seeing more often in society today, Julia, is that people just have lost. A lot. In terms of how they connect and how they can engage with people that they disagree with. So before we get deep into the book, I want to bring a little bit more about you to the Derate the Hate listeners, in terms of what guided you into this, because this is a very interesting story and I like it a lot. How did you decide you needed to know better how to interact with people, that you weren't necessarily on the same page with?
[00:05:46:00] Julia Minson: You know? So I've had like lots of reasons in my life that I, you know. Should have worked on disagreement, right? I'm a first generation immigrant from Russia. I sort of have a family where, you know, my husband and I are like more on the liberal side. And my in-laws, who I adore are more on the conservative side. You know, I have all my sort of Russian family, all my American family. But the thing that really got me into thinking hard about disagreement is that I used to be a competitive ballroom dancer. And, you know, this is part of the whole Russian thing, right? A lot of little Russian kids ballroom dance, just like, you know, American kids do, you know, ballet and tap and jazz and whatever, you know, and the thing about ballroom dancing is that you have to do it with another person, right? And my partner for many years is now my husband for over 25 years. And, you know, so we used to, you know, we used to dance together. We were very serious. We were quite good. We practiced hours every day like we traveled. We had sponsors. You know, this was sort of like our entire life. And we fought constantly. And and the thing that was kind of remarkable is that we didn't fight about anything else. Right? So like, we had this very, you know, we had this like a very happy relationship except for dancing. and it was sort of extra strange. Right? Because if you think about dancing, like you're learning what to do together, right? So you learn the same steps, you're listening to the same music, you have the same coach, like telling you what to do. Both of you are there the entire time. So it's kind of remarkable that there can be that much misunderstanding and that much frustration, given you're sort of like sharing all the same information and, you know, but this was so big for me. This was so intense for me that, you know, I one got a PhD essentially in order to figure out this, like, you know, very important problem. And then, of course, you know, I get to Stanford and I realize there's like bigger conflicts in the world than, you know, my dance partnership. Sure. You know, at 22 that that was my whole world.
[00:08:06:05] Wilk Wilkinson: Yeah. And, you know, this is and I'm. Yeah. When I, when I read that and I'm like, this is the first person I've obviously on this podcast, I've asked a lot of people, you know, what was it that brought you into the depolarization space? How did you get into bridge building and everything else? And and when I read that in your book about, I just wanted to understand better how how to how to how to disagree better and better understand what was landing for my dance partner. And and I'm like, that is definitely the first time I've ever. come across that as an answer. And and I really liked it. I not not competitive ballroom dancing by any means, but I spent a lot of my early adult years running around honky tonks and dance, you know, dance, country dance bars down south in Florida and other southern states and absolutely love dancing. But but yeah, there's there's this thing where when you're dancing with somebody, especially when it becomes a little more serious than just your average person in a bar that you're walking up to and asking to dance. It is a communication style of its own, and if you're going to do anything that looks right, I can imagine, you know, when it comes to, to to ballroom dancing there, there has to be a oneness in how you're moving, how you're communicating, how you understand the movements and the communications of the other person. So if you're that serious about it, I can I can understand how that would would lead you to that.
[00:09:40:07] Julia Minson: Well, and you know, what's interesting about it is that since sort of having those experiences and like having been thinking about nothing but disagreement for the last 25 years, you know, like my in-laws used to play bridge together. And the key word is used to. Right. And I think there's probably a lot of couples, you know, who are listening to this podcast who can think of, you know, hobbies that they used to do with their significant other that led to enough conflict that it was like, okay, well, either stop the hobby or break up the marriage, right?
[00:10:11:21] Wilk Wilkinson: Yeah, yeah.
[00:10:12:18] Julia Minson: And so it's like anything you do that you're serious about and that you have to rely on the other person and you have to make decisions together. And then especially if it's somebody you're really close with and you just sort of like, can't understand why they're not agreeing with you. I think a lot of people have had some version of that experience.
