Opinion: How do we make progress? Combine disagreement with respect
In an era where even a hint of disagreement triggers an instinct to retreat, it is common for people to hastily sidestep conflict. To disagree can unleash a slew of labels and assumptions from opponents — think neo-liberal, racist, conspiracy theorist, MAGA Republican or woke liberal. The current state of polarization in society has led many to believe that preserving relationships with family and friends necessitates an outright avoidance of disagreement. The rationale is simple: If we abstain from engagement, we are less likely to ruffle feathers, ignite arguments and inadvertently incite drama.
Disagreement doesn’t have to be a bad thing. In fact, disagreement is essential to a healthy society. Many of the best things have emerged from disagreements. Consider, for instance, the birth of the United States. In the sweltering confines of a small meeting hall, the Founding Fathers passionately disagreed for days and days. From those disagreements emerged a country of hope and opportunity.
Or take Abraham Lincoln — when he was elected president, he intentionally appointed his political rivals to serve in his cabinet. He knew that by doing this, he would be forced to look at every side of an issue. The good this did for our country speaks to the power of disagreement.
Other examples of this can be seen in the workplace. When I started my career as a young consultant, I was stunned that in my workplace disagreement was not only allowed, but encouraged. Senior employees encouraged everyone, even interns, to challenge their ideas to ensure that we came to the best solutions. This led to innovation, growth and retention of employees.
Disagreement, though, is a double-edged sword. If done correctly, it leads to new insights, progress and solutions. If done incorrectly, it leads to division, othering and anger.
Related
It is essential that every disagreement is founded on active listening. This means biting your tongue when you want to refute a point. Instead of speaking, we need to spend more time listening and asking thoughtful questions to make sure we really understand what is being said.
In a disagreement, it is important to assume the best. This might mean trusting that the other person has genuine motives. Too frequently, we prematurely attribute malicious motives to others, eroding the credibility of their words without critically thinking about them. In reality, most people are just trying their best.
Most importantly, we must not demonize those we disagree with. At the end of the disagreement, we may share different opinions, but we must retain a mutual respect for each other and commit to continuing to work together.
Here in Utah, these ideas are becoming more prominent.
Related
Last year, a candidate for Utah’s 4th Congressional District ran on the platform, “optimism over outrage,” calling for a more positive approach to politics. In July, Gov. Spencer Cox announced an initiative called “Disagree Better,” to help teach people how to get along even when they held different political beliefs. Just days ago, a candidate for the 2nd Congressional District reaffirmed her dedication to the virtue of compromise when she said, “I’m not afraid of conflict, because I know in many cases you’re going to learn a lot.”
People across the state are calling for civil, productive and better disagreement. It is time for all of us to heed their call. Here in Utah, we have an opportunity to be an example to the nation that even when we disagree, we can be agreeable.
Adam Johnson is a graduate of Brigham Young University and Utah’s 2023 Truman Scholar. He currently works as consultant for Cicero Group focusing on social impact and strengthening public-private partnerships to solve challenging social issues.
