What You Can Learn from People Who Disagree With You | Shreya Joshi | TED

Summary

In this heartfelt talk, a 17-year-old high school student reflects on the growing polarization in society, drawing parallels to the awkwardness of choosing where to sit in the high school cafeteria. She shares a personal experience from a political debate, where she shifted from trying to 'win' an argument to listening and learning from differing viewpoints. By fostering open, empathetic conversations, even about divisive issues, she believes we can bridge divides and understand opposing perspectives. Her initiative, Project TEAL, encourages students to engage in civil discourse and emphasizes the importance of community in tackling polarization.

Takeaways

• 😀 The feeling of not knowing where to sit in the high school cafeteria reflects a broader societal tendency to gravitate towards people who are similar to us, making polarization feel natural.
• 😀 This tendency to seek out familiar people can be harmful, contributing to the view that people with opposing views are malevolent rather than simply different.
• 😀 Polarization is not just about disagreements over facts; it is about seeing the 'other side' as hateful and dangerous.
• 😀 Engaging in conversations with the intent to listen and learn, rather than to win or agree, can be a path to overcoming polarization.
• 😀 The speaker, a 17-year-old, shares a personal story about changing their view on the death penalty through meaningful conversations with peers with opposing perspectives.
• 😀 The process of changing one's mind is facilitated by listening to and learning from people who hold different opinions.
• 😀 Through the speaker's initiative, Project TEAL, high school students discuss various political and social issues and engage in civil discourse, demonstrating the power of conversation in fostering understanding.
• 😀 A powerful example of civil discourse occurred between a Black girl and the son of a cop, where both shared perspectives on the Black Lives Matter movement and learned from each other despite their disagreement.
• 😀 Civil discourse does not necessarily require agreement, but it enables better understanding of others' perspectives, which can lead to more productive dialogue.
• 😀 Creating opportunities for bipartisan discourse, whether in community groups or workplaces, can reduce societal divisions, as most Americans recognize the value of such conversations.
• 😀 To engage in meaningful and uncomfortable conversations, it's important to listen actively, stay off social media, and focus on real, human connections rather than debating to win.

Q & A

What does the speaker suggest is the main problem with polarization today?

The speaker highlights that polarization today isn't just about disagreement on facts; it's about viewing the other side as malevolent, with a hateful agenda, which leads to harmful outcomes like violence and divisive politics.

How did the speaker's perspective on the death penalty change?

Initially, the speaker believed in the death penalty as a form of justice, but after engaging in a conversation and listening to opposing viewpoints, they researched the topic and discovered that the death penalty is disproportionately applied to people of color and doesn't effectively deter crime, leading to a shift in their stance.

What is the significance of the speaker's initiative, Project TEAL?

Project TEAL was created by the speaker to encourage high school students to engage in nonpartisan political discourse. The initiative focuses on important social issues and fosters respectful, constructive conversations that bridge ideological divides.

What key insight did the speaker gain from the 2020 conversation between the boy and girl about Black Lives Matter?

The key insight was that even though the boy and girl disagreed on the Black Lives Matter movement, they learned from each other’s perspectives. Their conversation helped them understand the context and experiences that shaped the other's view, leading to mutual appreciation despite disagreement.

What does the speaker believe is necessary for creating productive bipartisan discourse?

The speaker suggests that the first step toward productive bipartisan discourse is finding a community where people can engage in uncomfortable but meaningful conversations. This community-based approach allows individuals to recognize shared values, which makes it easier to discuss divisive issues.

How does the speaker suggest we handle uncomfortable conversations?

The speaker recommends approaching uncomfortable conversations with the intent to listen and learn, rather than to win or agree. It's important to be open, stay present, and engage with respect, even on polarizing topics.

What role does the speaker suggest social media plays in polarizing discourse?

Social media, according to the speaker, undermines productive discourse by creating distance between individuals, leading to a lack of personal connection. This detachment makes it harder to empathize with opposing viewpoints and diminishes the potential for meaningful, face-to-face dialogue.

What is the impact of having conversations in real life, according to the speaker?

Having conversations in real life, rather than online, allows for a more humanized interaction, where individuals can better understand and empathize with one another's perspectives. This is crucial for breaking down polarization and finding common ground.

How does the speaker relate their personal experience to the wider issue of polarization in society?

The speaker uses their own experience of engaging with differing viewpoints, particularly in high school and during the ACLU program, to illustrate how civil discourse can lead to understanding and change. They express concern about entering an adult world marked by polarization, emphasizing the urgency of addressing this issue.

What specific advice does the speaker give for initiating meaningful conversations in everyday life?

The speaker advises people to find a community or group where difficult conversations can take place, ideally once a week. Topics should be uncomfortable and meaningful, ranging from politics to religion, with a focus on listening and learning from others, not just debating to win.