[00:10:32:02] Wilk Wilkinson: Well, yeah, I mean, I can think of a lot of different ways that that could, could play out. I mean, a lot of the listeners know a lot of my story. I always make the joke. I spent more time on barstools than in classrooms. And and, you know, when I when I think about all the different competitive stuff we do in the bars, like being, you know, darts or pool league or different things like that. And, and there's some people where you get along in every other aspect of what you're doing, but you try to do this one thing and it's just not going to be something that you guys are going to be on the same page. You're not going to be able to work together. You're not going to be able to communicate in the right way to get to where you need to be as a as a pair, as a team. And it's a lot of frustration.
[00:11:13:11] Julia Minson: Right? Right, right. And you know, I remember I mean, here's maybe a bit of a transition to other larger concerns is, you know, when I, we my husband and I danced together for years and then we decided to have kids. And then, you know, we quit dancing. I literally found out I was pregnant with our first child when we were at US nationals. So we're at nationals, and I'm feeling, like, unusually winded and like, you know, and so it was this very it was this very dramatic shift in our lifestyle. Right? We go from sort of doing this thing to now doing this totally other thing. and one point I remember being sort of very concerned about it. I, you know, I'm like talking to him about how this was such a big part of our relationship. And, you know, what sort of formed us as a couple was, you know, us working together on sort of a common project and, you know, sort of, you know, me and him against the world and like, learning all these things and how it sort of bonded us. And I'm like, if we quit dancing, what are we going to be? And he says, well, we're going to be parents.
[00:12:26:19] Wilk Wilkinson: Yeah, yeah.
[00:12:28:11] Julia Minson: And guess what? All of those things about dancing have been playing out again for the last 20 years as we have, you know, parented three girls.
[00:12:37:13] Wilk Wilkinson: Sure.
[00:12:38:08] Julia Minson: That, you know, the communication and the misunderstanding. It never goes away.
[00:12:42:17] Wilk Wilkinson: Yeah, it's it's just a different dance, but it's it's still a it's a different deal being a parent and and yeah, anybody who's, who's been through that. But one of the things that I really liked about your book, Julia, that, that and you actually even mention it in the book as to when you're communicating with somebody or, and I'll let you tell it because you're going to tell it a lot better than me. But incorporating those personal stories into how you communicate, because the person receiving it then understands how real it is for you, the author of that piece, and they're going to receive it better, whether it be empathy or just just being able to see themselves in that story because you're real and you're telling it to them. Talk a little bit about that, because I think that's a very important thing that a lot of people just I think they miss it.
[00:13:38:02] Julia Minson: Yeah. Well, you know, it's funny. So I'm, you know, professionally. Right? I'm a researcher. And so everything about my life is, you know, sort of facts and evidence and like, what does the science tell us? And I'm honestly, like, naturally a pretty argumentative person. So I've spent a lot of my life getting into a lot of arguments where I lean into the science and I say, you know, here's the data, here's the facts. You're wrong. I'm right. Like, what's. Complicated about that?
[00:14:09:14] Wilk Wilkinson: Yeah, it goes over just it's great. Goes over great.
[00:14:12:22] Julia Minson: Right? Right right right right. But, you know, I mean, the problem is especially, I think, these days when everybody has sort of endless access to every kind of information and, you know, you can find somebody out there that supports any point or any belief, and you can even find somebody with a PhD that supports, you know, at any point or any belief. And so I think people have gotten sort of like naturally skeptical of, well, here's the facts, right. And one of the things that we have studied in my lab is how you can combine sort of facts based arguments with sharing the story of how and why you came to believe whatever it is you believe, right? So instead of just saying like, this is a better policy because the data support, you know, increasing the minimum wage, right? You might say like, well, you know, I had this job and here was my financial situation, and without the minimum wage being increased, I couldn't put food on the table. Right. And then people sort of say like, oh, I see why this matters to this person, you know? And it can't be it can't be any old story. It has to be a story that shows some vulnerability in you, because that's what makes people trust the story. It's sort of like you say to yourself as a listener, you say a person is sharing this thing that is vulnerable. That could be a little embarrassing for them. So it must be true, because why would they be telling me this stuff if it wasn't?
[00:15:58:16] Wilk Wilkinson: Yeah, yeah. Well, in this, this goes to I guess a bigger part of me in this podcast and, and this is something that I guess I've just let naturally learned to do as an unconscious thing. I didn't even realize how integral that, you know, this thing was in, communicating what I was trying to communicate. I mean, a lot of this, this podcast was, you know, started because of my personal journey of being like this, angry and, you know, person for a lot of my life. And now, you know, changing my mindset into something completely different. And then that led me into the, the depolarization space. But but, I mean, this is one of those affirmation things. It's like, okay, maybe I am doing this right. Maybe. And and so so yeah, that was that was. A highlight. In the book for me. Let's so that's part of the, the you know, that outward part of communication. But the inward part of how we receive things is, is, I think, a huge part that I want the listeners to, to hear from you, because the receptiveness thing is, and this is, you know, I've talked about it in a number of different ways. I've talked to a number of people that talk about it in different ways, but there's a there's a couple things here that you, you hit on in the book that I think are hugely important. Number one, just the overall the overall importance of being a receptive person. And then it has to be, this genuine receptiveness. And then there's an acronym that you use and I want to get into that the Here acronym. But let's start with receptiveness, Julia, because this is, this is incredibly important. And and everybody, for the most. Part. I think everybody wants to tell their story. But when it comes to receiving other people's story, that's when it gets a little harder. I call it listening with intention. But receptiveness is is hugely important. So. So take that. And that one.
[00:18:03:22] Julia Minson: Yeah. So this was, you know, kind of the first. Idea that I got really excited about in graduate school. And it's funny because I, you know, I guess I don't have a lot of need for variety in my life. I've been working on the same idea for 20 years. But, you know, the idea behind receptiveness, right, is that there are lots of disagreements and there's lots of sort of conversations and negotiations where literally nobody will ever change their mind. So when I when I was a PhD student, my advisor was a man named Lee Ross, who was one of the sort of preeminent social psychologists of the 20th century. And he worked a lot on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And, you know, I mean, it was the 90s, right? And I mean, honestly didn't look all that different than it did now, which is sort of intractable, right? And part of the insight, part of the part of the sort of both the inside and the challenge at the time was that people both on the Israeli side and the Palestinian side said, we don't have a partner for dialog, like we don't have a person on the other side or a set of parties on the other side who are sort of negotiating in good faith, who can be like trustworthy partners. And there's this really interesting distinction there, right? Because the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one example of a conflict where nobody will ever change their mind on the fundamental core issue. Right? Like, neither side is going to say, okay, we're wrong. You're right. You take all the land, we're just going to go away, right? Like that's never going to happen. But you can imagine conversations that are more constructive, conversations that solve particular problems, that build trust, that reduce enmity, that can happen and sort of build respect between people without anybody necessarily compromising. Right. And so that's kind of where the idea of receptiveness, that was one of the, you know, sort of huge, important real world situations that inspired the idea of receptiveness. Is there a mindset that enables people to listen and really think hard about what their counterpart is offering, and try to understand it from their point of view and try to give it a fair evaluation in their minds, even if they have absolutely no intention of actually compromising or, you know, moving towards the center or changing their mind. Right. And that that was kind of a hard sell, because we spent so much time thinking about how do you change the other person's mind that like selling folks on the idea that there's this other thing that's also important, that is not about persuasion was was and, you know, an uphill battle.
[00:21:20:18] Wilk Wilkinson: Yeah. it is an uphill battle. And and that's why I've. I've. Resorted in doing this work. And it took me a long time because when I started doing this podcast, Julia, I was I was still a fairly politically polarized person, you know, before I ever knew about Braver Angels or that the bridge buildings face was a thing. You know, I was still one of those people. I'd been on this long mindset journey that I've mentioned it, but I was still of the mindset that as long as I could just convey the message the right way. That everybody on the left was completely wrong about everything that they'd ever believed. As long as I could convey that message the right way, they would just change their mind. Right. Very naive. Right? But. But I. Came to realize that after doing this work, after, I mean, and even a little bit before, I encountered braver angels. But braver angels hit me, like, right at the right time. In that I started learning that it's not about changing people's minds, but opening them to the curiosity about what other people believe, not just what they believe, but why they believe it. And and it it it's one of those things that once you see it, you can't unsee it. How the how important that is that that, you know, you and I can probably sit here and have a conversation about all kinds of different political things and, and never come to any real middle ground on where, you know, what we think things should be. You know, maybe we do, maybe we don't. But the reality is, is, is we would come to a better understanding of, you know, who you are, why you believe what you believe, who I am, why I believe what I believe. And at least at that point, you know, we have a cornerstone for something bigger that we can build together. I think a lot of people, they get so hung up, like you said, they get so hung up on changing somebody's mind and forget that there's a whole nother place. So dive into that just a bit deeper. Because that, I think, is is one of the most important things in how we dialog with people, how we how how we communicate that it's not about changing minds, but opening them.
[00:23:46:10] Julia Minson: Yeah. So I think, you know, I think you're right. The why really matters, right? So when a person is advocating for particular policy, or when a person, affiliates with a particular party, right? We automatically, as human observers make assumptions about the why. And we don't even realize that we've made an assumption because we think our assumption is right and we think we know. Right. So and the why makes all the difference in the world, right? So, you know, if you say, well, you know, this person is, you know, a liberal because they're like a naive snowflake, that's a why, right? But if you ask that person why they, you know, like ascribe to the liberal agenda, they probably wouldn't say that they would give you a different why. Right. Yeah. And you know, and you can do the same thing with the other side. Right. But like we make these assumptions and we don't even realize that they're assumptions. And then we get very attached to these assumptions. And so much of a think the enmity in our society is not about what you believe. It's about what I assumed your belief says about you.
[00:25:18:10] Wilk Wilkinson: That's right.
[00:25:19:18] Julia Minson: And, you know, and so a lot of, the work of, you know, a lot of my research and a lot of sort of the work of social psychology is sort of uncovering the biases that people have with regard to, you know, conversations and people they disagree with and like, what do we jump to? Right. So we often jump to this person is uninformed. This person is irrational. This person has some kind of nefarious motive. And that's the only reason why they claim this set of beliefs or this ideology. Another thing we do is we tend to assume that the other person is far more extreme than they really are.
[00:26:07:20] Wilk Wilkinson: That's right.
[00:26:08:14] Julia Minson: Right. And then I think the third thing that we assume that kind of fall, you know, kind of creates this really negative dynamic is we assume that the other person dislikes us a lot more than they really do.
[00:26:24:15] Wilk Wilkinson: That's absolutely right.
[00:26:25:11] Julia Minson: Those three things together, like I think, cover a lot of ground of how we got to the place we're in right now as a.
[00:26:31:08] Wilk Wilkinson: Country does. I mean, those are those are three hugely, you know, huge contributing factors to the US versus them tribalism that we see today. You know, assuming that that they think, you know, we think they're worse than they are. They think we're worse than we are. And you know, we don't just think that they're wrong. We think they're either stupid or evil. I mean, these things, Julia, have have driven such an incredible wedge in between, in between who we are. And another thing that you go into in the book that I think is hugely important, I bring it up all the time, is the studies about the perception gap by more in common, very good information there. If people haven't haven't checked out the the perception gap and they can just Google the perception gap more in common, do it because that is one of the most eye opening things in terms of what we believe about the other side, what they believe about us, and what's actually true about the other side. how we see, how we see each other as opposed to, what each other really is and what we believe the other side believes about us. Just incredible stuff. So let's talk about in this, this half hours just flying by. But and there's a lot more in this book than we could even begin to cover in a half an hour. But, but this acronym that you've come up with Julia about. Hear, H.E.A.R. Which is not something I hear. I've got a favorite acronym. I call it fog, fear, outrage and grievance. Something totally indifferent. Or totally, totally. Different than than what you're doing. But it contributes to that perception. Get fear, outrage, and grievance. Do more than probably anything in my opinion. But but the HEAR, this this goes back to the receptiveness and how we receive somebody's message, how it's going to land for us, how when they're speaking to us, how it lands for them. Let's talk about that, that acronym, H.E.A.R. HEAR
[00:28:34:05] Julia Minson: Yeah. So you know, so we're we're studying receptiveness and we're trying to understand how we can get people to have, you know, better conversations by sort of encouraging them to think more thoroughly through the other side's positions. Right. Like, how can we get people to really engage with the other person and, you know, not sort of space out? One other person is talking and really, like, consider the merits of their arguments for, you know, sort of at face value. And we kept doing all these studies where we would try to teach people to be receptive and then sort of not getting anywhere. And it was just really frustrating and kind of embarrassing because, you know, we knew that sort of receptiveness existed. We knew that people who are more receptive kind of process information differently, and we couldn't figure out for the life of us why would they weren't having better conversations. And then what we ultimately did figure out is that there's a real sort of translation problem, which is that being receptive in your mind