In his article on FEE, Steven Horowitz argues that a key to civil discourse is attempting to view the debate from the other side. It is all too easy to assume that ‘we’ are right and everyone else is wrong, and therefore ill-intentioned. As he writes:

(FEE) It’s tempting to accuse such folks of cutting off classical-liberal arguments without a fair hearing, and no doubt, especially in a highly politicized context such as a presidential campaign, this is true at times. But to assume this is why others won’t argue with us in good faith would be to do exactly what we accuse them of doing!

One is compelled to ask, what good is a debate if we don’t first recognize where the other side is coming from? As in the ancient Greeks, all good discourse depends upon an open definition of terms, and that can only come about when all participants are open to the rationale of the other side. They must be willing to accept the other side’s rationale even if (especially if) that rationale is convincing.

Of course, in this busy day and age, it is a luxury to be able to afford such civility. It means we must first bring into question our own beliefs–almost unheard of these days. We want to be right more than we want to find the truth. And all too often it is much easier to be right if we neglect the truth. It is much easier to simply characterize the other side’s arguments as we have defined them ourselves (‘The Left want a minimum wage, and so they want a culture of dependence’; ‘The Right want to defeat terrorists at all costs, so they want a perpetual war’; and so on).

But this is to build up the logical strawman–a fallacy that replaces our opponent’s good argument for a weak one that is easy to defeat. We build it up and tear it down and think that something has been accomplished. In reality, we have only severed ourselves from the other side and further threatened the cooperation that is essential in civil discourse, and ultimately in civil society.

As rhetoric heats up, and the actions that back rhetoric are intensified, this shortcut leads to serious troubles.

Only [when we understand and respect the other side’s best arguments] will we know there really are smart people who sincerely want to make the world better and who have arguments different from our own that we cannot easily dismiss.  When we recognize that others are neither stupid nor hard-hearted will we be able to achieve genuine dialogue.