Introduction

Group discussions are not just an academic activity. Sometimes there are group discussions in the classroom, but more than likely when you participate in a group discussion you will be with a study group, other members of a committee or organization, a group in a seminar, or with a group of people talking at a coffee shop or in a dorm room. There is often no grade involved in a group discussion, but there is usually something much more important involved: understanding.

Too often group discussions bring to mind adversarial situations. The participants are trying to defend their positions against the attacks of the other participants. And beyond that the participants are trying to win a victory over the other participants and over their positions. This type of discussion may be stimulating, but it is not the type of discussion you are going to learn about in this lesson.

This lesson assumes that the primary purpose of discussion— talking with other people about their ideas and opinions—is to broaden your understanding. This happens by seeing things from the point of view of other people. We talk with them in order to widen our vision of their views and to eliminate misunderstanding about how they are seeing a situation or an issue.

You should go into a discussion wanting to gain something other than victory. You should go into a discussion wanting a richer understanding of how other people live in and see the world. In other words, you should want to change your mind, but not necessarily change your opinions. We are talking about changing your mind in the sense of reaching a new understanding.

Let's think about some comments frequently heard in discussions. Which ones contribute to an adversarial atmosphere and which ones contribute to an atmosphere of understanding?

For each sentence below, decide if the comment contributes to an adversarial atmosphere or to an atmosphere of understanding. When you think you know the answer, click the link that matches your response.

"That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard."

Adversarial

It's easy to identify the attack in this comment.

Close Understanding

Try Again.

"I don't understand what you are saying. Could you explain that again?"

Adversarial

Try Again.

Close Understanding

Even though the comment starts with an admission of not understanding, the comment is probably the most valuable comment you can make if you want to grow in your understanding of other people's positions.

"I think I know what you mean. Tell me if this is what you're saying . . ."

Adversarial

Try Again.

Close Understanding

This is another valuable comment. You should memorize this formula. It's easy to say "I understand." But until you check it out by restating what another person said, there is no guarantee (and not even a very good chance) that you really do understand.

"I can't believe you're saying that. You've obviously led a very sheltered life."

Adversarial

This is clearly in attack mode.

Close Understanding

Try Again

"Let me explain to you why you are wrong."

Adversarial

Don't be fooled by the politeness of this statement. Civility doesn't count for much if it is serving only the person using it rather than mutual understanding.

Close Understanding

Try Again.

"Do you mean that . . . ?"

Adversarial

Try Again.

Close Understanding

This can be used in attack mode, if it is insincere. But if there is a sincere desire to know whether your understanding of what is being said is accepted by the person who said it, it is a valuable step toward understanding.

"You said, [the comment]. Does that mean you think [paraphrase of the comment]?"

Adversarial

Try Again.

Close Understanding

Memorize this formula.

"Let's just agree to disagree."

Adversarial

This sounds wise, high-minded, and pragmatic. Actually it is adversarial. There is no need to "agree." But there is a need to understand. The goal is not for one side to win so the other side can be eliminated. The goal is simply for each of the two sides to understand the position of the other. Agreeing to disagree is fine, but usually this means "we are wasting our time talking" and thinking that it is a waste of time is a misunderstanding of the purpose of the talk.

Close Understanding

Try Again.

"We're just going around in circles on this. We're never going to agree."

Adversarial

Understanding is not as much fun as verbal combat, but it is much more valuable.

Close Understanding

Try Again.

"No. No. No. You just don't understand. I'm trying to explain, and you just don't get it."

Adversarial

Attack mode is obvious.

Close Understanding

Try Again.

You may be asking, "What do we gain from understanding the ideas of other people if those ideas are wrong?"

It's very hard for any of us to admit that our ideas may be biased. But inevitably some part of what we believe is based on assumptions that we have come to adopt without even being aware of it. Those assumptions may often lead us to make good decisions, but unless we are aware of the assumptions our decisions are based on, we can have no confidence that the decisions will always be good. It is by learning to listen to other people and sincerely struggling to understand how they see an issue that we become aware of our own biases and limitations.

Quick check

Does discussion for understanding mean that one side ends up agreeing with the other?

No it doesn't. There is no need for agreement. Understanding is enough.

