- set a goal that is not 'get the other to admit they are wrong'
- LOVE - Listen, Observe body language, Verify their point, Empathise even if you don't agree
- find common ground
- take a break before you argue
- agree on small points, defer the bigger points
- compliment the other
- acknowledge that the other is allowed to feel what they feel
- don't raise your voice
- "What is it about you are feeling that I don't understand"
- if you are wrong you can't afford to lose your temper, if you are right, you can
- discuss, don't argue
- agree to disagree, we don't have to agree
- just because you are quiet doesn't mean you are peaceful
- in an emotional argument, hug the person and reassure
- "I don't want to fight. (NOT BUT) I need to tell you something that's concerning me"
- it's better to be happy than right
- don't keep score of past arguments
I don't think 'natural' is good. There are many things that we apply (some almost arbitrary) (some ignorant and backward ideas of natural and not-natural agenda-propagating) rules of morality. I think 'natural' is a political rhetoric, profoundly abused. 'Diversity' is the only defensible rhetoric for 'thinking' beings. We are not, of course, the only creatures that do thinking, but we are the only creatures with the power to oppress others and other creatures whose languages we don't understand. Us (badly) thinking creatures, slowly, ponderously gathering the evidence of our badness (I see no reason for your (god's) patience with us), have the ability to decide to be better than (the fashionable) 'natural' of the day. It is our responsibility to transcend our vileness. Just that. That one task. Our thinkingness I believe is for that. A world (constructed by god) to demonstrate this point. And we will find every rhetor...
Comments