Podcasts about disagree better

Marianne Viray joins Jen and Patrick to delve into the dynamics of conflict and peacemaking within leadership and society, drawing lessons from the biblical story of Jonathan, David, and Saul. They explore how leadership decisions can influence societal polarization and offer practical tools for engaging with leaders respectfully. The discussion emphasizes the importance of modeling civility and virtue in public discourse and provides strategies for individuals to break cycles of conflict. The conversation highlights the power of personal transformation, empathy, and community action in fostering a respectful and civil society.Timestamps:00:00 - Introduction: Peace in the context of biblical conflict resolutions06:39 - Navigating disagreement with leaders respectfully15:34 - Disagree Better: reducing polarization through leadership modeling23:17 - The basis of true peace: love, empathy, and recognition of human complexity30:12 - The power of small, intentional acts in societal peacebuilding38:32 - Engaging civility in city councils and local governmentFor full show notes and transcript, visit https://proclaimpeace.org

¿Alguna vez saliste de una conversación sintiéndote frustrada, pensando "ni siquiera intentó entenderme"? Hoy exploramos la ciencia detrás de esa reacción — y lo que podemos hacer al respecto.Basado en la investigación de Julia Minson, psicóloga y profesora de políticas públicas en la Universidad de Harvard, que lleva más de 20 años estudiando cómo nos comportamos cuando alguien no piensa como nosotros.En este episodio hablamos de:— Por qué tu cerebro te convence de que tu versión es LA verdad (y no una versión)— Qué es la receptividad conversacional y cómo puede cambiar una discusión con solo cambiar la forma en que hablas— El método H.E.A.R. para discrepar sin destruir la relación— Por qué probablemente estás mucho más cerca del otro de lo que creesPreguntas para reflexionar:¿Hay alguien en tu vida con quien dejaste de hablar de ciertos temas porque "no tiene caso"?¿Estás reaccionando al desacuerdo real — o a la historia que te cuentas sobre por qué esa persona piensa así?Referencias:Minson, J. (2026). How to Disagree Better. Penguin Random House.Minson, J. & Chen, F. (2022). "Receptiveness to Opposing Views." Personality and Social Psychology Review.Me encuentras en Instagram como @MARISALAZO.OFICIAL

Disagreements happen everywhere to everyone – in workplaces, in families, and with our countrymates. And these days, the levels of anger and vitriol seem to be skyrocketing. As a result, many of us are either in a constant state of conflict or assiduously avoiding voicing any opinion that might spark debate. Yet, according to Julia Minson, PhD, a psychologist and professor at the Harvard Kennedy School, disagreeing is both inevitable and essential for everything from navigating decisions at home to running innovative and agile companies to governing democratic societies. Through the years, social scientists have often offered well-meaning but unproven (and not very useful) advice on handling conflict, according to Minson. In HOW TO DISAGREE BETTER (Avery; March 24, 2026), she offers evidence-based insights, based on decades of scientific research to help readers understand why we disagree, and how we can do it constructively and without rancor.Minson defines constructive disagreement as any disagreement that increases the parties' willingness to talk again. Her bedrock concept is "receptiveness to opposing views" - a trait she has studied for years, and that can be measured using a simple survey. However, Minson argues that even more important than cultivating a mental habit of receptiveness, is working on showing the other party that we are receptive to their point of view. Unfortunately, most of us are not naturally gifted at this task (indeed, evidence shows we are quite bad at it).Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/arroe-collins-unplugged-totally-uncut--994165/support.

Curtis, Kelly star in "Disagree Better" ad --  Interim Day: Legislative committee report on Utah prison populations -- Lawmakers receive training on government transparency laws 

Head of School Andrew Bishop sits down with three Upper School students who participated in Davidson Day's first-of-its-kind partnership with Davidson College's Deliberative Citizenship Initiative. The students share their reflections from the experience and what they learned about the importance of respectful civil discourse.

Most of us walk into disagreements armed with arguments, ready to persuade, but Harvard behavioral scientist Dr. Julia Minson's research reveals that persuasion is actually the goal you're least likely to achieve. In this episode, she unpacks the hidden science of receptiveness: why the most influential people in any room aren't the loudest voices, but the best listeners. Julia Minson is a professor at the Harvard Kennedy School. She is a behavioral scientist with extensive research experience in conflict, communication, negotiations, and decision-making. Her work has been published in top academic outlets and covered by CNN, TIME, The Atlantic, The Washington Post, and The New York Times. Get her book How to Disagree Better here: https://amzn.to/3QFUypd New here? I am a two-time New York Times bestselling author and one of the most sought-after public speakers globally, having spoken to over 500 companies while traveling to more than 40 countries. My clients include Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Nike. My work has been covered in print media, including The New Yorker, The New York Times, Time, Fast Company, Fortune, Politico, Inc., and Harvard Business Review. It has also been featured on NPR, NBC, FOX, and multiple times on The Steve Harvey Show. Get more stuff from me: Join 200K+ subscribers on my FREE weekly newsletter: https://gregmckeown.com/1mw/ Essentialism: The Disciplined Pursuit of Less Effortless: Make It Easier to Do What Matters Most The Essentialism Planner: A 90-Day Guide to Accomplishing More by Doing Less Stay in touch with me: Instagram https://www.instagram.com/gregorymckeown/ LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/gregmckeown/ X https://x.com/GregoryMcKeown Hire me to speak: https://gregmckeown.com/keynote/

Learn how to say what you think without blowing up your relationships. Most of us have been there. A conversation that starts completely normally and somehow ends with you lying awake at 2am wondering how it went so wrong, again. Whether it is a partner, a teenager, a colleague, or someone on the other side of a political divide, the cost of disagreement done badly is one of the quietest, most cumulative kinds of pain there is.Julia Minson is a behavioral scientist and professor at the Harvard Kennedy School who has spent years studying the psychology of disagreement, researching how people handle opinions, judgments, and beliefs that differ from their own, and what it actually takes to navigate those moments without losing the relationship in the process. Her book How to Disagree Better distills that research into a practical, science-backed guide for anyone ready to do the real work of staying connected across difference.In this conversation, you will discover:The single most common mistake people make at the start of a disagreement that almost guarantees it will escalate into a full argumentThe HEAR framework, a four-part behavioral science tool for expressing your view firmly without triggering defensiveness or shutting the other person downWhy leading with facts and data backfires when you are talking to someone who already disagrees with you, and what to use instead that dramatically increases trustA critical practice for building disagreement skills on low-stakes conversations first, so you are not white-knuckling it when the big moments arriveWhy empathy is wonderful in theory but unreliable in the heat of the moment, and what to focus on instead that actually shifts the dynamicIf you are tired of watching important relationships quietly erode one hard conversation at a time, this episode is for you. Press play and let's figure out how to disagree better, together.You can find Julia at: Website | LinkedIn | Episode TranscriptNext week, we're sharing our conversation with Dr. Nicole LePera, New York Times best-selling author of Reparenting the Inner Child, about why so many of us feel stuck in patterns we can't seem to escape, no matter how hard we try. And what's actually happening in your nervous system when that happens. It's a grounding, hopeful conversation.Check out our offerings & partners: Join My New Writing Project: Awake at the WheelVisit Our Sponsor Page For Great Resources & Discount Codes Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

  Do we still want to disagree better? It's been something Governor Spencer Cox has championed for years now, but recent comments he made against those opposed to a proposed data center have Holly wondering if we've moved on. And then a local business has announced it would forego a signed event for Governor Cox's new book, citing anger from their shoppers. Inside Sources goes deeper on the messaging and whether or not we've lost all hope of disagreeing better. 

The "banana planes" are all grounded  May the fourth be with you  Changing healthcare practices in Utah after enhanced ACA tax credits expire  Societal imbalances due to aging population  The gang's getting back together: KSL Brightside  Reflections on graduation season  Iran's "he said, she said" in the Strait of Hormuz  AI deepfakes are coming from your bank accounts  Are we done with "Disagree Better"?  University of Utah researchers looking into psychedelic mushrooms that makes users see "whimsical little fairies" 

Political violence is becoming more common, and Americans report personal stress and dissatisfaction with the quality of our political dialogue. Disagree Better is an initiative that helps Americans engage in healthier conflict. Jake speaks with Marianne Viray, Disagree Better's Executive Director, about why they're taking on this challenge, and what they've learned along the way.

