What really sucks imo is that often times parents suffocate their children's capacity or willingness to have a discussion. Example: Child: *disagrees with parents on something* "Can we have a discussion about this?" Parent: "No, I am right because I said so." And just like that, the discussion is terminated and the child learns that discussion will not help to convince others.

To summarize key points: To have a fruitful debate one needs to: 1. Find common ground 2. Debate ideas rather than personalities 3. Be open to be proven wrong

"Shared reality is the antidote to alternative facts" -- concise, powerful, beautiful

"Contempt has replaced conversation." Loved that.

I love her voice, not just for the accent, it's got a nice solidity to it. Powerful.

Very clear, concise and a wonderful idea for how we can continue to each have our own unique experience, while keeping everyone at the table of discussion. Respecting our differences instead of just tolerating them. Even in online communities! 😆🙏🏼

That was a well structured, rehearsed and delivered speech.

“Disagreements can be transformed by debating ideas rather than discussing identity”. What a bloody refreshing and pleasantly surprising thing to hear. Great talk

It is so true that people prefer contempt rather then the risk of connecting... So I agree with you miss speaker :)

I am absolutely grateful for her talk. I struggle with intellectual maturity. She is right when she says we tend to be attached to our ideas. But I also couldn't help but notice the way she breathes in deeply with her eyes closed whilst shaking her head vigorously with her arms flaring about every so often haha, just an observation I couldn't ignore. Again, her talk was excellent!

Great TedTalk. Had to watch this for my college course and she makes a lot if great points. It's really the basis for effective communication in general tbh. I took a college course on Argumentation and Debate; I really liked the class despite how hard and how much work it was. Very fruitful class.

Wow she is such a brilliant speaker! 👏

“Arguing” or debating, is only productive if both parties are RESPECTFUL of each other and each other’s views. That happens like 0.0000003% of the time so it’s almost never productive LOL

TED coming in hot is some primo speakers on real topics. Powerful talk. Julia offers real solutions to miscommunication and reasonable debate. Two thumbs up.

Very well articulated and thought out. I love that in debate you are given a side to debate for and you need to jump into those shoes and see through the lens of the person who believes that to be true. What better way to build empathy.

I agree with these 3 steps and how it is important to give positive feedback on ones opinion before stating your point of view. It is okay to have different viewpoints and talk about them, while doing so in a respectful manner.

Julia, I have just watched a few of your talks. I have been struggling with knowing how to have productive discussions that provoke thought and promote respect on both sides. I relate well to people and once considered myself a centrist politically so I can typically find something to agree on to establish a promising discussion. Increasingly, over the last 5-6 years, it has become more difficult to find reasonable common ground. Specific actions in my country has caused to move left of the center, but perhaps right from the most liberal Progressives. These days people like to label each other and to the outside world I seem to be a liberal. It's a label I can wear proudly although it ignores that I may be conservative on some issues too. We are each a complex mix and labels can be a disservice to ourselves for demanding to label everything. I have watched the Fred Rogers conversation. It is indeed a wonderful example. I watched Mr Rogers in 60's. Subconsciously Mr. Rogers subtly reinforced the messages my parents were trying to teach me about respect and kindness and fairness. Thank's for reminding me of that committee and the outcome. I can honestly say that Mr. Rogers modeled the behavior that I myself would like to see in the world. It was consistent with my parents view and the view of my religious studies (which didn't continue long into my life). What a gift that man gave me. I had just seen the most recent TED talk promoted on June 14, 2021 from direct email from TED. Your message is one of the most important points with great suggestions that my home country, the USA, needs to start participating in. Furthermore, you given me fuel and inspiration even though I was already using some of the ideas you or your father practice. My home country is sadly more divided than ever and it could get worse before we see a reuniting of all Americans around core human-facing issues and then respectfully disagree on tactics. I long for that day and will work towards it.

A well suited mission Julia❣️You’re brilliant & this is the best Ted talk ever💥

Part of our problem in political arguments is that there's money pushing lots of (mis)information and ideologies. Actual debate is tainted by who has the most to gain by winning and has the most to spend to win. Our senators are not actually working in good faith in the interest of the people. They serve different masters all together, masters who spend lots of money pushing propaganda in an attempt to further their own interests.

Does not work if the other person is a psychopath or narcissist.

Very good and probably very helpful. I will put this TT on my list to listen to again (and again).

The news media is way too busy being an anger factory to care enough about truth-finding and honest debate.

Excellent!!! We need this now more than ever. Happy New Year, everyone!

I'm loving everything shes saying, but I cant stop wondering where she got her jacket from

Spectacular! Awesome idea about the anonymous ideas to strip identity and ego from the problem solving process.

Nice! I love this talk! It would be amazing if everyone would at least TRY for these ideals

*Life is pretty simple: You do some stuff. Most fails. Some works. You do more of what works..*

This was so good. Wish it had millions more views we can all benefit from this humble wisdom

It's easy to be right all the time: Be willing to change your opinion to fit the evidence.

Need to listen on a loop. I really hate admitting when I'm wrong.

I'm so sad I can't give more than just one thumbs up, this was beautiful

Bravo! Well communicated! Continued success! Thank you!

More extra points: 1. Listen 2. Pause a little to understand where he/she is coming from 3. Find a common ground 4. Express respect 5. State yourself clearly and discuss only ideas, not the persononality

I love her finesse! So strong, attractive & admirable. 😍😊

I would love to listen to this woman argue with her husband

I loved this talk. Enjoyed every second of it.

I'd love to see her stumble upon a Steven Crowder table at some college campus. It's be nice to see him debate someone who can actually argue a point.

The whole internet needs to watch this video

We need an equal number of Julia Dhars as Mr. Rogers and John Pastorés combined.

Finding the common ground position can be hard. It would be nice to see an example of how to proceed from that point.

Wait a minute, where's my dictionary. Lot of vocabulary's here😰

_"Some days it feels like the only thing we can agree on, is that we can't agree on anything."_ I've been bumping into this problem more often lately: when I am so sure of my opinion, I can't really respect another's. Like, I am open to the idea of me being wrong, and I am listening and humanising and all that. But it doesn't work. I still feel like I'm definitely right. And maybe I am, or may am not but that's not the problem really. The problem is that it really gives me a lot of frustration to know people do have different opinions (about these specific things I am so sure of), and it frustrates me even more that I can't accept them nor deem them valid in any way. Any tips on how to get over myself and not get so frustrated?

Awakening!

That's was very uplifting! I, like many others are becoming very concerned with the state of public discourse. One of the biggest, most helpful and easiest changes we can make is to not be a-holes to other people online. And not dismiss people as being stupid just because they have different ideas than us. It's way better to give them the facts and let them decide on their own that their ideas are dumb ;-)

A bit to optimistic to have much of an effect on reality. First off, almost all people do not debate, they argue. They do not follow the rules of formal debate, they seek to undermine their opponent, and if they feel that they have come off the winner, then they win. If there's an audience than it is more of a popularity contest or a battle of insults than anything else. The most popular "debates" are likely the ones held during elections of nations such as America or Canada, but those are not really formal debates. To quote an article I recall reading, they are "ideological sound bites, largely devoid of policy specifics". This is what the people of North America think of when they think of debate, while formal debate is regarded as a silly thing for academic types, not something that has any use in day to day life. You do not debate with "that" family member, you yell at them until one side feels like they cannot win, one side feels like they've won, or an outside party tells you to shut up. Second, people live very different lives, and many people's personal realities share very few things in common beyond what is normal for a 21st century human. The life of a poor member of one of the scheduled tribes in Assam (one of the poorest parts of India) is radically different from a rich young son going to Dartmouth, is radically different from the life of a drag queen in Birmingham, to pick some extreme examples. Some people have such radically different values that the common human ground _does_ _not_ _matter_ to them.

1.What’s the foundation of debate 2.why is finding common ground important to a successful debate 3. What’s an example of shared reality being used to persuade another person 4.why is it important to separate ideas from identity 5. Why is the humility of uncertainty

As agreed by majority, it's concise and accurate, yet one thing, more on concepts and enticements with vague and insufficient examples.

Amazing Thanks

Nice topic and good presentation!! 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍 Hello from E.T. -- 🦋East Turkistan🦋

Thank You for speaking my mind

Her words are high to digest

Just in time for the Grand Christmas Family Political Debates. 🎁🎄⛄️

I don't think that anyone wants to be wrong. That's why discussions are pointless. Nobody will change their viewpoint.

This is a very important message for our times

I think a key strategy is to avoid trying to necessarily change someone's mind in that very instant, but rather give people something to think about for later such that they can consider the controversial issue in a new light. Most of the time, people (unfortunately) are very reluctant to admit they were wrong in the heat of the moment but may come around later on and even conduct their own research beyond the scope of the original debate, changing their minds for themselves. Rather than trying to DeStRoY LiBtArDs WiTh FaCtS aNd LoGiC, make people say to themselves, "oh, I hadn't thought of it like that; this person might actually have a point" because that's probably the best you're going to get in terms of actually persuading anyone in the short term.

Great approach to the topic! Really got me thinking here

What a beautiful and intelligent person.

Enjoyed this thoroughly!! Great talk!!

Here's common ground - for all - no matter what: we are here - together ~ we inter-are

Wonderful TED talk. Of course this isn’t a popular video. We can’t hold on to our uniformed hardlined options if we listen.

Truly the best!

Great Job...Thanks

This is where one could debate should we elect more, Givers, Takers, or Matchers for our future. It is debatable that our way of school teaching, and ways of political debating is justly outdated for todays society. To grow we need to keep up with the era, as it is always revolving. What once paved our way to set order in life and chaos, could use a updated version to pave us into a new and brighter future.

Brilliant Julia!

i LOVE this ted talk, really great speech with amazing ideas. i'm a big fan of this mindset. as a person with somewhat radical liberal ideas, i recognize that even though i'd love it to, the world does not operate how a single person wants it to. if we work together we move forward together, versus splitting society further apart. compromise is tough but it's necessary.

now *this* i need

Tragedy! Even all of mankind we are seeking same things: safety, health, happiness, peace... But we are still trapped in Uncivilized Age, fighting against each other.

Nice. Very true.

Much to my disgust, our conversation that began in the Enlightenment is doomed because humility is not a virtue. Since the 1980s, the only virtue that dominates the world is to win at all cost.

Identity Politics is prevalent today. She is saying that is an obstacle to good discussion/debate. We need to stop assuming a person's view is defined by the group they belong to. In that case, there is by definition little to no common ground. If you achieve some common ground, if the rest is defined by identity, then I don't see how individuals can effectively debate. It's a battle of group ideology and the individuals talking to one another are quickly irrelevant.

This lady's a genius, 5:09 😊..

"Debate requires that we separate ideas from the identity of the person discussing them" But isn’t this statement a paradox by itself? In real life, an idea stems from a person and that idea must have come from an agenda that person has right?

Everything human beings do is based on competition, even conversation or debate, she is making lots of assumption, open up, to listen and so on. How person who wants to win a debate can open his or her mind, how a person who is getting ready to respond to an attack on one's idea or opinion, which person has great attachment to, and actually what person's identity is. Well at least she is selling her skills to confused people that we are, another expert who wants to get us how to communicate. If she understood what a true dialogue is, she wouldn’t talk about debate, but that is how she has been conditioned or programmed through her education and experience. Check out 'on dialogue' by David Bohm to see how dialogue is conducted and how incredibly is difficult and challenging it is..

First of all we cant convince anyone.they should accept their flaws first and decide to make a good connection to your words if not we're just talking to a wall.

awesome!!!!

So... how to debate a person that won't pay attention to our arguments?

I immediatley accept the other persons opinion to avoid an argument, because when i talk, i talk so much smack i always regret it (especially with women).

She's beautiful. On many levels.

I'm in love.

Where can I listen to an audio version of this talk?

Excellent. That is how congress should work. They shouldn’t know who is sponsoring the bill and have the republicans assign 1 republican to argue for and 1 person to argue against and the democrats should do exactly the same 1 democrat person for and 1 person against. But both the dem-pro, dem-against, rep-for, & rep-against should each do it in front of all republicans and democrats for that say all of the senate hears 2 people speak for and 2 people speak against and this debater should be volunteers or maybe assigned as debating as part of their job and none of the debators or the senate should know who sponsored the bill until after it is voted on and has also passed by the president so there is no changing of the discussion once it’s made it completely through. And if nobody wants to argue against the proposal then the debate portion could be skipped all together and put straight up for voting and passing it though pass the president. This divided party thing needs to stop of within 60 to at most 100 years our government will crumble and people will rebel against the government. The senate and the house of representatives are supposed to be representing the people of their state. We are supposed to be voting for candidates that want want we want. We are not supposed to be picking between to polar opposite parties and what the parties stand for. We are supposed to be voting for people not parties. And when elected these reps and senators are supposed to be voting for what their people want from their state and NOT for what the party is telling them to vote for. The president should be mutual when taking office and not the leaders of one of two parties. If a president has a good idea that benefits the whole country then it should be voted through and not intentiionally stopped by the opposing party. And same goes if the president has a bad idea then if should be voted down by everyone and not passed through by his party just because he is part of the party. I said 60-100 years. I hardly doubt it will take that long before a serious uprising against our government will come. America will fall if this 2 extremely opposite parties keep going like this. It’s not right. In the olden days a president was elected by who had the most votes the vice president was elected because he had the 2nd most votes which also made him the opposite party to the president and smoothed things over. They should still do it that way at the very least. Although I have a brand new way of doing it but the two parties have so much money and power that is doesn’t matter how great my plan is. I and my educated assortment would be squashed like bugs. And there would no longer be any person attacked at debates. It would be the subject at hand only. And no crying about the president that preceded you. I wish I had my whole plan and everyone involved all set and put together but I don’t yet and I don’t know that I will put myself through this tough fight to put the power back into the people’s hands and make congress respresent us like they were meant to do.

So disagree to agree on new ideas until a common ground is reached.

Before anything, we all need to understand the overdramatized or under undermined consequences of neglected Equal Lawful Opportunities and Human/Civil rights, including as Julia mentioned, dismissive behavior of municipal workers, which should not have ripple effect at home between family members but many people besides me carry work stress, vice versa, to home and home stress to work.

I don't argue or debate. I assert my superior knowledge of an issue. I could't care less if I change the other person's mind. It's all about getting them to lose their composure and get personal. That's just a way for me to keep my self-esteem up. If you can't handle it then get out of my way. I've gone from a mute to expressing myself to whoever, where ever and whenever I choose and it feels fantastic. All I have are my words and you better believe than whenever I choose to use them I'm out for blood.

Mr. Rodgers FTW!

This is a little off topic, I guess, but I think this is the type of video I can share my story on. You could say it involves a "disagreement." Once, I was telling this new coworker how the k95 masks feel on me (after I stated he was lucky he and others don't have to mask up in school), but two of my other coworkers said something like "that's enough" or "let's not talk about that"? See, I guess in the past, I had expressed a bit too much my opinions that face masks aren't so necessary and Covid isn't so dreadful? I don't know. I guess they wanted to stop me from being a negative nellie or something. Later, I *more or less* said to one of them, "Just for the record, I was just casually saying the masks make my nose feel congested, pointing out the irony." Something like that. She shook her head and said "I don't care." What do you guys think? Was that really wrong and obnoxious of her? In fact, was it immoral for her and the other to, as far as I'm concerned, "gang up" on me? Maybe they could and _should_ have handled it differently, especially since there was a new guy here? Why make me out to be the "bad guy," just by lecturing me in front of him. I feel disagreeing with someone can somewhat be the same as ganging up on a person, especially if you _and_ a partner disagree with said person.

Perhaps Mrs May should watch this?

"The right to an education. The equality of all people. The importance of safer communities." Not a single one of those is a consensus issue in America.

It's sad that there is even a speech on how to talk to each other

Hey

In today’s world of celebrating stupidity and dumbing down everything, humanity can’t do this.

10:24-10:34

I learned that when we debate sometimes your ideas could change find a common ground.

Let me guess before I watch - don't do this in the comment section or on social media? :P

I still didn’t figure out how to disagree, find the common ground and win the debate...... can someone help..

This all sounds good and dandy but when the evidence and facts are gotten from dubious singular sources or maybe even religion...it derails any chance of productive disagreement because the foundation of one's position is already rooted in false evidence.

And Julia D, you talk too fast but I agree on many level in this talk because my viewpoint matter as well as yours as long as both conversationalists has sensitivity, respect, sensibility, and etiquette before hard rules because that also hard rule is not absolute truth in many situations.

Very nice dear

i think there is kind of a contradiction when you talk of the importance of separating people from their ideas while also encouraging us to talk face to face to "humanize" our opponents.

An opinion is only one persons perspective it is like the two people arguing over the 6 saying no its 6, no its 9. Now on the whole those with high EQ and those with good insight and self awareness should lead to be open to others points of view as there are an abundence of those with closed rigid minds. The hard part is having empathy and understanding for those with the rigid fixed mindset. Plus sometimes you can learn something about another person based on a difference of opinions on how they handle themselves and how they handle others.