This talk isn't so much a lesson in how to fix broken political conversations as it is a lesson in how to use rhetoric to win an argument. This talk seems to advocate tapping into others' values to manipulate rather than to understand and communicate meaningfully as equal parties, which would truly lead to the resolution of issues or at least lead to a less angry and divided nation. It might even demand that politicians become better thinkers and leaders instead of panderers. So much of current conversation isn't motivated by our values, but fear of losing those values, a way of life. And the fear backs two opposing people against opposite walls, and suddenly they are polarized. Speak with others as neighbors, as fellow citizens, as friends, as family, as people trying to survive in this mad world, just like you. Do not speak to others as political stereotypes. We are all much more complex than that.
I also think that if we let go of convincing the other party and are open even for being wrong and learning from them, we can transform polarization into a source of new development.
Thank you so much for this talk, Robb! I find it so important that we understand that each opinion is coming from somewhere, is based on values, needs and fears. And if we succeed to look beyond the opinion, meeting each other with empathy and respect as you say, we are ready for connected conversation.
I Disagree. It is mostly a left wing issue for good presuppositional reasons. The globe is God's private property and we humans are only stewards over it which includes being responsible and accountable before Him for our care and cultivation of it - not before other humans or human institutions such as the UN. The globe is not our mother goddess to be the object of our worship or the root of our religious beliefs and practices. When I was growing up it was global cooling, my sister it was global warming, my daughter it is global changing. It is a demonic trick to promote the emotional responses of fear and throwing money at the fictional problem to make it go away by socialistic wealth redistribution. God did not create us to live in fear or be poor stewards over His nor our own internal and external private properties. No one denies that climate changes from minute to day to month to season to year!
I vehemently disagree with you. When you bring Christianity into the equation, all logic goes out of the question...If we are your god's stewards, shouldn't we protect everything that was created by him; keep it clean and pure? surely it's all sacred? Though you may not worship the earth, but many people do. You say the climate has been getting hotter and then colder. Yes. That is called climate change. And of course it changes all the time, but either end is becoming more extreme. I'm not sure how you can call it a fictional problem when science (e.g. actual facts) support it. How are we going to be stewards of the earth if half of it is under water? I've never spoken to a climate change denier. I knew they existed, but wow, this is something!
I am Jewish. Science and scientists have repeatedly proven it's a money and power scam rather than actual area of concern. Yes we are to protect and keep clean and well used those things that have been created and that bless our lives by. Yes this even means ocean bottoms. Do you remember Dawn being used to wash oiled ducks backs and bacterial microbes used in clean-up spills? Both acts of stewardship and taking ownership for human "boo-boos" dealt with water/Oceans. This has more to do with presuppositions that lead to worldviews and belief systems and with definitions and applications of specific values.
Yes I do look into it myself. Yes it is a one-sided issue because the other side knows it's absolute gospel. The point of the ted talk is that each of use knows we are in the right and the other person is in the wrong. I think we both need a little work on finding the common or shared ground or value systems.
He's speaking to a Liberal crowd. Using his own logic, which I think is solid, he's framed his discussion in Liberal values. But everything he says could be reversed to help Conservatives make more effective arguments to Liberals. If you want to move a Liberal to consider a Conservative policy, like Voter ID, for example, you will get nowhere if you don't show how these laws can enhance equality and fairness. How is a Voter ID law compassionate and inclusive? In fact, making sure that our votes are counted accurately is the definition of fairness. If your party votes honestly and the other party cheats, your rights are being violated and your political views and values are being suppressed. To make this point clear, imagine a country where radical Conservative activists flood the polling places with illegal votes. In that world, Liberals would be the ones fighting hardest for Voter ID laws. Suppose the KKK organized a campaign to skew voting toward white candidates by having their members vote multiple times. Liberals would be outraged by this, as they should be, and would insist on finding ways, like Voter ID laws, to make the system "fair" again. I believe this is the point Robb Willer is making here.
I think we should all calm down and see his reasoning and his purpose, I see his obvious bias but at the same time try to see his reasoning, the bickering between ideologies needs to be quelled because this polarization only promotes hostility towards each other. People must stop being quick to assume things. Just have an open mind and be courteous, I know all the problems occurring in our country but bickering and arguing about it isn't going to fix things at all. Admit your own faults and then try to come together.
Shreyas Sudhaman The problem with *many* conservatives is that they are fared if the future. The problem with *some* liberals is that they don’t learn from what obviously doesn’t work, like drugs. *Unfortunately both sides only see the extremes in one another.*
Not impressed. He's preaching conservative conversion therapy instead of showing people that we need both sides of the spectrum. If we're all conservative, nothing will evolve but if we're all liberals, everything will fly apart. If we can recognize that we depend on one another for overall balance, then we will be more open to a dialogue.