Being absolutely sure you're right should settle an argument, but somehow, it often does the opposite. Instead, things escalate, tensions rise, and before you know it, the conflict has taken on a life of its own. For this episode, Yael welcomes New York Times bestselling author, trained mediator, and Good Conflict co-founder Amanda Ripley to unpack her book  High Conflict: Why We Get Trapped, and How We Get Out, and the difference between “good conflict” that strengthens us and “high conflict” that feeds on contempt, disgust, and rigid us-versus-them thinking. You'll hear why high conflict makes us more error-prone while feeling more righteous, how group belonging and media incentives can keep the cycle going, and practical ways to interrupt the pattern like Gary Freeman's three-question pause before speaking. Listen to learn how to stay in the fight without losing nuance, curiosity, or yourself.Listen and Learn:The distinction between healthy conflict that helps you grow and the kind that quietly turns destructive in ways you may not notice Why conflicts can quietly take over our thinking, shifting us into an us-versus-them mindset Why do we get pulled into conflicts that drain us even when we know the cost, and what keeps us hooked?How can even people deeply engaged with information find themselves pulling away from conflict, and what does that reveal about the hidden dynamics of high conflictHow you can recognize the early signs of high conflict and shift toward more productive, healthier conversations before things escalateResources: High Conflict: Why We Get Trapped, and How We Get Out: https://bookshop.org/a/30734/9781982128579 Amanda's Website: https://www.amandaripley.com/Good Conflict Website: https://www.thegoodconflict.comConnect with Amanda on Social Media: https://www.facebook.com/amanda.ripley.35/https://www.instagram.com/ripleywriter/Amada's Substack: https://amandaripley.substack.com/ Amanda's article about high-conflict journalism, I stopped reading the news. Is the problem me–or the product?Yael's Substack post about how journalists quickly build connectionBuilders Movement: an Instagram feed and website that offers “inspiration, tools, and ways to take action to rise above us vs. them and solve our toughest problems together.”About Amanda Ripley: Amanda Ripley is a New York Times bestselling author, magazine journalist, and co-founder of Good Conflict, a media and training company helping people reimagine how we fight. She has written three award-winning nonfiction books — The Unthinkable, The Smartest Kids in the World, and High Conflict — each following people through transformations to uncover what the rest of us can learn. Her most recent book, High Conflict, chronicles how good conflict metastasizes into something that consumes everything in its path — and, crucially, how people find their way out. A trained mediator herself, Amanda's work reveals that escape from high conflict isn't about being nicer; it's about learning to genuinely comprehend what you still disagree with. Her writing has appeared in the Atlantic, the Washington Post, and Politico Magazine, among others.Related Episodes:234. The Power of Us with Dominic Packer371. Uniting Toward a Better Future with Diana McLain Smith392. Outraged with Kurt Gray408. Connecting Like a Hostage Negotiator with Gary Noesner452. How to Disagree Better with Julia MinsonSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Disagreements are everywhere right now - and let's be honest, they can get messy fast. But what if arguing didn't have to wreck your relationships… or your nervous system? This week on Getting Better, JVN sits down with Dr. Julia Minson, a Harvard decision scientist and leading expert on disagreements, to unpack why we clash, how we can do it better, and the small shifts that make a huge difference. From dinner table debates to full-on conflict spirals, we're getting into the psychology behind why being “right” isn't always the win you think it is. Together, they explore the gold standard for healthy disagreement, where conflict actually comes from, and the real-life tools you can start using today to stay grounded, curious, and connected - even when you deeply disagree. How to Disagree Better by Julia Minson out now! Full Getting Better Video Episodes now available on YouTube.  Follow Dr. Julia Minson on Instagram @juliaminson  Follow us on Instagram @gettingbetterwithjvn  Follow Jonathan on Instagram @jvn Executive Producer, Chris McClure Producer, Editor & Engineer is Nathanael McClure Production support from Chad Hall Our theme music is also composed by Nathanael McClure. Check out the JVN Patreon for exclusive BTS content, extra interviews, and much much more - check it out here: www.patreon.com/jvn  Curious about bringing your brand to life on the show? Email podcastadsales@sonymusic.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this episode, meet therapist Nidhi Tewari, professor Arthur C. Brooks, and professor and behavioral scientist Julia Minson. Tune in to hear the science behind Nidhi Tewari's deep dive into workplace burnout, discover what Arthur C. Brooks is most excited for listeners to hear in his audiobook, and hear Julia Minson on the art of disagreement – and why she loves listening to audiobooks on a long drive. Working Well by Nidhi Tewari, MSW, LCSW: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/788782/working-well-by-nidhi-tewari-msw-lcsw-foreword-by-amy-cuddy/audio The Meaning of Your Life by Arthur C. Brooks: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/724315/the-meaning-of-your-life-by-arthur-c-brooks/audio How to Disagree Better by Julia Minson: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/774525/how-to-disagree-better-by-julia-minson/audio

In an era of extreme polarization, Harvard Professor Julia Minson joins Brian to reveal the science behind having better disagreements. She breaks down her "H.E.A.R." framework—a proven method to lower the temperature of heated debates and show real "conversational receptiveness" without compromising your values. Learn why the goal of persuasion is a trap and how "listening with your mouth" can change your relationships. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Let's Argue… Better

Harvard Kennedy School's Julia Minson joins to discuss her new book, How to Disagree Better, and why the goal of most arguments shouldn't be persuasion at all. She explains naive realism, the boomerang question trap, and why understanding where someone is coming from beats trying to change their mind. Plus, Anthropic wins in court and the Prairieland antifa trial ends in across-the-board terrorism convictions, a reminder that when the stakes are so high outrage is not a legal strategy. Produced by Corey Wara Video and Social Media by Geoff Craig Do you have questions or comments, or just want to say hello? Email us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠thegist@mikepesca.com For full Pesca content and updates, check out our website at https://www.mikepesca.com/⁠ For ad-free content or to become a Pesca Plus subscriber, check out ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://subscribe.mikepesca.com/ For Mike's daily takes on Substack, subscribe to The Gist List https://mikepesca.substack.com/ Follow us on Social Media:⁠⁠⁠⁠ YouTube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4_bh0wHgk2YfpKf4rg40_g⁠⁠⁠⁠ Instagram https://www.instagram.com/pescagist/ X https://x.com/pescami TikTok https://www.tiktok.com/@pescagist To advertise on the show, contact ⁠⁠⁠⁠ad-sales@libsyn.com⁠⁠⁠⁠ or visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://advertising.libsyn.com/TheGist

If you've ever ended an argument with your partner, coworker, or family member feeling confused about how it escalated so quickly, this episode is for you. Julia Minson, founder of the Constructive Disagreement Lab and author of How to Disagree Better, explains to us why trying to “win” arguments often starts fights and offers a different metric for success: a disagreement that increases both people's willingness to talk again. Drawing on her work on naive realism and research on receptiveness, she discusses why differences feel threatening, how listening is hard to perceive in conflict, and how language can signal receptivity using the HEAR framework. Listen in to learn evidence-based tools to make hard conversations in your life more constructive.Listen and Learn: Julia's upbringing in a family of psychologists, her immigrant experience, and her years as a ballroom dancer, and why people can share the same moment yet see it completely differently, making disagreement inevitableWhy a truly constructive disagreement isn't about “winning” or changing minds, but about improving mutual willingness to continue the conversation and deepening understandingNaive realism and the tendency to assume our perceptions are objectively correct, which underlies everyday conflicts, because everyone thinks “I get it” and struggles to see others' perspectivesHow true receptiveness works, not just thinking receptively, but expressing it clearly through language so others genuinely feel heard, especially in conflict or disagreementHow to use the HEAR framework to communicate receptively and build stronger relationshipsJulia's Hawk story and how approaching disagreements with curiosity rather than judgment can turn tense or potentially divisive moments into understanding, connection, and even common groundResources: How to Disagree Better: https://bookshop.org/a/30734/9780593855003Julia's Websites: https://disagreeingbetter.com/ and https://www.juliaminson.com/ Connect with Julia on Social Media: https://www.linkedin.com/in/julia-minson-5b511b150/https://twitter.com/juliaminson Take The Measure of Receptivity:https://receptiveness.net/survey.html About Julia Minson: Julia Minson is a professor of public policy at Harvard Kennedy School and founder of the Constructive Disagreement Lab, where she studies what she calls the "psychology of disagreement" — how we actually engage with views that conflict with our own, especially on the hot-button stuff: politics, values, health decisions.Her new book, How to Disagree Better, starts from a counterintuitive premise: we're drowning in advice on how to win arguments, but Julia's research shows that trying to win is basically a guaranteed way to start a fight. Her work offers evidence-based strategies for being genuinely receptive to opposing views, which turns out to be far more effective than perfecting your persuasion game.Related Episodes:276. Assertive Communication Skills with Randy Paterson281. Belonging Uncertainty and Bridging Divides with Geoffrey Cohen371. Uniting Toward a Better Future with Diana McLain Smith392. Outraged with Kurt Gray403. Conflict Resilience with Bob Bordone and Joel SalinasSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Disagreements happen everywhere to everyone – in workplaces, in families, and with our countrymates. And these days, the levels of anger and vitriol seem to be skyrocketing. As a result, many of us are either in a constant state of conflict or assiduously avoiding voicing any opinion that might spark debate. Yet, according to Julia Minson, PhD, a psychologist and professor at the Harvard Kennedy School, disagreeing is both inevitable and essential for everything from navigating decisions at home to running innovative and agile companies to governing democratic societies. Through the years, social scientists have often offered well-meaning but unproven (and not very useful) advice on handling conflict, according to Minson. In HOW TO DISAGREE BETTER (Avery; March 24, 2026), she offers evidence-based insights, based on decades of scientific research to help readers understand why we disagree, and how we can do it constructively and without rancor.Minson defines constructive disagreement as any disagreement that increases the parties' willingness to talk again. Her bedrock concept is "receptiveness to opposing views" - a trait she has studied for years, and that can be measured using a simple survey. However, Minson argues that even more important than cultivating a mental habit of receptiveness, is working on showing the other party that we are receptive to their point of view. Unfortunately, most of us are not naturally gifted at this task (indeed, evidence shows we are quite bad at it).Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/arroe-collins-like-it-s-live--4113802/support.

