undefined | Better HN

0 pointsafcapel4y ago0 comments

That's exactly the problem: assuming that the only valid reason to talk about an awkward situation is to convince the other person that they are wrong or change their behaviour.

We can talk about about awkward things, nobody has to convince anyone of anything. You can listen to the other person and just come to understand how they feel and why. You don't need to feel the same way, just have a better understanding of why they feel how they feel.

If more people did this the world would be a much better place. It'd accomplish a lot, I think.

0 comments

OnACoffeeBreak4y ago

That is exactly the point. It's not about proving your point or bring proven right or wrong. It's about understanding the other point of view. That's what discussion is all about.

watwut4y ago

Sometimes, fully understanding other position means you will perceive them as even more threat.

notriddle4y ago

But what’s the point? Political conversations, even civil ones where everyone walks away understanding each other’s POV and agree to disagree, usually aren’t going to accomplish anything concrete, because very few people have the opportunity to affect government policy.

The best case scenario is that talking about politics doesn’t make your relationship worse. The most likely outcome, as you’ve noticed, is that we both leave convinced that each other are idiots. The good outcomes of more ordinary conversation, where we learn from each other and put what you learn into action, doesn’t exist. So what’s the point?

Swizec4y ago

It accomplishes a better understanding between people and a less divisive society.

Which is also what we need to stick it to the man. They want us to fight and bicker and be divided into camps and never agree on anything. That’s how they can keep doing whatever they want. Even better if we convince each other that talking about this stuff is taboo and unproductive.

Remember: A populace than can work together is a scary populace, if you’re in power.

XorNot4y ago

A huge number of people are extremely eager to tell you their long-winded justification on why some group of people should be exterminated.

I don't see how there's any value in trying to understand that because the division is built right into the premise.

BeetleB4y ago

> But what’s the point? Political conversations, even civil ones where everyone walks away understanding each other’s POV and agree to disagree, usually aren’t going to accomplish anything concrete, because very few people have the opportunity to affect government policy.

That's true of most conversations - not just political ones. Why put them in a special bucket?

> The best case scenario is that talking about politics doesn’t make your relationship worse.

This is silly. There are lots of good case scenarios. Even "I enjoyed the conversation" is a good case scenario, and there are many better outcomes.

> The good outcomes of more ordinary conversation, where we learn from each other and put what you learn into action, doesn’t exist.

If you've convinced yourself an entity doesn't exist, then it will not exist for you.

jfengel4y ago

Frequently, political conversations are personal. When you're debating about whether or not you should be allowed to vote, or whether you should be deprived of money or other rights, it's difficult to simply come away saying "I enjoyed the conversation".

Political conversations are more likely to be fun when they're discussing abstractions. But they can have real effects in a way that few other disputes can. Even though the absolute power of one vote is very small, it's not enjoyable to be told "I'm going to put my small amount of power to making your life worse."

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse