A true sign of intelligence isn’t how well you can explain your perspective, but how well you can explain your opposers viewpoint.
I don’t care how well you can articulate your argument, show me how the other person is also partially right and I’ll listen. Show me that you've even partly considered the other persons viewpoint as true and I'll listen.
But hang on, the last sentence isn’t as easy as it sounds--- was it?
What does it mean to actually contemplate another person’s perspective? Most of the time when we say we’re doing this we’re not — what we're doing is trying to show them how they're wrong. We’re strategizing, we’re scheming, and we’re definitely not actively trying to live inside their experience to feel how they got to that argument.
Actually considering what someone is saying means dropping any agenda we have of being "the winner" and being totally willing to change our viewpoint... but who wants to do that?
Our lives and identities are so tied in with our beliefs on gun control, climate change or eating animals that would make us a social outcast if we changed sides — and few people want to feel like an outcast.
It's much easier to stay in our bubble. We've gotten really good at pretending we're "cultured" and intelligent.
A New Standard
Let me suggest a standard that would be a complete game changer if applied it to conversations.
Rule 1: You must be able to articulate both sides of an argument in a way that has both sides feeling "understood" and "gotten". If you can't do that, it's time to stop the conversation and do some research.
For example, if you're a liberal and let's say you're debating a conservative, Trump voter, and you can’t articulate their position in a way they say “yes, you have it nailed” then you have no right to try to sway them to your way of seeing things. Your goal should be to more clearly understand their viewpoints, rather than changing it.
How ridiculous is it to try to change someones viewpoint when we don't even know what they believe in the first place? Our growth will be at a standstill. If you can't see anything "good" in what they're saying, your job is to be the best listener possible... not try to change their minds.
Isn't this the obvious answer? But why do few do this?
More often than not, when people "think" they're debating, what they're actually doing is WANTING friction and drama. It's like road rage, but online, where one little trigger unleashes a tsunami of pent up hurt and frustration that was building for years. In this situation, no one wins, and it isn't moving the conversation forward at all.
If our goal is for others to see things the way we see it, if we don't first see things their way, then we're wasting our time.