Disagreement is essential to better decisions—but most of us either avoid it or handle it poorly. Julia Minson is a professor of public policy at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, and she's spent years studying disagreement and what we get wrong. She explains why intent matters less than behavior, how leaders can model “receptiveness,” and why the goal of a good disagreement isn't to win—but to keep the conversation going. Minson is the coauthor of the HBR article "A Smarter Way to Disagree" and author of the book How to Disagree Better.

Kelly connects with Julia Minson, a professor at Harvard Kennedy School. She is a behavioral scientist with extensive research experience in conflict, communication, negotiations, and decision-making. She has a new book: “How to Disagree Better.” 

“The problems start when I conclude that only an uninformed, unintelligent, or evil person could hold the view that you hold.” — Julia MinsonIn a sneak preview of the 2028 Presidential election, Andy Beshear called JD Vance the most arrogant politician in America. Vance's spokesperson fires back that Beshear is chasing headlines. Just another disagreeable day in American public life. So how can we make conversation more civil? How to disagree more agreeably?In her new book (out today) How to Disagree Better, the Harvard public policy professor Julia Minson argues that disagreement is not conflict. You and I can see the world differently and have a completely civil conversation about it. The problem is when we decide the other person is stupid, evil, or both.Minson's test case is her own family. Her father-in-law is a retired Army veteran who served in Vietnam and Korea and has voted Republican his entire life. Minson is a first-generation Russian immigrant who came to Denver as a teenager. They disagree on immigration, on ICE, on most of what divides America. The problem, she confesses, is that they don't actually know why the other believes what they believe because they've spent years avoiding the subject. So Minson and her father-in-law make the worst assumptions about each other.Her deeper argument is about the danger of silence. The loudest disagreements get the headlines, but the more dangerous problem is the people who don't dare to speak up — the junior person in the corporate meeting sitting on their hands while a bad decision gets made, the teenager who walks out of the room, the patient who leaves the doctor's office. Minson is honest about the limits of how to disagree better: Putin wouldn't read this book. Some disagreements are not between equals. But most of ours are — and we're terrible at them because we'd rather go to the dentist than spend twenty minutes talking to someone who disagrees with us. Let's hope Minson has sent How to Disagree Better to both Andy Beshear and JD Vance. Five Takeaways•       Disagreement Is Not Conflict: You and I can see the world differently and have a completely civil conversation about it. The problems start when I conclude that only an uninformed, unintelligent, or evil person could hold the view you hold. That's when disagreement becomes conflict — and it's usually based on inaccurate information about the other person's motives.•       We Fill In the Blanks with the Worst Possible Story: When people avoid a topic, they don't actually know why the other person believes what they believe. So they make assumptions — and what they assume is negative. Grandpa doesn't like immigrants because he's a racist. That probably isn't how grandpa would explain himself. Most conflict is bred in misunderstanding.•       Vulnerability Persuades. Bragging Doesn't: If Minson says “we should let in more immigrants because my life as an immigrant is wonderful” — that sounds like bragging. If she says “I struggled to find acceptance and I want to make it easier for others” — that resonates. Sharing why a topic matters to you, especially the vulnerable part, changes the conversation.•       The Real Problem Is Silence, Not Shouting: The loudest disagreements get the headlines. But the more common and more dangerous problem is people who don't speak up because they're afraid the disagreement will turn into drama. In corporations, in families, in classrooms — the junior person sitting on their hands while a bad decision gets made. That silence has real costs.•       Putin Wouldn't Read This Book: Minson is honest about the limits. Her book is for people who want better relationships with people they disagree with. It's not for autocrats. Some disagreements are not between equals. Some people have made clear what their goals are, and thoughtful conversation is not one of them. The book works best where diplomacy already should. About the GuestJulia Minson is an Associate Professor of Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government and founder of Disagreeing Better, LLC. Her research focuses on the psychology of disagreement. How to Disagree Better is published by Portfolio/Penguin Random House.References:•       How to Disagree Better by Julia Minson (Portfolio, 2026) — out today.•       Disagreeing Better — Minson's consulting practice and research hub.•       Episode 2845: Let's Ban Billionaires — Noam Cohen on the Know-It-Alls, where the disagreement is rather less agreeable.About Keen On AmericaNobody asks more awkward questions than the Anglo-American writer and filmmaker Andrew Keen. In Keen On America, Andrew brings his pointed Transatlantic wit to making sense of the United States — hosting daily interviews about the history and future of this now venerable Republic. With nearly 2,800 episodes since the show launched on TechCrunch in 2010, Keen On America is the most prolific intellectual interview show in the history of podcasting.WebsiteSubstackYouTubeApple PodcastsSpotify Chapters:

In this episode, Julia Minson, a PhD behavioral scientist and professor at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, shares insights from her new book, How to Disagree Better. Julia discusses the difference between disagreement and argument, highlighting how we can have constructive conversations by being curious and genuinely interested in others' perspectives. She emphasizes the importance of active listening and provides a framework, the H-E-A-R method, to help us navigate disagreements with empathy and understanding. This conversation offers practical tips for improving our communication skills and building stronger relationships in our personal and professional lives.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today's episode of the podcast is a wide-ranging conversation that covers everything from the war in Iran to the importance of disagreeing better. Host Ross talks about President Trump's claims of substantive talks with Iran, expressing skepticism that these talks are actually happening. He also discusses the movie Project Hail Mary, which is doing well at the box office, and the business story behind it. Additionally, the episode touches on the Colorado egg industry, with a guest from the Colorado Egg Producers discussing the current state of the industry and the challenges it faces.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of Talk Nerdy, Cara is joined by behavioral scientist, and Professor of Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, Julie Minson. They discuss her latest book, How to Disagree Better. Follow Julia: @juliaminson

What if the goal of disagreement isn't to win but to build a bridge to the next conversation? Harvard Kennedy School professor Julia Minson studies one thing: how to disagree better. In this episode of Uncomfy, she shares why most of us confuse disagreement with conflict and how that mistake quietly damages our closest relationships. From ballroom dancing arguments with her husband to a life-and-death disagreement with her mother's oncologist, Julia explains the powerful difference between being receptive and being persuaded. “You don't have to give in to make someone feel profoundly heard.” ABOUT GUEST Julia Minson is a professor of public policy at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government and author of the new book, “How to Disagree Better” (https://www.juliaminson.com/) CHAPTERS (0:00) Introduction (0:56) Meet Julia Minson (1:30) Kitchen Dance Disagreement (4:12) Disagreement vs Conflict (6:07) Studying Disagreement (7:18) Receptive Not Persuaded (8:43) Mom's Doctor Story (13:01) Listen With Your Mouth (15:08) HEAR Framework Breakdown (19:12) Authenticity and Practice (21:03) Conclusion

As the United States approaches its 250th anniversary, Americans are growing more concerned about the state of the nation's democracy. According to Pew Research Center, 80% of U.S. adults say that when it comes to major issues facing the country, Republican and Democratic voters don't just disagree on policies—they can't even agree on basic facts. So, what does it take to bridge divides during a time of deep polarization? In this special rebroadcast of The Pew Charitable Trusts and Disagree Better's "America at 250 Forum," Governors Spencer Cox (UT), Wes Moore (MD), and Kevin Stitt (OK) join NPR's Steve Inskeep for a cross-party conversation about civil discourse, public trust, and where we can find common ground on our nation's most pressing policy issues.