Good for you. The point of the discussion is understanding, not forced agreement.

Is the point of discussion for understanding to be able to see an issue from another perspective?

It is very hard to work through the assumptions and learned prejudices which interfere with understanding each other. Accomplishing understanding or even something close to understanding is a worthy accomplishment.

There are other benefits beyond this one, but seeing an issue from another perspective is one of the primary goals of such a discussion.

Do we gain anything by understanding why someone holds a wrong opinion?

First of all it is valuable for people to actually get to explore what they mean. When I say to you, "I'm interested in what you're saying, but I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean . . .?" I'm giving you an opportunity to really look at what you do mean and therefore a challenge of exploring the biases and assumptions that your meaning is based on. And conversely, it is valuable for me to explore the way you look at an issue because I gain perspective. Seeing from two points of view is always better than seeing from just one.

We don't gain anything but agreeing with an opinion we know (or believe) to be wrong. But there is a value in finding out how someone else can believe it to be right. We might gain some understanding.

Steps toward Listening to Understand

This is all about listening. If you want to really listen to anyone in any situation, these steps will help.

Throw aside your defenses.

Come to the talk with no defensive impulses. Consciously give them up. How will you know if you have gotten rid of your discussion aggression? You won't know until you feel the urge to reject something that someone has said. Maybe they made some slip: misused a word, made a bad analogy, misquoted someone, stated as factual something you know to be incorrect. Unless this slip gets in the way of understanding, you should ignore it. Consciously ignore it. If it does get in the way of understanding, then you should ask about it. But before you come to the discussion, hang up the boxing gloves.

boxing gloves lying palms down, unused

What to think to help you throw aside your defenses:

I’m not here to win or show off; I’m here to listen and understand.
I’ll ignore whatever it was that annoyed me; it was a side issue anyway.
I could say something mean right now, but I won’t; I’m here to understand.

Clear out your mind.

This sounds like very bad advice for someone entering into an intellectual discussion. But you are not making yourself stupid; you are making yourself receptive. Some philosophers say you can't add more to a bowl that is already full. You have to open up some space in your mind to receive something. Consciously invite some new ideas, some new ways of looking at things.

What to think to help you clear your mind:

I have a good argument against what was just said, but I'll listen first and say something later.
I know what was just said is wrong because . . . , but I'll wait and see if I can understand why it seems right to this person.
I am not going to lose anything by listening and doing my best to understand what is being said.

Put on someone else's shoes.

It is hard enough to be able to state accurately what someone else has said. It's twice as hard to live in the way the other person sees things.

What to think to help you put on their shoes:

Here's what is different in their way of looking at things . . .
I know what I think, but I'll try thinking what that person or these people think.

Try walking down someone else's road.

After you have "put on their shoes" and lived in their perspective, you will be able to speculate on how you would act if you adopted this point of view. If you can accurately predict the behavior that this point of view would motivate (and the other person says you have predicted correctly), you can probably claim that you truly understand the other person's position.

What to think to help you to walk down another's road:

So if I understand this, then if I were in a situation such as . . . I would do this: . . .
I'm never going to really live this way, but I can imagine that if I agreed with these people, I would do this: . . .

Quick Check

Without looking back at the text of the lesson above, try connecting these images to the steps toward "listening to understand" explained in the lesson. Write your best idea about the relation of the image to listening, then click on RESPONSE for a comparison answer.

boxing gloves lying palms down, unused

Check your understanding

The boxing gloves are taken off. This should remind you that during the time you are focused on listening, you are not going to be fighting, you are not going to be defending yourself. You are trying to see from the perspective of the other person rather than trying to see from your own perspective. You are trying to add to your understanding, not prove the other person wrong.

person holding empty bowl.

Check your understanding

The bowl should remind you to empty your mind so that something can be added. You should make room for the possibility of learning something, the possibility of seeing something in a new way.

hiking boots recently taken off.

Check your understanding

The shoes should remind you that you need to actually experience (in your imagination) what other people have experienced or are experiencing that makes their perspective make sense to them. Probably you know the proverb about walking in someone else's moccasins; this is the same idea.

picture of a road.