is, like very important for you to be a better informed person and more thoughtful person who sort of like, understand things in a deeper way. But when you are in the middle of a disagreement and you are thinking hard and you're doing all of this like extra intellectual work, your counterpart can't tell the difference, right? Like, they literally like they cannot read your mind. And, you know, this is sort of like the most obvious thing in the world, right? Like when I say, like, people can't read each other's minds, everybody's like, well, yeah, no, but but that is a big overlooked feature of how we teach conflict communication, because most of the time what we teach people is, you know, how to think different thoughts and have different feelings. We overlook the fact that their counterpart can't read their mind and therefore has no idea that they're having, you know, different thoughts and feelings. And so we started kind of thinking about this in a very different way, which is what would a person have to do to convince their counterpart that they're being receptive? Right. Like, forget what's actually happening in their brain. Like, what's the signal you could send that the other person would recognize and say, yeah, this person is really thinking hard about what I just said. And they're trying their damnedest to like, you know, reconcile our worldviews and sort of show me respect. And all of that comes down to language because, we all have, thousands of words that are disposal. And we have a pretty good shared understanding of what all those words mean. So if I want to convey something to you, words are my best bet. And so what we started doing is saying, okay, what are literally the words and phrases that people say that convince their counterparts that they're being receptive? And so, you know, the way you do this kind of work is you collect a bunch of conversations, like thousands of transcripts of conversations, and then you have them rated by other people to see, which conversations sound more receptive. And then you write an algorithm that picks out the words and phrases that make people think that the person saying the words is receptive, right? So it's very much like you start with just like a mass of data, and then you end up with some, you know, and then you end up with a list of words. And the list is organized into this here acronym that you referenced. Right. So that's how we get to the Here acronym. So here stands for hedging your claims, emphasizing agreement acknowledging other perspectives and reframing to the positive. So here and to the idea is that like if I'm talking to you and you just, you know, you just said whatever it is you said and I disagree, but, you know, I'm trying to have a good conversation. I, you know, maybe I asked you some questions. You know, I showed curiosity like I did all the things, but I still disagree. And so at some point I got to say my thing right. Sure. And so the question is, how do I say it in a way that doesn't cause like a negative spiral, right. And so that's where the here framework comes in. So hedging is words like maybe sometimes perhaps occasionally right. So like I could say the Covid vaccine is safe and effective. Right. Or I could say most physicians tend to believe that the Covid vaccine is largely safe and effective. Right. So it's like three different ways. I hedged my claim in one sentence, but it sort of leaves like a little bit of breathing room for the opposing perspective in what I am arguing. Right?
[00:33:55:03] Wilk Wilkinson: Not speaking in absolutes is not.
[00:33:57:16] Julia Minson: An absolute.
[00:33:58:13] Wilk Wilkinson: It's a hugely important thing, right?
[00:34:00:10] Julia Minson: Which is the opposite of what we normally try to do when we're arguing. Right? Because when you're arguing, you're trying to win. So an absolute sounds like a good idea.
[00:34:09:13] Wilk Wilkinson: Yeah. Yeah,
[00:34:11:06] Julia Minson: So the is emphasizing agreement you remember I'm you know I keep trying to make this argument that receptiveness is not about agreement. But any two people who disagree about anything agree on something.
[00:34:26:12] Wilk Wilkinson: They're going to find some points of agreement somewhere in there. And when you emphasize those people are going to be more receptive to listening to you, right?
[00:34:34:18] Julia Minson: Right. So you're kind of putting in, you know, like you're putting yourselves on the same side of the table. So, you know, we are both concerned with I am also interested in or I agree with some of what you're saying. Right. Like, I think one of the things that happens in arguments is people are in a big hurry, right? And so they just want to contradict the other person as quickly as possible, whereas agreement just slows you down and you're saying like, well, before I start arguing with you, let me tell you what I do agree with, right? That a is acknowledgment. So this is, you know, taking a few seconds to restate what your counterpart said, right. And, you know, my main sort of complaint about the way people do acknowledgment out in the world is that they do kind of like a half assed job. Right? So it's like, it's like, I hear you, but here's why you're wrong.