Encore Episode. Society is trying to understand if there is an answer to this dilemma of disagreeing with respect and not hate. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

We kicked off the program with four news stories and different guests on the stories we think you need to know about! Is 2026 likely to be another wild ride? You bet! What challenges and opportunities might 2026 bring?Guest: Duane Deason – President of The Efficacy Group & certified public accountant Police ask public for video of Brown shooting suspect. The latest in this investigation as the shooter is still at large…Guest: Colleen Cronin – Boston Herald reporter “How to Disagree Better”. How to (or not to) chat with your family and friends about politics around the holidays.Guest: Julia Minson – Harvard Kennedy School professor and behavioral scientist, author & a Builders Movement Partner (which is a global initiative to combat extreme division and polarization) After the Patriots disappointing loss to the Bills, what’s next? & which Patriots player would make the best coach in the future?Guest: Khari Thompson – Boston Globe sports reporter See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In part 2 of our Thanksgiving line up, John speaks with legal analyst Dr. Tracy Pearson about the legal aspects of Donald Trump's latest hair brained decisions and other current legal news. He also interviews Professor Julia Minson on her upcoming book "How to Disagree Better".See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Many people are gearing up for holiday conversation with loved ones who may disagree with them -- on everything from politics to religion and lifestyle choices. These conversations can get personal and come to a halt quickly. But today on the show, we get into neuroscience and psychological research showing that as much as we disagree, there are ways to bridge these divides -- and people who are actively using these strategies well in their daily lives. (encore)Want to hear more neuroscience and psychology? Email us your ideas to shortwave@npr.org — we'd love to hear from you!Listen to every episode of Short Wave sponsor-free and support our work at NPR by signing up for Short Wave+ at plus.npr.org/shortwave.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

October 9, 2025 ~ Mike Reitz, Executive Vice President of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy discusses his piece on the Disagree Better Initiative. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

After a week of soul searching in the United States and beyond, James Moore and Gerry Butts take on the question of how to "disagree better". Society is trying to understand if there is an answer to this dilemma of disagreeing with respect and not hate. In the 23rd of their conversations on The Bridge, two top political minds, from different parties, look for a way of achieving non-partisan talk. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

While the nation convulses in grief, fear and anger after the murder of Charlie Kirk, one politician in particular is meeting the moment

What actually motivates us? When we disagree with someone else—how can we do it better? Social psychologist and author of Outraged, Kurt Gray, PhD, shares what he's learned from studying the behaviors of people with different experiences. He corrects a few funny things we got wrong about human evolution. And he explains what “concept creep” and “the creep of harm” mean—and why we're generally much safer than we think. We talk about what tends to give birth to polarization, why we behave the way we do on social media, and why we often forget the complexity within our own perspectives. For the show notes, head over to my Substack. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Gov. Spencer Cox has asked Utahns to “Disagree Better” in an effort to cool down our politics. But what if conflict is actually the good stuff? Host Ali Vallarta asks Utah Valley University professor and conflict specialist Dr. Maria Blevins what the Governor's campaign gets right and what it's missing. Plus, tips for when Salt Lakers are feeling feisty — whether with a state legislator or a friend. This episode originally aired on April 22, 2024.  Resources and references: Gov. Cox's Disagree Better Initiative Become a member of City Cast Salt Lake today! It's the best way to support our work and help make sure we're around for years to come. Get all the details and sign up at membership.citycast.fm. Subscribe to Hey Salt Lake, our daily morning newsletter. You can also find us on Instagram @CityCastSLC. Today's Gift Guide sponsor is Aroma Retail. If you enjoyed the interview with Jim Reding, the CEO of Aroma Retail, check out their products here.  Looking to advertise on City Cast Salt Lake? Check out our options for podcast and newsletter ads. Learn more about the sponsors of this episode:  Sugar House Chamber of Commerce Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hosts: Marty Carpenter and Adam Gardiner  Utah Governor Spencer Cox was in Virginia today, speaking on a panel about disagreements in politics. He was joined by Democratic New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy. They each spoke about the current political environment and how we can have healthier discussions in that environment. We hear from both of them; the Inside Sources hosts share their reactions. 

Hosts: Marty Carpenter and Adam Gardiner  Sentencing delays coming in Trump’s ‘hush money’ case The Manhattan District Attorney has agreed to pause sentencing in Donald Trump’s ‘hush money’ case. The defense wants the judge to dismiss the case, but the prosecution wants to delay movement in the case until Mr. Trump is no longer president... in 2029. Inside Sources kicks off the show sharing in-depth updates on this interesting case.  Harris campaign spends more than $1 Billion in short campaign The Kamala Harris campaign is facing major criticisms today, as reports come out showing the campaign spent more than $1 Billion in their short 15-week-long campaign. How were they able to spend so much, yet still lose by so much? Hosts Adam Gardiner and Marty Carpenter have both worked on political campaigns and have lots of experience spending campaign money; they share their thoughts.  Utah’s Attorney General joins coalition of states against SEC regulation of cryptocurrency Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes is now leading a coalition of 18 states who don’t want the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to regulate the cryptocurrency industry. Amelia Powers Gardner, co-founder of the Utah Blockchain Coalition and Utah County Commissioner joins Inside Sources to talk about this new lawsuit. She also explains what blockchain and cryptocurrency mean for our less technologically inclined listeners.   Ukraine launches US-made longer-range missiles against Russia Soon after President Biden gave Ukraine permission to use American-made longer-range missiles against Russia, Ukraine launched an attack. Russia is now threatening a nuclear response against countries that aid Ukraine. Things are escalating quickly – should we be concerned? The hosts talk through the situation to calm listeners’ fears.  Democrat Natalie Pinkney declares victory in SLCo Council race For the first time in 22 years, a new council member has taken over Seat C on the Salt Lake County Council. Democrat Natalie Pinkney has defeated Republican candidate Rachelle Morris, making Pinkney the first Black woman elected to a county-wide seat in Utah. We talk about the race as a whole, what Pinkney wants to accomplish, and how she and Morris are going to work together.  Bureau of Land Management revokes UDOT’s right-of-way for Northern Corridor Utah leaders are speaking out against a BLM decision to revoke UDOT’s right-of-way for a new highway in Washington County called the Northern Corridor. What is this project, and why is it such a big deal for not just state leaders, but federal leaders too? Utah DNR Deputy Director Redge Johnson joins Inside Sources to educate Wasatch Front listeners on this important issue and what might happen next.  Gov. Cox’s ‘Disagree Better’ initiative heads to Virginia Utah Governor Spencer Cox was in Virginia today, speaking on a panel about disagreements in politics. He was joined by Democratic New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy. They each spoke about the current political environment and how we can have healthier discussions in that environment. We hear from both of them; the Inside Sources hosts share their reactions. 