We can have an do everything we want for all to equally live. But we have too many primitive behaviors and toxic lifestyle norms for anyone to solve alone. We have all the answers to the questions were not asking. It's a matter of when we stop asking the wrong ones that we will ask the right ones.
media and corporations make sure you keep having the wrong dialogues, now the flavor of the decade is identity politics, it serves as a smokescreen for the oligarchs to hide that these are all economic class issues of 4 years of bad international trades that favor & enrich the friends of the parties who offshore money & outsource labor where there are no fair law to protect the workers. as well as foreign political entities trying to subvert local powers.
I agree with the principle but there are some intransigent people responding below. I can get a look into their paradigm but how can I speak with them? My dad used to mock some people saying their mind was made up and they didn't want to be confused with facts. I guess Motivational Interviewing. I haven't read The Righeous Mind yet either.
I think he has the political ideologies mixed up. Every conservative I know preaches about fairness and equality, and every Leftist I know seems to be more morally pure/self righteous.
No, conservatives have a higher disgust response. And disgust can be triggered due to moral issues. Hence they are “morally pure”. Go watch Jordan Peterson’s talk on concientiousness it explains how this moral purity and orderliness can go wrong.
Your conclusions sound like the movie The Great Debaters. Our parents and grandparents were expected to learn this in school and called it argumentation and debate skills. Maybe next time you could address more detail on when you don't believe in a value or define or apply it differently, such as fairness or patriotism. Presuppositions and definitions are key to dialogue.
Adopting the same ecofascist talking points used by ultra nationalists who oppose immigration may have unforseen consequences even if it yields some good poll results.
Liberals aren't liberal anymore, Conservatives aren't true conservatives anymore. I hate both terms we use as a blanket term instead of the proper political term. I am a National Monarchist(Nationalist and Monarchist) I hate how republics and democracy divide people on ideological lines, instead of uniting them under a common idea of something greater, a nation, a Kingdom of a people
This talk isn't so much a lesson in how to fix broken political conversations as it is a lesson in how to use rhetoric to win an argument. This talk seems to advocate tapping into others' values to manipulate rather than to understand and communicate meaningfully as equal parties, which would truly lead to the resolution of issues or at least lead to a less angry and divided nation. It might even demand that politicians become better thinkers and leaders instead of panderers. So much of current conversation isn't motivated by our values, but fear of losing those values, a way of life. And the fear backs two opposing people against opposite walls, and suddenly they are polarized. Speak with others as neighbors, as fellow citizens, as friends, as family, as people trying to survive in this mad world, just like you. Do not speak to others as political stereotypes. We are all much more complex than that.
I also think that if we let go of convincing the other party and are open even for being wrong and learning from them, we can transform polarization into a source of new development.
@@ValerieKattenfeld yes!
Thank you so much for this talk, Robb! I find it so important that we understand that each opinion is coming from somewhere, is based on values, needs and fears. And if we succeed to look beyond the opinion, meeting each other with empathy and respect as you say, we are ready for connected conversation.
Thank you for this. I was a conservative (moderate now) but appreciated much of this. This seems like an excellent start to extremely important work.
Dear Amanda, may I ask what initiated your changing?
brilliant, what do you think of the situation now?
"Not Red, Not Blue, PURPLE ". IDBC Nobody thinks they are the bad guys. Urban vs Rural.
Listen to our Conservative-Liberal counterparts. "Red+Blue+Purple=🇺🇸
Climate change cannot just be a left-wing issue, it needs to be a global, cross-party one if we are to have any chance of combatting it.
I Disagree. It is mostly a left wing issue for good presuppositional reasons. The globe is God's private property and we humans are only stewards over it which includes being responsible and accountable before Him for our care and cultivation of it - not before other humans or human institutions such as the UN. The globe is not our mother goddess to be the object of our worship or the root of our religious beliefs and practices. When I was growing up it was global cooling, my sister it was global warming, my daughter it is global changing. It is a demonic trick to promote the emotional responses of fear and throwing money at the fictional problem to make it go away by socialistic wealth redistribution. God did not create us to live in fear or be poor stewards over His nor our own internal and external private properties. No one denies that climate changes from minute to day to month to season to year!
I vehemently disagree with you. When you bring Christianity into the equation, all logic goes out of the question...If we are your god's stewards, shouldn't we protect everything that was created by him; keep it clean and pure? surely it's all sacred?
Though you may not worship the earth, but many people do.
You say the climate has been getting hotter and then colder. Yes. That is called climate change. And of course it changes all the time, but either end is becoming more extreme.
I'm not sure how you can call it a fictional problem when science (e.g. actual facts) support it.
How are we going to be stewards of the earth if half of it is under water?
I've never spoken to a climate change denier. I knew they existed, but wow, this is something!
I am Jewish. Science and scientists have repeatedly proven it's a money and power scam rather than actual area of concern. Yes we are to protect and keep clean and well used those things that have been created and that bless our lives by. Yes this even means ocean bottoms. Do you remember Dawn being used to wash oiled ducks backs and bacterial microbes used in clean-up spills? Both acts of stewardship and taking ownership for human "boo-boos" dealt with water/Oceans. This has more to do with presuppositions that lead to worldviews and belief systems and with definitions and applications of specific values.
