( Discord: http://public.FutureGadgetLab.net , twitter: @_Alaestor )

A Guide to Meaningful Discussion

TL;DR

Act purposefully.
Try to discuss as individuals, from your own perspective.
Separate beliefs from identity.
Separate objectivity from subjectivity.
Try to honestly understand their position and argument.
Acknowledge correct points.
Find common ground.
Be honest with them.
Be honest with yourself.
Articulate your position clearly and concisely.
Correct your own mistakes.
Correct their mistakes politely.
Don't give in to the "gotcha!" moment. Push through it with gravitas.

To engage in meaningful discussion, you first need to understand some premises

Everything I say here isn't limited to the person you're discussing with. Always consider that they also effect you also.

0. Truth matters. Otherwise, why discuss?

1. Brick Wall Syndrome (aka BWS). This occurs when discussion breaks down to the point where participants are mischaracterizing eachothers arguments, dismissing them, or outright ignoring them. They are constantly on the offensive or defensive, almost completely independent of the other persons actions, with no meaningful exchanges taking place.

2. Echo chambers and group dynamics. Social media and social groups both promote "us vs them". Unless you truly make a real damned effort, it's very easy to only begin seeing things from one perspective. When this happens, groups tend to strawman each other. That is to say, they build a caricature of the other group that is perfectly infuriating, often only using the fringe elements of 'the other'. Then, engagement between groups die down entirely. Graphs of interaction on social media often show that people would rather stay within the boundaries of their own group while discussing the other group, rather than actually discussing WITH the other group. (group-wide BWS)

3. People can easily become possessed by their ideology. What I mean by this is a process which is part of group dynamics. They stop speaking from an individual point of view and begin speaking through a lens of the group they are part of that correlates with the topic of discussion. They also stop discussing with individuals, and instead feel like they are discussing on a group "us vs them" basis. (leads to BWS)

4. Assume people are being authentic with their viewpoint. Everyone believes in what they do because to them it has been justified or proven to some extent. Often times they are personally and emotionally invested in that belief, and also often for good reason from their perspective. If you don't assume this, then you have fallen victim of BWS. If you don't believe their viewpoint is authentic then listening to it honestly and openly becomes impossible.

5. Your beliefs don't define who you are. If someone says you're wrong, it doesn't mean who you are is wrong. People can easily feel attacked. We seem to have a difficult time separating one's beliefs from one's identity. When you attack someone's held position, they feel personally attacked and retreat within their identity (fortified by their beliefs, BWS). They define themselves by what they believe. When this happens, they don't want to challenge their beliefs.

6. Thought germs... If you haven't seen CGP Grey's "thought germs" video, watch it. Invaluable.

From those premises, you can derive a method to navigating difficult social encounters (debates in particular).

Approach each discussion honestly. Really try to listen to what the other person is saying. Don't let yourself strawman their position with prejudice, or blanketly dismiss their position and argument. Try to really understand what they are saying and where their position is. If you don't understand their position, there is no possible way you can attack it without misrepresenting them and their beliefs. This would be counter-productive and only fuel their side of the issue as onlookers would view it as an obviously-incorrect attack and feel defensive and become more justified in just dismissing your arguments. And often, when you really understand someone's position you end up not wanting to attack it.

Be honest with yourself. Tell the truth. Try to find common ground, especially if you think Brick Wall Syndrome will start to become a factor. Common ground can often be found in some subtle points, and often you'll find it's only a difference of extremes to which you disagree with the other person. Acknowledge points you believe to be correct. Don't just attack what you see as wrong. This back and forth will promote meaningful discussion by showing that you're actually listening and trying to understand. It also reminds the other person that you're also an individual, and will begin to break through any strawman caricature they may hold. I've seen a single common ground & acknowledgement point completely destroy Brick Wall Syndrome.

Honestly, honesty. Correct yourself when you misspeak or make a mistake. Try to articulate your stance and reasons in a clear and concise fashion. If they misrepresent your position, politely correct them and explain why. Assume they've honestly misunderstood your argument. If they have, you promote meaningful discussion and correct misinformation. If they are trying to misrepresent you on purpose (see: Jordan Peterson, Channel 4, "so you're saying"), then they make themselves look like an idiot while you appear to be authentic. Assuming goodwill is a good thing to do, regardless of their true intentions.

Honestly, discuss. If you've been struggling to make a breakthrough in the conversation and you finally do, or you corner the other person in their argument, try to avoid the "gotcha" moment (see: Jordan Peterson, channel 4, "Gotcha!"). Remember that this is an educational exchange for both sides. Push through it with gravitas. Gotcha's are great for entertainment and audiences, but horrible for meaningful discussion between two individuals (especially if the they are a stranger, or immediately after breaking down the Brick Wall Syndrome).

The Emphasis On Truth & Honesty

This is my interpretation & adaptation of the Logos, inspired by the views Jordan Peterson expressed in a few videos. Specifically: "Logos - The Articulated Truth", "Mind-bending Logos Conversation", and "The Logos, Piaget, Jung, and Ideology".

To my understanding:

A repeated theme within various religions & mythos, but specifically Christianity, is that of the spoken word. This strikes at something that is integral to our being social creatures. That our lives are defined most and in context by our interactions with others. That our communication and inter/re/actions are core to both finding/making purpose, and progress. "A life lived unchallenged and unexamined isn't worth living".

To embody the logos is to speak the articulated truth. This is to say, that the most powerful, purposeful, and meaningful communication we can have, and therefore the most powerful means to progress and manifested purpose, is to articulate what we believe is the truth so that others may understand it and argue with and against it. By this communication, we can have authentic, meaningful, and purposeful arguments, out of which arises a (possibly new) emergent truth. That truth is responsible for our progression as a species, and an increase in probability of moving further towards a desirable state. Society, law, interpersonal relationships, study of the natural world - all are only possible through speaking the articulated truth.

A focus on truth confines thought to be a constructive force. Truth implies that you believe the position is true regardless of opinion, and also that you aren't malicious. This involves being true to yourself and the person you disagree with. And this is where order and chaos come in. For example, a misrepresentation of someones argument (A lie, most commonly unconscious) is a purely malicious act. It serves only to manifest chaos and bend the perception of reality. Being truthful to someone you disagree with requires you to understand their argument. Being truthful to yourself requires you to understand and challenge your own arguments. To know it's flaws and accept possible arguments against it or alternative points of view. In other words, being truthful is to care about the truth. Not who's argument it is (especially your own). This is to manifest order from chaos; to make known the unknown, and clear the unclear. The truth is both a sword to argue with, and a shield to protect against falsehoods.

Additionally; the 'embodiment of the Logos' requires the emotional and rational views aligned towards a purpose. Often times people view passion and emotion to be the antithesis of rational argument, however, we are emotional beings. We have emotion for good reason. It may appear to be random and incoherent at a glance, but our emotional instincts are incredibly important for navigating the world, our interactions with others, and can act as compass for unveiling nuanced points of argument we would otherwise overlook or ignore.