The election is over and, is spite of Trump's clear victory, America remains as divided as ever. So how to put the country together again? Juliana Tafur, the director of the Bridging Differences Program at UC Berkeley, has been giving this existential question much thought. What all Americans need, Tafur tells me, is the compassion, empathy and humility to understand the other side. But, as I asked her, isn't that just shorthand for a progressive bridge building project in which the left defines the language of a reunited America?Juliana Tafur, the director of the Bridging Differences Program at UC Berkeley Her work focuses on strengthening social connections across lines of race, religion, culture, politics, and more, to foster a culture of understanding and belonging in the United States and beyond. Through partnerships, multimedia content, speaking engagements, and workshops, Juliana is committed to ensuring that bridge-building skills and resources reach people and inspire meaningful change. With experience as a social entrepreneur, workshop creator, Emmy-nominated senior producer, and award-winning documentary filmmaker, she has been working to foster human connection across complex societal divides for more than a decade. A TEDx speaker, she has led and facilitated speaking engagements and training sessions on bridging differences at more than 30 higher education institutions and organizations. Juliana is also a 2021–2022 Obama Foundation Scholar at Columbia University—a mid-career fellowship that recognized and deepened her work in the bridge-building field, expanding her research on intergroup relations, political polarization, and conflict transformation. She is an honors graduate of Northwestern University, where she earned dual Bachelor of Science degrees in Journalism and History.Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting KEEN ON, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy show. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children.TRANSCRIPTKEEN: Hello, everybody. The easy bit's over! The election's finished, now the real challenge is bringing America back together. We always hear these terms from politicians and activists, but in practice, of course, it's a very challenging thing to do. My guest today on the show, Juliana Tafur, though, is somebody who's given a great deal of thought to bringing America back together, bridging differences. She is the inaugural director of the Bridging Differences Program at UC Berkeley. She's also very much involved in the Denver Foundation. She's based in Boulder, Colorado, and she's joining us today. Juliana, is that fair? Was the election the easy bit? Now, the challenge is putting Humpty Dumpty back together again?TAFUR: 100%. I love the Humpty Dumpty. Yes, we are broken. How do we come back together and mend those pieces while still acknowledging the brokenness, right? Yeah. With that analogy, there's a beautiful Japanese technique that aims to cover the fractures, but to cover the fractures with a strand of gold so that we're not pretending like the fractures aren't there, but we are making something better as a result of the recognition of those fractures.KEEN: Juliana, we've done a lot of shows about this sort of thing. In fact, I've worked with the Braver Angels group. I'm sure you're familiar with them. I have been to a couple of their conferences. There are more and more of these groups trying to bring Americans back together. Might one suggest that there is now a broader movement in America to bring Americans of different--particularly different political persuasions back together? You're doing it, braver angels are doing it. Many of the thousands of activists and hundreds of groups.TAFUR: Yeah. There is so many of us across the country that work tirelessly day in and day out, around elections and before and after elections to make sure we come together. And yes, Braver Angels is just one of them. I could certainly give you a list that you could attach to the show notes, because a lot of us are doing this work and it's good for people to know that we're out there and that this is possible. But sometimes it takes seeing it in action and understanding how to do it to really trust that you can do it, too.KEEN: Yeah, we've had lots of people on the show. I know you're familiar with the work of Eboo Patel. You've worked with him his book couple of years ago. We Need to Build: Field Notes for Diverse Democracy is another example of this kind of work. Tell me what you do at the Greater Good Science Center at UC Berkeley. What are you doing that's different or unusual or unique in terms of bringing Americans back together?TAFUR: Yeah, well, at the Greater Good Science Center, we study the psychology, sociology and neuroscience of well-being, or what we'd like to call the science of a meaningful life. And we break the science to the practice. So we take the science of how to have a meaningful life or how to bridge differences, and we translate it in a way that is accessible to people to apply in their own lives or to practitioners to help others apply the science. And in the bridging differences programs specifically, we do this through a series of videos, multimedia pieces that we publish in our magazine, Greater Good. We have a famous podcast called The Science of Happiness. We began in earnest in 2018, I would say, gathering what the science said about how to bring people together across differences. And when we talk about the science, we talk about skills, science-based skills, from compassionate listening to finding shared identities, etc., that have been tested in labs, and we translate them in a way that people understand how some of these skills applied, how they worked in labs, and how they can then work also in kind of real-life scenarios and situations. So we have a bridging differences playbook that has 14 science-based skills for bridging differences. We have an edX course that's free and available for everyone to take that also disseminates some of the science-based skills.KEEN: Tell me a little bit more about yourself. You've been involved in this space for a while. You're also a filmmaker, so you're very much committed on lots of fronts to this. How did you find yourself? Is this a reflection of your own upbringing, your own experience in the United States?TAFUR: Absolutely, yes. What you had up first was the page from the Obama Scholars Program. So a few years ago, 21, 22, I was an Obama scholar at Columbia University--KEEN: And you were the founder, at least at that point, of something called Story Powerhouse. I'm guessing you're still the founder, although you've moved on in a sense.TAFUR: Correct. Yeah. And Story Powerhouse was at the company Listen Courageously, which was a workshop series that I took around to universities and organizations and corporations talking about the power of empathic listening. And I got to that through film that I produced and directed that brought Americans together on opposite ends of the spectrum across the easy topics of abortion, guns and immigration. And the inspiration for this film came after the 2016 election. I felt a big need back then to try to bridge the divide that I was seeing and feeling, very explicitly, for the very first time in our country. And as a Colombian-American, I was beginning to talk to folks in my circles, and I was feeling this this real sense of othering that I had never, ever experienced and wondering and questioning what was my place and that of so many others like me in our country. And that led to to Listen, to this film that brought three sets of participants across these really tough topics together to explore if they could see each other as people and connect on a human level despite their differences. And I had no idea what the outcome would be. I had documented their conversations across a period of time. And I was truly moved by what I saw. I saw that those who were able to connect at a deep, human level were those who were able to listen. So then, that led me to study and explore and understand the power of listening and understood that it was a field. It's an arts, but it's also a science and connected with practitioners, but also researchers in the field of listening. And one thing led to the other, right? As a practitioner and filmmaker in the field of bridging differences, I found myself going back to intergroup relations and conflict transformation and other subjects too, to really understand why. Why was it that my film participants had come together, and how could I then equip others to continue doing the same? Less from a "we know this is possible" and more from a kind of research-grounded way.KEEN: Juliana, some people might be listening to this and...whilst on the one hand being, in a way, impressed they might be scratching their head, maybe listening to you, you use the E-word all the time empathetic, which is quite a kind of ideological character these days. You talk about othering, you're funded by, or you were funded by, the Obama Foundation. Now you head up a greater good institute at UC Berkeley, People's Republic of Berkeley, which is a place I know all too well, I used to live there for many years. Some people might be listening to this and thinking if you scratch the surface of what Juliana's saying, is she suggesting that this is the progressive version of the greater good? And as long as you're in our camp and you use her words like "empathy" and "othering" and love the Obamas and spend time at UC Berkeley, it's fine. But when you start perhaps putting red caps on and talking about America becoming great again or not being particularly sympathetic to immigrants, then you're outside your world. How would you respond to that? Is that a fair criticism or am I wrong, or would one be wrong?TAFUR: Well, obviously, people's criticisms are their criticisms, and that's absolutely okay. And there is no right or wrong. I just want to say--KEEN: Well, there is right and wrong, Juliana, isn't there? There's some things are certainly more right than wrong and some things are more wrong and right.TAFUR: Yes, but we don't judge that. I think, you know, people are right to believe what they believe, vote for who they vote, and be who they are. And we start bridging from the place of: I see you, and I hear you, and I might not understand you, but that's okay. I still don't dehumanize you. And that's the spirit of bridging differences. And yes, I don't hide where I stand. Politically, I am more progressive. And I have been an Obama scholar. And I work at Berkeley. So all of that is who I am. And from that place, I bridge. I bridge from the place of this is who I am, where I stand. I still love you and I still want to get to know you. And I still want to see you. And I just want to say, given that I'm Colombian American and I lived in Miami for the last ten years, I just recently moved to Boulder, Colorado, to lead a statewide initiative here in the state of Colorado called Belonging Colorado to make Colorado a place where everyone feels like they belong. Thank you for popping it up.KEEN: Called Belonging Colorado.TAFUR: Yeah, in Florida, I mean, I've had friends and neighbors who don't think like I do, who don't see the world like I do. And I've appreciated that. And I have not excluded them from our circles, from trying deeply to learn and understand what is it that they believe, what they believe. So I intentionally have made way to understand our country and and to try to tap into, honestly, what at the end of the day, are people's fears of what we need. And I approach them from that place. When you approach others from a place of "we are all walking with our fears in our foreheads," we begin to connect with your fear, my fear. But it's all fear and it's okay.KEEN: You used the term "humanizing differences," Juliana. Some people, again, might be listening and thinking to themselves, well, the guy who just won the election, more Americans voted for him than the other candidate. It's quite a decisive election. He doesn't seem to be in the business of "humanizing differences." In fact, many of the people he doesn't like, he seems, some people believe, I tend to be sympathetic there, he's dehumanizing them. So. So what do we do in an America, where the next president is, or appears to be, very often in the business of dehumanization?TAFUR: Hopefully we take back the narrative.KEEN: What does that mean, "take back the narrative"? He's been elected. It's his narrative.TAFUR: It is his narrative. But as people I don't believe that everyone who voted for him is voting for the dehumanization. I am holding firm to the belief that people are good, and that people have voted for other things and not for that. And I want people who voted for him to still see that we need to humanize each other despite our differences. And I believe that they do. I do not believe people are buying into that narrative and rhetoric. At least not everyone. Some may. But I think when we take back the narrative, we take back the narrative of: yes, right now there's a winning camp and a losing camp, and that's okay. And I would hope that those in the winning camp also want to see across differences and are reaching out to humanize those who are not in the winning camp. And, you know, that is now that is four years. But our country perseveres and continues and we are interdependent and need each other. Absolutely need each other. More than this rhetoric, more than the divisive politics. Politics is just one aspect of who we are.KEEN: There are others. I mean, you acknowledge that you're a progressive. There are other progressives who are preparing to resist the new--what they see as a regime, some people even think that the new president is a fascist. What would you say to resistors, people who don't believe that it's possible to, as you would put it, reshape the narrative or seize the narrative, that that the next president is in the business of dehumanizing many people, particularly people out of America and many people in America. And it's just pointless and that they're going to fight him, they're going to fight him in the courts, and maybe even on the streets.TAFUR: I don't think that's the way. I don't stand for that. And I'm also trying to bring those people along. I think the only way out of hate, sincerely, and I know it sounds cliche, but it's through love. I don't believe in resistance in that way. I am for peace and I will continue to promote peace. And I know that that is hard for people in the far left to also swallow. And I know it takes time and I know not everyone is there right now, especially right now. And not everyone will be there ever. And that's okay, too. We understand that bridging is not the right thing for every person in every situation. We know that a lot of people who feel that their identity is in danger or that they're being disrespected might not be called to bridge differences. And that is also okay. I don't think this is work that you do by demand. And and we know that it's not without risks. We know that it involves exposing vulnerability. And we also know that sometimes bridging work takes small shifts over time. What we like to call small to large, or big, bridges. Sometimes you don't start with the biggest bridge possible bridging across the biggest divide. So we know that it's work that requires the right mindsets and skills and attitudes, and that takes time.KEEN: You've used the word bridge a lot, bridging as a noun, as an adjective. I seem to remember Bill Clinton was very much in the, at least the etymological bridge building business. He would always talk about it. Are examples of American politicians in the past who have successfully built bridges? I mean, Clinton wanted to, of course, he had his own controversial personal narrative that didn't help. But when you look back into the American past, who are the bridging presidents? FDR, Teddy Roosevelt, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, Lincoln?TAFUR: Yeah, those, and I would say, you know, yes, I may I'm totally biased because I am funded, have been funded, by the Obama Foundation. But sincerely, President Obama has taken bridging and pluralism, as he called it, as the work that he is doing, that he is centering on after his presidency, and he runs these democracy summits that happen once a year. And and it is a message that he deeply believes in and is trying to share with others.KEEN: Yeah, I mean, doesn't everyone bridge on their own terms? Obama campaigned aggressively for Harris. And in fact, a lot of people believe that Trump never would have got involved in politics had Obama not given him such a violent roasting at one of the White House correspondence evenings a few years ago. So isn't Obama an example of someone who bridges when they feel like it and when they don't, they accuse other people of not bridging?TAFUR: Yeah, I mean, honestly, I prefer not to get into politics. I do bridging differences work because I am equipping folks with the skills to be able to do this work. And I believe in humans. So so this is really not about politics for me. It never was. It never will be. I happen to be an Obama scholar, but I'd really rather not comment on what politicians are or not doing.KEEN: And I take your point, Juliana. But politics and the founders knew this, the politics in and out of