The Healthy Discussion
-A guide to, you guessed it, a Healthy Discussion.
Sorry for the terribly coding of this thing..
-A guide to, you guessed it, a Healthy Discussion.
So, out of nowhere I decided to post this, hoping it would help someone / prove to be somewhat useful or present a good read.
In my opinion, a healthy discussion is where the people involved in said discussion listen to each other’s points, whether you view them as insignificant, poorly presented or otherwise at fault, before you reply with your own argument. This shows the other part that you not only respect them, but value their opinion and words without carelessly throwing them over your shoulder and not reviewing what they say and then replying with your own argument, stating that this is the only right option.
While you can put in your personal view on things, do not bluntly deny everyone else and perceive everything as an attack against you personally. A discussion is about a subject, the matter at hand, It’s not about hitting your opponent until he accepts your values or beliefs / agrees with you.
Listen.
Respect each other.
Keep to the subject of the discussion.
Do not get personal, nor shall you perceive anything as a personal attack against you unless that is the clear purpose of the statement.
Do not put words in your opponent’s mouth. They said what they said, not what you wanted them to say. If you’re confused, ask, and never think you heard differently and telling everyone what you heard, when in fact it was not at all what was said.
Below I shall post some examples:
EXAMPLE 1:
Subject 1: “I don’t believe that we should join in this assault on the village, sir. As it goes against my beliefs and the general order for which our country stands for.”
Subject 2: “Well, I say we attack right away, yes? Good. You’ll attack when I tell you damnit! Left flank advance!”
In the above example, subject 1 presents his views and case on the matter, while Subject 2 shows no signs of having listened or understood what Subject 1 was talking about. This is not a healthy discussion, infact, no discussion took place.
EXAMPLE 2:
Subject 1: “I don’t believe that we should join in this assault on the village, sir. As it goes against my beliefs and the general order for which our country stands for.”
Subject 2: “Your personal opinion means little, as we are a unit under a higher command, yet I understand your view. Our country might be just and proud, but we have our orders, recruit. Wether we like them or not.”
Now, in this example, subject 1 presents his case, while subject 2 replies to what he said, showing that he listened, and processed what was presented by subject 1. From this point, Subject 1 could continue to question the mentioned orders, and, if subject 2 continues to listen and respond accordingly, this would be a healthy discussion.
In my opinion, a healthy discussion is where the people involved in said discussion listen to each other’s points, whether you view them as insignificant, poorly presented or otherwise at fault, before you reply with your own argument. This shows the other part that you not only respect them, but value their opinion and words without carelessly throwing them over your shoulder and not reviewing what they say and then replying with your own argument, stating that this is the only right option.
While you can put in your personal view on things, do not bluntly deny everyone else and perceive everything as an attack against you personally. A discussion is about a subject, the matter at hand, It’s not about hitting your opponent until he accepts your values or beliefs / agrees with you.
Listen.
Respect each other.
Keep to the subject of the discussion.
Do not get personal, nor shall you perceive anything as a personal attack against you unless that is the clear purpose of the statement.
Do not put words in your opponent’s mouth. They said what they said, not what you wanted them to say. If you’re confused, ask, and never think you heard differently and telling everyone what you heard, when in fact it was not at all what was said.
Below I shall post some examples:
EXAMPLE 1:
Subject 1: “I don’t believe that we should join in this assault on the village, sir. As it goes against my beliefs and the general order for which our country stands for.”
Subject 2: “Well, I say we attack right away, yes? Good. You’ll attack when I tell you damnit! Left flank advance!”
In the above example, subject 1 presents his views and case on the matter, while Subject 2 shows no signs of having listened or understood what Subject 1 was talking about. This is not a healthy discussion, infact, no discussion took place.
EXAMPLE 2:
Subject 1: “I don’t believe that we should join in this assault on the village, sir. As it goes against my beliefs and the general order for which our country stands for.”
Subject 2: “Your personal opinion means little, as we are a unit under a higher command, yet I understand your view. Our country might be just and proud, but we have our orders, recruit. Wether we like them or not.”
Now, in this example, subject 1 presents his case, while subject 2 replies to what he said, showing that he listened, and processed what was presented by subject 1. From this point, Subject 1 could continue to question the mentioned orders, and, if subject 2 continues to listen and respond accordingly, this would be a healthy discussion.
Sorry for the terribly coding of this thing..