�鶹��Ѱ�����

We’ve all been there: You’re talking to someone—maybe a relative or a neighbor—about politics. Your face gets flushed. Your hands start to shake. You can’t believe anyone could possibly be so thickheaded.

Matthew Koschmann, associate professor in the Department of Communication at �鶹��Ѱ�����Boulder, knows all about those difficult kinds of conversations. He notes that talking to someone you don’t agree with during a fraught election year can be uncomfortable or even infuriating. But there are a few strategies that anyone can take to keep the dialogue civil—and maybe even come to a place of deeper understanding.

Koschmann touched on these challenges at a recent panel discussion in Boulder called “Election year polarization: Can we stay good neighbors?” First off, he said, you need to realize that you probably won’t change anyone’s mind through talking alone.

“Conversations aren’t just about abstract ideas or strategies,” he said. “They’re about real people with real hormones and emotions in real circumstances.”

He gives his take on why being in tune with your own body is critical and how to survive a conservation with that one uncle.

A lot of us may assume that we can win people over with the perfect argument centered on logic and facts. Do you think that’s true?

Of course, logic and reasoning are very important, but it tends to be contextual. A lot of interaction environments have boundaries and rules, like in a courtroom. There are very strict rules on who can talk, when they can talk, what they're allowed to say. That interaction environment privileges certain ways of making decisions, particularly based on evidence, reasoning and expertise.  

But in the public sphere, there aren’t really a lot of rules. You're not required to agree with somebody just because they presented a better argument. Reason and rationality are just some of many factors that contribute to how we make decisions.

Is it possible to change peoples’ minds?

In this kind of free-for-all of the public sphere, or the Thanksgiving table, issues of identity, narrative, affection or affinity, emotion and sense of belonging are very important. And when those things are threatened or challenged, no amount of facts is going to necessarily change people's minds. We're going to dig in and, if anything, double down on our positions.

We often hear: ‘People want compromise.’ But, usually, compromise is what everybody wants other people to do. It’s not necessarily what we are willing to do ourselves. Most of us just aren't that willing to change our beliefs and values.

Matthew Koschmann

So how can we approach these kinds of conversations?

First of all, I think it's important to have a sober-minded assessment of what is actually at stake and what’s actually possible. As an example, we just had some relatives in town, a wonderful family visit. It seems cliché, but these issues came up with one of my uncles who has political views that are different than mine.

But we had a good-hearted conversation. Part of that was that I came in knowing that he lives in Texas. Even if I completely convert him, which I’m not going to do, nothing changes in the election, and the same is true for me here in Colorado.

What if the conversation starts becoming heated?

A good way to approach that is through a concept scholars call ‘appreciative inquiry.’ We may never agree, but we can ask some genuine questions: ‘I don't see it that way, but I want to, at least, understand. Tell me how you came to hold that view? What are some experiences in your life that shaped your politics?’

We can also practice the principle of reciprocity. Persuasion tends to happen when there's a lot of give and take. I've had a lot of success by asking people, ‘Hey, is there something you you've read or a video you've seen that maybe I should watch to understand? Maybe we can talk about it sometime.’

I don’t say, ‘Then I've got something for you to read,’ but most of the time, people will ask.

What happens when the stakes of a conversation become genuinely high?

There are situations where there is a lot at stake, where there are power imbalances between the parties involved—whether it's an employment relationship or a family relationship. When we get into the case of, for example, a parent telling a child: ‘If you continue to believe this, I'm not going to pay your tuition,’ we’re in a different realm. That’s no longer a dialogue. That’s now in the realm of conflict resolution, therapy, family intervention.

At the event, you talked about being aware of your own body. Why is that important?

It’s so much easier to talk about this stuff in the abstract. It is totally different when you're the one in the conversation. Your stress levels are elevated. Your physiology is triggering fight-or-flight scenarios that are making it difficult to think through constructive answers.

What do we do then?

A really important practical life skill is to practice managing your responses, your reactions in that physiological space. The classroom can be a great place to simulate that—if you get up in front of a group, your physiology changes. 

When I’m feeling anxiety, when I'm about to give a presentation, I try to recognize: Here it comes. I practice my breathing, practice control, regulate my pulse.