America, is a dirty business. We pursue our own interests. Madison called them the pursuit of faction. That's why we have divisions, that's why we have branches of government which are designed to negate each other. Just as Madison so famously said, so profoundly said, "If men were angels (and he did say, man, he didn't say women as well, of course), if men were angels, there'd be no need for government." And I wonder whether...and again, I don't want a group for your movements or your thinking into one, but I wonder whether this kind of ambivalence, hostility, maybe even contempt for politics is problematic. When I think of someone like Michelle Obama, I have to admit I'm very, very disappointed that she didn't choose to enter into politics. She seems to be political when she feels like it. But not to participate in politics, she was probably the only person in America could have beaten Trump. Again, I don't want to turn this into a conversation about either Obama's. But my question to you is about acknowledging the dirtiness of politics, which reflects the dirtiness of the human condition, the fact that we all are, for better or worse, self-interested. Do you accept that Madisonian version of human nature?TAFUR: I honestly think there is a better future for us when we tap into what we can be and not what we are. And I know it's hard for many to do right now. And it's hard when what we see as reality is what politicians do. And I do see some examples of politics where people are coming together that I'd like to highlight, including Governor Spencer Cox. And he's led a national campaign called Disagree Better. And he's come on ads with Governor Jared Polis from--KEEN: Colorado, yeah?TAFUR: Colorado. And Governor Cox is out of Utah, Republican. Jared Polis is a Democrat from Colorado. And I think we need more of that. We need more examples of that, politicians coming together and showing how they are coming together so that we believe that it's also possible. So I'd like to  hang on to those examples in the political realm. But again, I'm in the business of what we individuals can do at the interpersonal level to begin to cultivate the right skills and mindsets, to be able to come together and at the inter group level with others.KEEN: There's been a lot of conversation, debate after this election, Juliana, like many elections, about why and how people should vote. Should they vote out of self-interest or for the the greater good? Lots of comments about many of the people vote voting for Trump seem to be voting against their own interests, particularly the new American working class. Whereas the coastal elites in voting for Harris seem also in an odd way to be voting against their own--certainly economic--interests by voting for her, in your view, to get to this bridge and this ability to be empathetic and converse with others, do we need to overcome our own self-interest, particularly our own economic self-interest?TAFUR: I don't think you need to overcome your own economic self-interests to bridge. Not at all. Because when we bridge differences, we are not asking honestly people to leave aside any of what they value. It centers on this recognition of, yes, common humanity, which I know is very abstract to a lot of people. But it is not about persuasion and it does not require you compromising your beliefs or values. It just requires the ability for you to recognize that anyone, anyone can teach you something, which is a term called intellectual humility. So, no, not to bridge. I mean, you may be putting your self-interest aside, or some of your self-interests, aside when you're voting for certain candidates. But to bridge, we are just coming together to see each other and to be with each other.KEEN: You talk about intellectual humility. That word again, humility is another fashionable word that goes with empathy. Is there, do you think, a religious context to this? Do you think some of these movements, maybe yours, maybe even yourself, it grew out of a religious tradition. A Christian tradition? Humility, empathy, love, understanding. These are words that are traditionally used in religion.TAFUR: Yes, they are. I will say that we have not necessarily emphasized or called attention to these character virtues and moral virtues in our work. We do talk about them a lot and we will probably emphasize them a bit more moving forward, given interest that we have in doing so, because we do think that when you talk about civil, moral character virtues like respect and curiosity and courage, you are meeting different types of people at different places. And at the end of the day, this is about becoming better people.KEEN: Say that again: this is about becoming better people. So, it's a moral movement. You're suggesting people need to pull their their moral socks up if we're going to put Humpty Dumpty, to extend this rather childish metaphor, if we're if we're to put Humpty Dumpty back together again, we need to pull our moral socks up. Is that fair?TAFUR: Yeah. I mean, we believe that cultivating these virtues is not just about overcoming current societal divides, but about nurturing a deep commitment to, for a lack of a better word, the greater good. This is what this is about.KEEN: I don't know how many jobs you have, Juliana. I'm lucky enough that I don't have multiple jobs, but some people, again, might be watching this and saying this is all very well. Maybe in some biblical fantasy land, we can all put ourselves out and be better people. But most people are really busy. Many, particularly, working class people who perhaps voted for Trumo, they're working 2 or 3 jobs. They're busy. They struggle to pay their rent, feed their families. Does this require to be part of your bridging movement? Does it require, shall we say, moral...concentration? Or could you do it...occasionally?TAFUR: Absolutely. You can do it occasionally. You can do it in the weekend. You can do it with neighbors. You could do it at a school board meeting. You could do it in neighborhood meetings. You could do it wherever you are. You could do it at work. You could do it with colleagues. You could do it with your kids. It does not require more than anything that you are already doing. It's just about how you approach those who are in your circles and in your life.KEEN: What's the most difficult thing? You do this a lot. You run bridging programs. You run a school, essentially, designed to help people bridge. What does the movement most struggle with? When you see people who are open to the idea and say, you're right, I need to be able to talk responsibly with humility and empathy to people who I don't agree with on the other political side, culturally, racially, and all the rest of it. What do people most struggle with, what don't they expect? What would you warn people about who are trying to get into a movement like this?TAFUR: We are very clear that if the other person is dehumanizing you, and if you feel at risk or threatened by this dehumanization, that you should probably be careful in engaging. So that's where we draw the line.KEEN: Yeah, but then you're shifting the responsibility to somebody else. I mean, obviously, if they're dehumanizing you, you wouldn't want to talk to them. But what's hard about changing oneself, that's possible, that doesn't involve the other?TAFUR: I think this just requires the commitment to want to do it and then the right skills. To engage with it in a way that you see works, that feels good, and that invites you to continue trying it out. And all it takes is the willingness to say, "I'm exhausted by this. This is affecting me personally." Because we do know that our divides are consuming us. They're affecting our health, our well-being. We also know our divides are affecting our families and our closest circles. We know that our divides affect our children in schools. So there are many, many reasons for wanting to bridge, for saying, "this is enough. I am exhausted." And if you are, you are not alone. Three. Out of four Americans are. 75% of Americans in the most conservative estimates say they are exhausted by the division.KEEN: Exhausted by just this endless controversy of people not being able to talk to one another?TAFUR: Yeah. Research tells us that three out of four Americans see political hostility and divisiveness as a serious problem and want to live in a less polarized country. So we are just trying to meet that exhausted majority where they are. Because we do know that people value diverse perspectives. Again, research points to this, and a desire to shift the political discourse. So we're telling them: we hear you. We see you. Yes, this division hurts us. Let's do something about it. Do you need some skills? We got you.KEEN: Juliana, I asked you about other examples from American history. What about models from the rest of the world in these kinds of conversations? You often hear about the the reconciliation, the truth and reconciliation movement and Mandela, South Africa. Are there models overseas, which Americans can learn from? Americans often aren't very good at learning from other countries, particularly in Africa. But is the South African model a good one, do you think?TAFUR: Yes. I mean, clearly, they were able to come together across incredible fracture and division, and they were able to persevere and collaborate across differences. There is also the model in Ireland that we can point to. There is division that is hurting countries across the world right now. And I know ,I come from a country that is deeply divided, Colombia. And Colombians have also succeeded in bridging the great divide. But there's been strides, through peace treaties and others, to come together despite differences. So we can certainly learn from other countries that have been deeply divided and in deep conflict and have come together. We are not in a place in the US where our conflict has turned violent, thankfully, at least not openly. We are seeing signs of violence, but we are not in the midst of a war (although it seems like a moral war in many regards.) And and I do want to point to the hope that countries who have been in deeper fractures about how this is possible and and hopefully also show us that we must do something before the fracture goes wider and deeper. And where reconciliation seems harder to do.KEEN: Juliana, you mentioned Ireland. One of the things that comes to mind in the Irish model is the role of citizen assemblies in bringing people together to talk about very difficult issues. You brought up abortion, guns and immigration, in the U.S., the three most divisive issues, probably abortion, was and maybe still remains the most divisive in Roman Catholic Ireland. But the Citizens' Assembly movement in Ireland addressed the issue of abortion, and that was the way for the Irish parliament to actually develop some some quite interesting new legislation on abortion. Are you sympathetic to rethinking institutions, political institutions, political organizations like the Citizens' Assembly? Is this something that you've thought about, researched, is it part of a greater good future?TAFUR: Yeah, I mean, I do think we need to re-imagine. I do think we need to take good examples, including citizens' assemblies and in understand what's going to work for all of us. We know what we're doing now is not working for all of us. What does it take? How can we bring folks together to the conversation in a way that is bringing us all together? So, I do think bringing a diverse group of citizens to engage in structured dialogue, learn from experts, and also deliberate over complex topics could be the way. Maybe that's what we need. Maybe we do need more public participation in the democratic process in a way that ultimately ends up shaping legislation. And it does align with our bridging differences program, right? And and what we promote in in bringing people in and fostering inclusivity. So how can we bring different backgrounds together in structured discussions so that we can move beyond these partisan divides? Because we do understand that some of these issues do provoke, I would say, a really strong emotional response and and also carry significant social implications for folks.KEEN: Juliana Tafur, you've you've done very well with, my rather obnoxious question. So let's end with an opportunity for you to talk about, quite literally, where we go from here. You have some articles on your website, on the Bridging Differences website about where do we go from here, after the election. Perhaps you might touch on 3 or 4 bullets--concrete things of where we go from here in in early November 2024 that can bridge America, that can bring us back together. What would you suggest that's doable, viable, can be achieved in the next few months?TAFUR: It's great that you point to that article. I was obviously part of a group of us at the Greater Good Science Center that was very keen on publishing this the day after the election to--KEEN: And now you're on--I couldn't resist this one, Juliana, now you're on KEEN ON. I'm sorry for that rather silly joke, but anyway. Go on.TAFUR: Yep, yep, yep. Well, let me just, like, run through a bit of what some of the experts and researchers who we invited to be a part of this article with what they said.KEEN: And that included Eboo Patel, who, as I said, has been on the show. So you put together a very interesting group of people to write this thing.TAFUR: Thank you. Yeah, absolutely. So, yeah, so Eboo is saying keep doing what matters to you and the world, and he's trying to get us away from this catastrophe mindset, and he wants to remind us that what you are doing is sacred and it makes a difference. And even if the world is going to end, he says, the wisdom of the sages says to keep doing your meaningful work, because that work is part of the saving grace of humanity. So that was beautiful. Scott Shigeoka, who's a bridging differences fellow at the Greater Good Science Center, is inviting us to practice curiosity as an act of love. And for Scott, he says that we must practice curiosity if we want to transform our fear and hate. And he's reminding us that curiosity is a trait that we are all born with, and it's the desire to understand others more deeply. Again, this does not mean agreeing with views that clash with your own, but challenging the assumptions that you have about people who hold those views. So a lot about interrupting prejudice. Jeremy Smith, who's our editor at The Greater Good, he's inviting us to work to promote your values in community. I'll go high level on some of these. Get to know other humans, right? Get out of our silos as much as we can and connecting across our differences. Dr. Linda Traub, who is a close collaborator of ours, is inviting us to be good neighbors, even, and especially, to those who are different. So those are just a few. Choose nuance, not outrage. So I do invite folks to go through this article and and hopefully a few of the golden nuggets of inspiration do stay with you, do motivate you, to do something. It's been hard for many of us to understand what is it that we can do right now if bridging even is the calling of the moment when so many are struggling to understand what this means about our country, what this means about the next four years. But I understand others are not and are celebrating. Regardless of where you are, I think in a few weeks when you feel up for it, I think the calling of our times is to come together and to understand, again, our interdependence. We must break this cycle of othering us versus them. That does that does not exist. Those are constructs that that we have created. But we are better and we are more. And we are one. And sorry if this sounds cliche to some, but that's what I got for you.KEEN: That's interesting. And finally, Juliana, you mentioned one of your colleagues talked about what they would do if the world was to end tomorrow, what they would do this evening. It certainly reflects on you. I know if I knew the world was going to end tomorrow, I would go to Kentucky Fried Chicken. But that probably speaks of my own unsuitability for your movement. What would you do if you knew the world was ending tomorrow?TAFUR: I would speak to you, Andrew.KEEN: Oh my god, we can go together to the Kentucky Fried Chicken. Well, Juliana, it's been a real honor to have you on the show. Very interesting conversation, we're going to get you back on because this--one thing we can say for sure is this issue is not going away in 2024, 2025, 2026. Keep up the good work, Juliana, and we'll talk again in the not too distant future. Thank you so much.TAFUR: Thank you, Andrew. Thank you.For those impressed with what Julianna Tafur is doing and would like to participate, here are a couple of ideas:* Ready to turn division into connection? The Greater Good Science Center's 7-Day Campaign for Connection Challenge offers practical, research-based skills to ease stress and create understanding. Reserve your spot: http://tinyurl.com/7DayChallenge24* Feeling the weight of division this election season? You're not alone! Join the @Greater Good Science Center's 7-Day Campaign for Connection Challenge, to help you navigate these polarized times with science-backed skills. Reserve your place: http://tinyurl.com/7DayChallenge24Keen On is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