Yes I do look into it myself. Yes it is a one-sided issue because the other side knows it's absolute gospel. The point of the ted talk is that each of use knows we are in the right and the other person is in the wrong. I think we both need a little work on finding the common or shared ground or value systems.
cx45830 u can’t cripple the us economy for environmental causes.
He's speaking to a Liberal crowd. Using his own logic, which I think is solid, he's framed his discussion in Liberal values. But everything he says could be reversed to help Conservatives make more effective arguments to Liberals. If you want to move a Liberal to consider a Conservative policy, like Voter ID, for example, you will get nowhere if you don't show how these laws can enhance equality and fairness. How is a Voter ID law compassionate and inclusive? In fact, making sure that our votes are counted accurately is the definition of fairness. If your party votes honestly and the other party cheats, your rights are being violated and your political views and values are being suppressed. To make this point clear, imagine a country where radical Conservative activists flood the polling places with illegal votes. In that world, Liberals would be the ones fighting hardest for Voter ID laws. Suppose the KKK organized a campaign to skew voting toward white candidates by having their members vote multiple times. Liberals would be outraged by this, as they should be, and would insist on finding ways, like Voter ID laws, to make the system "fair" again. I believe this is the point Robb Willer is making here.
I think we should all calm down and see his reasoning and his purpose, I see his obvious bias but at the same time try to see his reasoning, the bickering between ideologies needs to be quelled because this polarization only promotes hostility towards each other. People must stop being quick to assume things. Just have an open mind and be courteous, I know all the problems occurring in our country but bickering and arguing about it isn't going to fix things at all. Admit your own faults and then try to come together.
Shreyas Sudhaman The problem with *many* conservatives is that they are fared if the future. The problem with *some* liberals is that they don’t learn from what obviously doesn’t work, like drugs. *Unfortunately both sides only see the extremes in one another.*
People are sheep. They resonate with rhetoric and very rarely ever research for themselves.
How to bridge political divide. Use psychological techniques to make them agree with you
If you like this talk, you would like the book “developmental politics” by Steve Macintosh
Not impressed. He's preaching conservative conversion therapy instead of showing people that we need both sides of the spectrum. If we're all conservative, nothing will evolve but if we're all liberals, everything will fly apart. If we can recognize that we depend on one another for overall balance, then we will be more open to a dialogue.
We can have an do everything we want for all to equally live. But we have too many primitive behaviors and toxic lifestyle norms for anyone to solve alone. We have all the answers to the questions were not asking. It's a matter of when we stop asking the wrong ones that we will ask the right ones.
media and corporations make sure you keep having the wrong dialogues,
now the flavor of the decade is identity politics, it serves as a smokescreen for the oligarchs to hide that these are all economic class issues of 4 years of bad international trades that favor & enrich the friends of the parties who offshore money & outsource labor where there are no fair law to protect the workers.
as well as foreign political entities trying to subvert local powers.
I agree with the principle but there are some intransigent people responding below. I can get a look into their paradigm but how can I speak with them? My dad used to mock some people saying their mind was made up and they didn't want to be confused with facts. I guess Motivational Interviewing. I haven't read The Righeous Mind yet either.
I think he has the political ideologies mixed up. Every conservative I know preaches about fairness and equality, and every Leftist I know seems to be more morally pure/self righteous.
No, conservatives have a higher disgust response. And disgust can be triggered due to moral issues. Hence they are “morally pure”. Go watch Jordan Peterson’s talk on concientiousness it explains how this moral purity and orderliness can go wrong.
Aaaaah I see, you have found the way to better political communication.
Empathy and respect. That's basically a liberal idea. That's out of the moral sphere of a conservative.
interesting that once Trump was election..its all about bad orange man..
Your conclusions sound like the movie The Great Debaters. Our parents and grandparents were expected to learn this in school and called it argumentation and debate skills. Maybe next time you could address more detail on when you don't believe in a value or define or apply it differently, such as fairness or patriotism. Presuppositions and definitions are key to dialogue.
Behind him is a (sings) Safe Space!
Adopting the same ecofascist talking points used by ultra nationalists who oppose immigration may have unforseen consequences even if it yields some good poll results.
サムネ、ノイアーかと思った
One side denies science, human rights, and is okay with criminal behavior.
How to convince a conservative they are wrong, effectively.
Liberals aren't liberal anymore, Conservatives aren't true conservatives anymore. I hate both terms we use as a blanket term instead of the proper political term. I am a National Monarchist(Nationalist and Monarchist) I hate how republics and democracy divide people on ideological lines, instead of uniting them under a common idea of something greater, a nation, a Kingdom of a people
You didnt say a damn thing tho
Jonathan Haidt discovers that conservatives have a broader sense of morality and all liberals can do is try to design propaganda around it.
And, precisely, how did he express that particular discovery? Curious and rational adult thinkers are eager to know.