[00:35:31:18] Wilk Wilkinson: Yeah. Yeah, exactly. I was listening just to make sure that you know, that I'm listening. But you're wrong.
[00:35:38:16] Julia Minson: Right, right, right. I'm like, well, prove to me that you're listening. Yeah, right. Like, show me. So it's like I hear that you're really concerned with, you know, what's happening in our schools and that the experiences that your children have had with public education, you know, make you want to you like unelected, our entire school board. Right. So you have to sort of say what you heard because, again, the other person can't read your mind. Right. So you have to prove that you heard with actual words. And then the are reframing to the positive means avoiding negative and contradictory words like no, can't, won't, don't hate, terrible, kill right and replacing it with positively valence towards right. Like I really appreciate it when or it would be great if right. Or I would really like it if we could. And so, you know, you can say like anything you want to say that's negative. You could rephrase it as a positive. What you would like to see version of that. So H.E.R.
[00:36:48:01] Wilk Wilkinson: Yeah. No this is a fantastic acronym. And and what I think it does is it takes a lot of different things and brings them together. Julia, you know, things that we've, you know, we in the bridging space have talked about before, you know, like steel Manning, star Manning, you know, being able to you know, I was just on the enemies project not too long ago. And he does this kind of role reversal identity confusion thing where you you know, and so there's there's a lot of different things. And then, you know, just the positive valence words versus negativity. These things are. All. Parts of great communication. But bringing them down into that he acronym, especially for people like me who likes acronyms but but is wonderful because it simplifies it. It's easy to remember and people you know the I think the one that that I think lands well. I think there's a lot of things that land great for me there. But the hedging thing, you know, speaking in absolutes and, and people speaking of their own certainty, because that's one thing that I like to talk about quite often, is that certainty stands in the way of so much, so much knowledge, so much wisdom. And when people get stuck in their own certainty, they're doing themselves a huge disservice. And and that's why, I mean, it's wonderful that that's that's the front piece of it because, you know, just being able to to, you know, step back for a second and say, you know, absolutes are a bad thing. There's so much more. There's so much more here.
[00:38:26:20] Julia Minson: And, you know. Can I, can I just. Sort of follow up, like you mentioned earlier in the hour, about the experiences you have had as a podcaster, and as a communicator around, you know, figuring things out right through your own intuition, in your own experience. You know, you talked about learning that storytelling can be very powerful. And I think, you know, a lot of times when I talk about these ideas, people who are, you know, either in bridging or in mediation or, you know, therapists or people who are just sort of intuitive peacemakers, if you will, like. None of this is rocket science, right? All of this is like, yeah, I get it. That makes sense. What I think we're trying to do is we're trying to distill ideas that people take years to come by into an easy framework to just make life a little easier. Right? Like all have to learn it through the school of hard knocks. You can just buy the book and memorize acronym.
[00:39:37:01] Wilk Wilkinson: By the book. Memorize the acronym live by it. It's going to be wonderful. Yeah. That's that's that's so important. I have my wife makes fun of me all the time. She's like, yeah, must be a Wilkinson doing everything the hard way because I've done things I've I've made more than my share of mistakes, and I've tried to do everything the, the worst way possible to get to where I am. But I think I'm finally learning. And books like this actually help me a lot. Books have helped me a lot on this journey and and this is definitely one people don't want to miss. It's How to disagree better by Julia Minson. This has been a fantastic conversation. We will definitely have to do more. I very much enjoyed it.
[00:40:21:01] Julia Minson: Me too. Thanks for having me.
[00:40:23:01] Wilk Wilkinson: Friends, I want to thank you so much for tuning in. And if there's anything in this episode that provided exceptional value to you, please make sure to hit that share button. If you haven't done so already, please be sure to subscribe to get the Derate the Hate podcast sent to your email inbox every week. We really are better together. So please take a moment to visit Braver Angels and consider joining the movement towards civic renewal and bridging our political divide. This is Wilk wrapping up for the week saying get out there. Be kind to one another. Be grateful for everything you've got. And remember, it's up to you to make every day the day that you want it to be. With that, my friend. I'm going to back on out of here and we will catch you next week. Take care.
Comments & Upvotes