Politicians on both sides of the aisle are raising campaign funds faster than ever before.  Boyd Matheson, political consultant, says Super Pacs are a big part of that revenue stream.  He says the pacs are where almost all the negative ads come from. Boyd says people need to be humble about what they think they know and look outside their normal sources of information in order to find out if what they are being fed is true or not.  The first borometer is -- if it sounds 'out there' it's probably not correct.  Please remember to "Disagree Better." You can follow this show on Instagram and Facebook.  And to see what Heather does when she's not talking money, go to her personal X (Twitter) page. Be sure to email Heather your questions and request topics you'd like her to cover here.

"Studies reveal a recipe for disagreeing better:Good disagreers ask questions instead of making statements.They work to get underneath people's opinions to their stories.When they spot common ground, good disagreers name it.When they are unsure about something, they say so rather than pretending to be confident.These ingredients each decrease the chance that dissent will devolve into toxic conflict. But good disagreement is more than nice; it's powerful. In experiments, people given the recipe you see here listened more intently and asked better questions. But the people they talked with also became more open-minded, even though they received no training. Outrage is contagious, but so are curiosity and humility.” - Jamil ZakiRESOURCES: https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/how_to_find_hope_when_youre_feeling_cynicalhttps://www.theguardian.com/books/article/2024/aug/23/hope-for-cynics-by-jamil-zaki-review-beating-the-trust-recessionhttps://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/in-hope-for-cynics-researcher-explores-how-seeing-the-good-in-others-is-good-for-youTHE BOOK: https://www.jamil-zaki.com/hope-for-cynicsDONATE:www.pcrf.netGet Involved:Operation Olive Branch: Spreadsheets + LinksGET AN OCCASIONAL PERSONAL EMAIL FROM ME: www.makeyourdamnbedpodcast.comTUNE IN ON INSTAGRAM FOR COOL CONTENT: www.instagram.com/mydbpodcastOR BE A REAL GEM + TUNE IN ON PATREON: www.patreon.com/MYDBpodcastOR WATCH ON YOUTUBE: www.youtube.com/juliemerica The opinions expressed by Julie Merica and Make Your Damn Bed Podcast are intended for entertainment purposes only. Make Your Damn Bed podcast is not intended or implied to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Get bonus content on PatreonSupport this show http://supporter.acast.com/make-your-damn-bed. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Utah's First Lady, Abby Cox, recently had the opportunity to appear on the Girls Talk Healthy Aging podcast with hosts Alli Kerr and Shawna Kaminski. We enjoyed the conversation so much that we wanted to share it here!  We dove into the balance of taking care of family while making a meaningful impact across Utah and Abby's profound responsibility toward the children in Utah’s foster care system. We also discuss how the "Disagree Better" initiative aims to alleviate the polarizing nature of modern politics and why empowering our communities through service can help combat the current outrage culture. Follow the Girls Talk Healthy Aging podcast below: Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/girls-talk-healthy-aging/id1700377806 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0YJRwk644teudB0KoQIjKB YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWSMCjRb6jDIxykYt0FK_Jw