Check your understanding

The country road should remind you that you should actually be able to try out the perspective by predicting how it would operate in some situation. The thing you need to think is "If I saw things the way I think you do, then when X happens, I would react this way: . . ." Of course, in a discussion you would want to actually ask the other person if you are predicting correctly, but even when you are just listening, it still is a good exercise to think this through.

Trying It Out

To practice listening for understanding, you are going to listen to a statement by Vice President Joe Biden addressed to gay young people. He was trying to encourage them to not be defeated by bullying or exclusion. This is part of a series of statements by older people telling young people who are gay that it gets better.

You may relate to this issue very strongly, or you might not relate to this issue at all. You may like or dislike Joe Biden, or you may have no impression of him whatsoever. You might find his comments boring, or you might find his comments very moving. This makes no difference in the challenge of listening for understanding. These comments are addressed directly to young people who are gay, so many of you are going to be listening to one person talking to another. You are not going to be part of the exchange, as sometimes happens in a real discussion.

Watch and listen to the video and then answer the questions that follow.

Using the Take Notes Tool, write detailed responses to each question below to show how well you listened and understood. When you are finished, check your understanding.

What is Biden saying to gay young people?
What resistance did you have to what he is saying? Were you able to let this go so you could listen?
What is the perspective that Biden has on this issue? Can you predict what a person who has the perspective that Biden has would do in an actual situation where the issue came into play? Could you predict what such a person would do if he heard the statement that bullying is just part of growing up?

Check your understanding

At the simplest level, he is saying that it is the bullies who are wrong, not the person being bullied. He is saying that if you are bullied, you should not let it affect your self-worth because it is the bully who is less of a person; the person who is gay should be proud. He is also saying that people who have been bullied and know what it is like should make sure that they never make anyone feel like this. He is even saying that the world can be changed when these people grow up with this perspective. There are other things he says that you may have written down. What he does not say is that gay young people should try to get the bullies punished. He does not say that gay young people should come out or be activists.
First let's note some trivial things that might have gotten in the way of your listening for understanding. Biden starts right off addressing gay youth directly as "you." If you aren't gay, did this make it hard for you to listen? Biden makes some strange grammatical moves at a few places. Once he seems to say that his parents are the ones who are wrong when he means the bullies. At the end, he seems to be grasping for some ending to his talk that is a little sketchy. There may be other small things that would be easy to be distracted by if you are in adversarial mode. If you didn't notice these things, it is to your credit. If you noticed them but ignored them as trivial, that's even more to your credit. You might have had some resistance to some other things too. Is it possible that gay young people sometimes invite some bullying? Is it possible that some gay young people do have some faults that should make them feel less worthy? These are fair questions, but if you are listening for understanding, you probably would not predict that Biden would disagree with these qualifying conditions. His message is not analytical but inspirational, and there is a difference in how qualifications to broad statements are handled when it is inspiration rather than analysis at issue. If you started to critique the comments for analytical weakness, you have to admit that that is not appropriate to this purpose.
Biden does not address this. That is why we are using it as a test of prediction powers. If you really understood what Biden is saying, you would be able to make a prediction about what he would say that he would agree with. There are a few indications of his perspective on this. One thing is that he does not bring this up. So he might agree that at the present time bullying is one of the things kids can expect as they grow up. He also says that he is a stronger person now after having been bullied and living through it. (It's not quite the same thing as saying that he is glad he was bullied because it made him stronger. He doesn't say that.) These aspects of the talk would indicate that he is not asking for a zero tolerance policy on bullying right now. But at the end of the talk, he says that when the young people who have been bullied grow up, they will be able to change the world into a better place because they will not allow other people to be treated the way they were. This is a strong statement against the attitude that "kids just have to go through this."

Going Back to Skeptical Mode

Now don't go away from this lesson thinking that you are being advised never to doubt other people's opinions and ideas. The point is not to give up asking hard questions and not to back away from defending a position you believe in.

Defending a position is an important aspect of responsible intellectual exchange. But defensiveness is not a good stance from which to listen. So if you want to come to the best possible position on an issue, first listen and understand. Then from that new place of understanding combined, with your own experience and ideas, decide how you will think and even what you are willing to fight for as you experience the world around you.