Jump to content


Exercise for enhancing relationships between individuals of different political beliefs


Recommended Posts

It is worth noting that the example I'm giving you comes at the end of a 6 hour workshop.

 

The first step is an icebreaker that helps you identify with individuals from different backgrounds ala:

 

Second, we lead participants through exercises to recognize their values. We also explain the need for both people that keep and expand boundaries (think of one as adding new stuff with little to no filter and the other as choosing what to keep and discard) This frequently maps on to conservative and liberal ideologies.

 

Then this is the exercise we do: Think of a political issue that you care deeply about, and maybe even feel a little, or a lot angry, about how others view it. So this could be: Abortion or pro-life, gun-control or gun rights, immigration, gay marriage, the environment, etc. These are the very difficult issues that often get us into arguments, when you have both liberals and conservatives in the room. So today, we are going to discuss these in a very specific way, to keep it safe. We are going to use the “downward arrow” technique. The downward arrow is that we start with anger, but underneath the anger is fear and vulnerability, and then underneath the fear and vulnerability is something we love and cherish. So the arrow goes from anger to fear and vulnerability to love. So, if you have identified the political issue that you are angry about, please spend a moment right now exploring what fear or vulnerability you may feel underneath it. Give people a few minutes to do this and write it down. Now, spend a moment right now exploring what it is that you love or cherish, that may be underneath that fear and vulnerability. Can you think of a specific memory in your life, in which you expressed this love for this thing? Write that down too.

To provide my own example (quote for formatting away from a wall of text)

 

I am angry about the future of the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program which will not apply to any loans taken out a little over a year from now.

 

I am scared about what that means for the future of science in the USA, something that is important to me on a macro and micro level (I think science is important and it might impact my future employment not to mention that for awhile I wasn't sure if I might be able to have my 6 figure loans forgiven). I'm a first generation college student who came from Lincoln and Milwaukee public schools and there's no way I would've gotten an undergraduate degree, not to mention PhD if loans were not available.

 

Furthermore, I met the person I intend to live the rest of my life with while pursuing this education. I have never met someone who is as thoughtful, loving, and kind as my partner. I used to date just because that was what you were supposed to do. I lived in fear that I'd end up like my dad who's a POS alcoholic who never had a meaningful relationship in his life. I could see that coming because of how I related to people. Then I met her. While at my desk, writing up some study results. I've never felt as passionate about a topic as much as I do my field. Sometimes we need to be able to pursue our passion to find what makes life meaningful.

 

We then get three or four people a chance to respond in a very specific way. The response should be focused on what they appreciate about what they heard, and how it helps them understand you better.

In our design people talk for 6 minutes then 4 minutes others (half who politically agree with them and half who don't) respond. This takes ~1 hour.

We then repeat but with a non-political topic, just sharing who you are and having people respond with what they learned from you, what they heard you say, and how they now understand/relate to you.

That's the basic design.

 

  • Fire 3
Link to comment

I like it.

 

I've never really dug down to understand the reasons behind my feelings - just say I have an opinion and back it with facts. What a better way to have a conversation and better understand the "whys'. So much of our conflict with politics is because we don't listen to the actual person - what does your data show about if this model changes opinions? Whether that be opinion of the actual topic or more specifically opinion on the person who has opposing ideas?

 

Thanks for sharing.

Link to comment

I like it.

 

I've never really dug down to understand the reasons behind my feelings - just say I have an opinion and back it with facts. What a better way to have a conversation and better understand the "whys'. So much of our conflict with politics is because we don't listen to the actual person - what does your data show about if this model changes opinions? Whether that be opinion of the actual topic or more specifically opinion on the person who has opposing ideas?

 

Thanks for sharing.

Initial findings show a lot of promise in reducing Manichaeism, the belief that the other side is bad/evil. Which is more or less what we're going for. But yeah, things look good here.

Link to comment

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...