Carol Bruess is the First Lady of the College of St. Benedict and St. John's University and has been named to the State Arts Board. She joins Jason to talk about their programs and how to disagree better in our polarized times. 

Join Abby Cox as she shares her inspiring journey from small-town farm life to residing in the governor's mansion in Salt Lake City. Growing up in the small town of Fairview, Utah she never imagined herself living a life in politics. Since becoming First Lady, Abby created the “Show Up” initiative, which invites everyone to show up in their community through service opportunities.  This year she has refocused her efforts on the larger nationwide initiative of “Disagree Better”. Meant to help ease the political discourse that has gotten so impassioned over the years.  During the conversation, Abby shares how she has personally learned how to “Disagree Better”. She explains what she does when she disagrees with her husband or kids on political issues, how we can better understand each other, and why it is important to never stop doing the work.   

Gov. Spencer Cox is asking Utahns to “Disagree Better” in an effort to cool down our politics. But what if conflict is actually the good stuff? Host Ali Vallarta asks Utah Valley University professor and conflict specialist Dr. Maria Blevins what the Governor's campaign gets right and what it's missing. Plus, tips for when Salt Lakers are feeling feisty — whether with a state legislator or a friend. Resources and references: Gov. Cox's Disagree Better Initiative  Consider becoming a founding member of City Cast Salt Lake today! It's the best way to support our work and help make sure we're around for years to come. Get all the details and sign up at membership.citycast.fm. Subscribe to our daily morning newsletter. You can also find us on Instagram @CityCastSLC. Looking to advertise on City Cast Salt Lake? Check out our options for podcast and newsletter ads. Learn more about the sponsors of this episode: Epic Brewing Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Two Governors from adjacent states and opposing parties, Utah's Spencer Cox (R) and Colorado's Jared Polis (D), join Governors Bredesen and Haslam to share their “Disagree Better” initiative. They affirm the need to "disagree without hating each other" and explore practical ways to disagree better in everyday life. 

Six in 10 Americans polled by the Pew Research Center say having political conversations with people they disagree with is generally stressful and frustrating. Does it have to be this way? Utah Gov. Spencer Cox (Republican) and Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly (Democrat) join host Krys Boyd to talk about why disagreement doesn't have to lead to disrespectful rhetoric and insults, and about how we can have more productive political conversations. The conversation, “The Art of Disagreeing Better,” was conducted in front of a live audience at the George W. Bush Presidential Center.

Recently, during a public event at Utah's State Capitol, Governor Spencer Cox issued a stark warning: "Either we, the people, collectively decide we're going to stop hating our fellow Americans, or we'll start shooting each other."   In our podcast, we hear why Governor Cox passionately believes that the country is heading in a dangerous direction with hyperpartisanship and political dysfunction and what he's doing about it with his Disagree Better Initiative. Spencer Cox, a Republican, is the 2023 Chair of the bipartisan National Governors Association. He selected "Disagree Better" to be the Association's current campaign. Through public debates, service projects, meetings, and public service announcements, Disagree Better brings together red and blue governors, looking at the problems of polarization and how to elevate solutions that Common Ground Committee and other groups in the bridging community are implementing. 

Do you suffer from the sin of certainty? How did Angela react when a grad student challenged her research? And can a Heineken commercial strengthen our democracy? RESOURCES:"Disagree Better," National Governors Association initiative led by Spencer Cox (2023-2024)."Cooling Heated Discourse: Conversational Receptiveness Boosts Interpersonal Evaluations and Willingness to Talk," by Julia Minson, David Hagmann, and Kara Luo (Preprint, 2023)."Megastudy Identifying Effective Interventions to Strengthen Americans' Democratic Attitudes," by Jan G. Voelkel, Robb Willer, et al. (Working Paper, 2023).Conflicted: Why Arguments Are Tearing Us Apart and How They Can Bring Us Together, by Ian Leslie (2021)."How to Disagree Productively and Find Common Ground," by Julia Dhar (TED, 2018)."From the Fundamental Attribution Error to the Truly Fundamental Attribution Error and Beyond: My Research Journey," by Lee Ross (Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2018)."The Humanizing Voice: Speech Reveals, and Text Conceals, a More Thoughtful Mind in the Midst of Disagreement," by Juliana Schroeder, Michael Kardas, and Nicholas Epley (Psychological Science, 2017)."Worlds Apart," ad by Heineken (2017)."Gritty Educations," by Anindya Kundu (Virginia Policy Review, 2014).Thinking, Fast and Slow, by Daniel Kahneman (2011)."Experiences of Collaborative Research," by Daniel Kahneman (American Psychologist, 2003).EXTRAS:TikTok with advice from Apple Store employee (2023)."Can You Change Your Mind Without Losing Face?" by No Stupid Questions (2022).12 Angry Men, film (1957).

Utah Governor Spencer Cox wants his enemies to be heard, his opponents to feel valued, and his sparring partners to never feel wounded. Is this any way to run a state? He says yes, and as Chair of the National Governor's Association, he's taking his "Disagree Better" platform national. Plus, Texas AG Ken Paxton is acquitted by a jury of his peers ... literally, including his wife, because of snazzy lawyerin' and political self-interest. Produced by Joel Patterson and Corey Wara Email us at thegist@mikepesca.com To advertise on the show, visit: https://advertisecast.com/TheGist Subscribe to The Gist Subscribe: https://subscribe.mikepesca.com/ Follow Mikes Substack at: Pesca Profundities | Mike Pesca | Substack Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices