What do you think?
Rate this book
I Never Thought of It That Way
We think we have the answers, but we need to be asking a lot more questions.
Partisanship is up, trust is down, and our social media feeds make us sure we're right and everyone else is ignorant (or worse). But avoiding and attacking one another is breaking... everything.
Journalist Mónica Guzmán is the loving liberal daughter of Mexican immigrants who voted—twice—for Donald Trump. When the country could no longer see straight across the political divide, Mónica set out to find what was blinding us, and discovered the most eye-opening tool we're not using: our own curiosity.
In this timely, personal guide, Mónica, the chief storyteller for the national cross-partisan depolarization organization Braver Angels, takes you to the real front lines of a crisis that threatens to grind America to a halt—broken conversations among confounded people. She shows you how to overcome the fear and assumptions that surround us to finally do what only seems impossible: understand and even learn from people in your life whose whole worldview is not just different from yours, but opposed.
Drawing from conversations she's had, organized, or witnessed everywhere from the echo chambers on social media to the wheat fields in Oregon to raw, unfiltered fights with her family on election night, Mónica shows how you can put your natural sense of wonder to work for you immediately, finding the answers you need by talking with people—rather than about them—and asking the questions you want across the divides you want, curiously.
In these pages, you'll learn:
• How to ask what you really want to know (even if you're afraid to)
• How to grow smarter from even the most tense interactions, online or off
• How to cross boundaries and find common ground—with anyone
Whether you're left, right, center, or sick of the labels: If you're ready to fight back against the confusion, heartbreak, and madness of our dangerously divided times—in your own life, at least—Mónica's got the tools and fresh, surprising insights to prove that seeing where people are coming from isn't just possible. It's easier than you think.
Partisanship is up, trust is down, and our social media feeds make us sure we're right and everyone else is ignorant (or worse). But avoiding and attacking one another is breaking... everything.
Journalist Mónica Guzmán is the loving liberal daughter of Mexican immigrants who voted—twice—for Donald Trump. When the country could no longer see straight across the political divide, Mónica set out to find what was blinding us, and discovered the most eye-opening tool we're not using: our own curiosity.
In this timely, personal guide, Mónica, the chief storyteller for the national cross-partisan depolarization organization Braver Angels, takes you to the real front lines of a crisis that threatens to grind America to a halt—broken conversations among confounded people. She shows you how to overcome the fear and assumptions that surround us to finally do what only seems impossible: understand and even learn from people in your life whose whole worldview is not just different from yours, but opposed.
Drawing from conversations she's had, organized, or witnessed everywhere from the echo chambers on social media to the wheat fields in Oregon to raw, unfiltered fights with her family on election night, Mónica shows how you can put your natural sense of wonder to work for you immediately, finding the answers you need by talking with people—rather than about them—and asking the questions you want across the divides you want, curiously.
In these pages, you'll learn:
• How to ask what you really want to know (even if you're afraid to)
• How to grow smarter from even the most tense interactions, online or off
• How to cross boundaries and find common ground—with anyone
Whether you're left, right, center, or sick of the labels: If you're ready to fight back against the confusion, heartbreak, and madness of our dangerously divided times—in your own life, at least—Mónica's got the tools and fresh, surprising insights to prove that seeing where people are coming from isn't just possible. It's easier than you think.
304 pages, Hardcover
Published March 8, 2022
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 316 reviews
May 15, 2022
A light read about a heavy topic -- people at political loggerheads. Red in the face. Blue veins popping. The sort of thing none of us has ever experienced, I'm sure.
Just kidding.
This is serious business, and we all have stories to tell. Mine is much like author Monica Guzmán's. Her immigrant parents, who came to the U.S. from Mexico, are staunch Trump supporters. Monica, meanwhile, is true blue.
My family goes a few decades back, immigration-wise, but the scenario is the same. Both of my parents are Trumpies and I find him not only detestable as a politician, but despicable as a human being.
See why I read this book? I use words like "detestable" and "despicable" to describe my enemy, then I group everyone who supports him into the same ball of wax.
Bad boy, Ken. Bad!
Retraining manual, I reached to you for this reason. My parents are lovely people. I mean, did they not create me? =) And so you see why I came to this, an unusual choice in reading. To give you an idea about the book's goal, I'll quote two of the summary-style paragraphs from the last chapter:
"Take one step closer to someone who disagrees with you -- whether that means spending time with a friend or a relative you've been drifting apart from, reading an opinion from an earnest voice on the other side, or sparking a conversation you're been both eager and hesitant to have. When you want to explore why they're wrong, explore what you're missing. When you want to determine whose view wins, determine what makes each view understandable. When you want to discover why someone believes something that confounds you, discover how they came to believe it. When you want to know what their problem is, try to know what their concerns are. When you want to demand why they don't care about what you care about, learn what they care about more. When you want to trap them into saying what you want to hear, free them so they say what they honestly mean.
"And when you want to stop listening so you can react or respond or judge -- which will be often! -- mind that gap between what you know and what you most certainly don't and ask one more curious question."
You catch her drift. This is a tool book. A how-to for people who want to bridge some scary gaps developing in this country, people who want to undo some of the damage being done by extremists on both sides of the aisle.
Wisely, it includes plenty of anecdotes, not only from Guzmán's life, but from people who have actually begun the hard work of bringing red and blue together. In some cases, the results will lift your spirits and renew hope.
That alone is worth the price of admission!
Just kidding.
This is serious business, and we all have stories to tell. Mine is much like author Monica Guzmán's. Her immigrant parents, who came to the U.S. from Mexico, are staunch Trump supporters. Monica, meanwhile, is true blue.
My family goes a few decades back, immigration-wise, but the scenario is the same. Both of my parents are Trumpies and I find him not only detestable as a politician, but despicable as a human being.
See why I read this book? I use words like "detestable" and "despicable" to describe my enemy, then I group everyone who supports him into the same ball of wax.
Bad boy, Ken. Bad!
Retraining manual, I reached to you for this reason. My parents are lovely people. I mean, did they not create me? =) And so you see why I came to this, an unusual choice in reading. To give you an idea about the book's goal, I'll quote two of the summary-style paragraphs from the last chapter:
"Take one step closer to someone who disagrees with you -- whether that means spending time with a friend or a relative you've been drifting apart from, reading an opinion from an earnest voice on the other side, or sparking a conversation you're been both eager and hesitant to have. When you want to explore why they're wrong, explore what you're missing. When you want to determine whose view wins, determine what makes each view understandable. When you want to discover why someone believes something that confounds you, discover how they came to believe it. When you want to know what their problem is, try to know what their concerns are. When you want to demand why they don't care about what you care about, learn what they care about more. When you want to trap them into saying what you want to hear, free them so they say what they honestly mean.
"And when you want to stop listening so you can react or respond or judge -- which will be often! -- mind that gap between what you know and what you most certainly don't and ask one more curious question."
You catch her drift. This is a tool book. A how-to for people who want to bridge some scary gaps developing in this country, people who want to undo some of the damage being done by extremists on both sides of the aisle.
Wisely, it includes plenty of anecdotes, not only from Guzmán's life, but from people who have actually begun the hard work of bringing red and blue together. In some cases, the results will lift your spirits and renew hope.
That alone is worth the price of admission!
March 7, 2024
A relentlessly cheerful attempt to get people who disagree with each other to talk to each other. She had some concrete suggestions that I appreciated. For example, she suggested when determining when and whether to have a serious conversation, consider (1) whether you have the time; (2) whether you can give the conversation the attention it deserves; (3) whether you are having it with someone in parity with you; (4) whether the conversation is contained in a way to encourage a fruitful communication (as opposed to on a public post on fb); (5) whether you are embodied - by which I think she really means, physically present so that full array of communication tools, like body language and tone, can come through. (84-86).
She does a nice job of illustrating confirmation bias. “When we encounter ideas that line up with our existing beliefs, we silently ask ourselves, ‘Can I believe it?’ We look at the evidence presented to us, consider it on its merits, and see if they points add up to a belief we can feel good about it. When we encounter ideas that challenge our beliefs, though, we ask ourselves something else: ‘Must I believe it.” And when we ask ourselves ‘Must I believe it?” it means our intuition is resisting.” (125).
She suggests there’s really only 10 values: stimulation, hedonism, achievement, power, benevolence, universalism, security, conformity, tradition, and self-direction. (168) (citing Shalom Schwartz). We all value these things differently, and a lot of the political divide comes from those differences. I give a low value to conformity and tradition and a high value to universalism and benevolence. She links us to a quiz that lists different values - care, equality, loyalty, authority, purity, and proportionality. See https://www.yourmorals.org/. I’ve heard similar suggestions before and I think it’s a work in progress. (168-69)
I appreciated learning that “ken” originally referred to the range of vision of a Scottish sailor at sea. If he had then kenning of it, he could see it. (53). I also appreciated her story of how someone redirected a conversation that was going off the rails with a “I’ am not comfortable with this conversation.” (233). Not sure he could have gotten away with it if he wasn’t an older while man who had been quietly observing, though.
That was all good.
But then there are a lot of things I found really vexing. Some of her sample prompts for a good conversation would likely shut down a conversation I was in. For example, “It sounds like you’re still figuring that out. What feels important to you as you think about it?” (205). That’s such a condescending question. It suggests the other person is in a position to help me sort out how I feel about something. If I’m not paying that person for therapy or advice, I would not want to hear it.
More importantly, while I agree with her that we have lost the muscles to have difficult conversations across difficult divides, I resent that she’s making a systemic problem an individual one. Making systemic problems individual ones is a good way to keep those problems from being solved.
Most troublingly, Guzman is offering cheerful solutions to a deep, dark, systemic problem. Individual solutions to a deep, dark, systemic problem don’t solve deep, dark, systemic problems. Only systemic solutions will. We have a deep culture of not talking about religion and politics at the dinner table. Our communities, civic institutions, and churches are increasingly politically segregated. Gerrymandering is ever more destructive of the political fabric. Since Gingrich was speaker, we no longer have congress living next to each other and modeling cooperation on the things people can cooperate on. The only way to have our country have these conversations is by creating systems that allow and require these conversations.
She does a nice job of illustrating confirmation bias. “When we encounter ideas that line up with our existing beliefs, we silently ask ourselves, ‘Can I believe it?’ We look at the evidence presented to us, consider it on its merits, and see if they points add up to a belief we can feel good about it. When we encounter ideas that challenge our beliefs, though, we ask ourselves something else: ‘Must I believe it.” And when we ask ourselves ‘Must I believe it?” it means our intuition is resisting.” (125).
She suggests there’s really only 10 values: stimulation, hedonism, achievement, power, benevolence, universalism, security, conformity, tradition, and self-direction. (168) (citing Shalom Schwartz). We all value these things differently, and a lot of the political divide comes from those differences. I give a low value to conformity and tradition and a high value to universalism and benevolence. She links us to a quiz that lists different values - care, equality, loyalty, authority, purity, and proportionality. See https://www.yourmorals.org/. I’ve heard similar suggestions before and I think it’s a work in progress. (168-69)
I appreciated learning that “ken” originally referred to the range of vision of a Scottish sailor at sea. If he had then kenning of it, he could see it. (53). I also appreciated her story of how someone redirected a conversation that was going off the rails with a “I’ am not comfortable with this conversation.” (233). Not sure he could have gotten away with it if he wasn’t an older while man who had been quietly observing, though.
That was all good.
But then there are a lot of things I found really vexing. Some of her sample prompts for a good conversation would likely shut down a conversation I was in. For example, “It sounds like you’re still figuring that out. What feels important to you as you think about it?” (205). That’s such a condescending question. It suggests the other person is in a position to help me sort out how I feel about something. If I’m not paying that person for therapy or advice, I would not want to hear it.
More importantly, while I agree with her that we have lost the muscles to have difficult conversations across difficult divides, I resent that she’s making a systemic problem an individual one. Making systemic problems individual ones is a good way to keep those problems from being solved.
Most troublingly, Guzman is offering cheerful solutions to a deep, dark, systemic problem. Individual solutions to a deep, dark, systemic problem don’t solve deep, dark, systemic problems. Only systemic solutions will. We have a deep culture of not talking about religion and politics at the dinner table. Our communities, civic institutions, and churches are increasingly politically segregated. Gerrymandering is ever more destructive of the political fabric. Since Gingrich was speaker, we no longer have congress living next to each other and modeling cooperation on the things people can cooperate on. The only way to have our country have these conversations is by creating systems that allow and require these conversations.
November 16, 2023
I like to be right. And if I can't be right, then I can at least be loud. And long-winded.
This can be toxic in our world today. Many people who disagree with my views carry guns.
I need this book. I learned tons of things from this book. I need to write down notes from this book and try them out. (Perhaps on Saturday when my family gathers for lunch? I don't think anyone in my family would draw a gun on me.) I might even read this book again.
Notes:
*David Smith, in his lecture, "Civil Conversation in an Angry Age," suggests we ask two questions that allow us to look at our opinions a second time. One is, "Are you willing to believe that you could be wrong about something?" The other one is, "Which do you value more, the truth or your own beliefs?"
*People can't know what they have never experienced.
*Elizabeth G. Saunders says that when you feel like you win online, you have rarely changed anyone's mind. "Instead," she says, "you stand as the triumphant king of a lonely land smoldering with the ashes of people you have decimated with your words, who are less likely than ever to listen to your side again."
*To question our conclusions across perspectives, we have to get curious. We direct our curiosity at the mystery of who we are, the gaps between what we know and what we wish we knew, keeping people at the center of our conversations, rather than their opinions or our assumptions. Once we are there, we look for paths people walked to get to their perspectives, the different conclusions they draw about the world."
*Here's another great statement to make: "Let me think out loud for a bit."
*The experience of being listened to is extremely rare in life. The key is to stay with one crucial question: "What do you mean?"
*It's important to acknowledge and be honest about the attachments that influence you.
*A simple invitation to speak for someone who is holding back: "Any thoughts on this one?"
*"Are you stuck with someone who is talking too much? At the next pause...ask if you can offer your experience with the topic."
*"Every tough issue that divides us...puts some fundamentally good values into tension with one another."
*"What good solutions might we find if current constraints weren't an issue?"
*How do you approach opinions flexibly enough to boost your creativity? Share current thinking on an issue. Change the question. Listen longer. Acknowledge agreement. Untie thought knots. Hit reset. Acknowledge good points. Offer, "I don't know."
*Three moments of positivity for every moment of negativity.
*"How did you come to believe X?"
*Explain yourself with story.
*Instead of commenting on someone else's opinion, pose a question.
*Great question: "What's your most generous interpretation of why they disagree with you?"
*In the middle of a discussion, switch from the dance floor to the balcony.
This can be toxic in our world today. Many people who disagree with my views carry guns.
I need this book. I learned tons of things from this book. I need to write down notes from this book and try them out. (Perhaps on Saturday when my family gathers for lunch? I don't think anyone in my family would draw a gun on me.) I might even read this book again.
Notes:
*David Smith, in his lecture, "Civil Conversation in an Angry Age," suggests we ask two questions that allow us to look at our opinions a second time. One is, "Are you willing to believe that you could be wrong about something?" The other one is, "Which do you value more, the truth or your own beliefs?"
*People can't know what they have never experienced.
*Elizabeth G. Saunders says that when you feel like you win online, you have rarely changed anyone's mind. "Instead," she says, "you stand as the triumphant king of a lonely land smoldering with the ashes of people you have decimated with your words, who are less likely than ever to listen to your side again."
*To question our conclusions across perspectives, we have to get curious. We direct our curiosity at the mystery of who we are, the gaps between what we know and what we wish we knew, keeping people at the center of our conversations, rather than their opinions or our assumptions. Once we are there, we look for paths people walked to get to their perspectives, the different conclusions they draw about the world."
*Here's another great statement to make: "Let me think out loud for a bit."
*The experience of being listened to is extremely rare in life. The key is to stay with one crucial question: "What do you mean?"
*It's important to acknowledge and be honest about the attachments that influence you.
*A simple invitation to speak for someone who is holding back: "Any thoughts on this one?"
*"Are you stuck with someone who is talking too much? At the next pause...ask if you can offer your experience with the topic."
*"Every tough issue that divides us...puts some fundamentally good values into tension with one another."
*"What good solutions might we find if current constraints weren't an issue?"
*How do you approach opinions flexibly enough to boost your creativity? Share current thinking on an issue. Change the question. Listen longer. Acknowledge agreement. Untie thought knots. Hit reset. Acknowledge good points. Offer, "I don't know."
*Three moments of positivity for every moment of negativity.
*"How did you come to believe X?"
*Explain yourself with story.
*Instead of commenting on someone else's opinion, pose a question.
*Great question: "What's your most generous interpretation of why they disagree with you?"
*In the middle of a discussion, switch from the dance floor to the balcony.
November 5, 2022
I get it, perspective taking, empathy, willingness to engage, blah, blah, blah, but this mostly seems like a take from a conservative apologist disguised as a liberal without any real consideration about how the politics of some have dangerous real world consequences for others.
November 30, 2021
On a bedrock level, it's essential reading in that it's incredibly helpful in teaching a reader how to begin, sustain, and benefit from conversation; in today's age, it's a must-have that will help to preserve the decorum, pleasantry, and enlightenment that we all *truly* seek when we engage in talks with people with whom we disagree.
It's not a "this is how you win an argument" instruction manual, but it offers something that's orders of magnitude more valuable: A refresher manual on how to connect, empathize, and enrich each other through talking things out. Guzman, in several instances, points out that we're all so very similar, but we let marked differences create the illusion that we're completely alien and lost to each other. Speaking directly and giving those around us respect and the time of day goes a long way; maybe we won't "convert" as a result, but dignity and respect is left intact (and ready for further discussion). We all learn, and we all grow.
I cannot recollect a more applicable book this day and age that has such wide and direct application to readers. If everyone read and observed the advice of Guzman, we'd be sitting pretty, emotionally, as a nation. Note that I'm not mentioning whether we'd be red or blue or whatever--we'd just function more like a family unit that's allowed to disagree with each other without treating those who think differently like a combatant.
Reading this is a civic duty as much as it is a quest for knowledge. My highest of recommendations and I hope it rocks the world when it comes out in 2022.
Many thanks to NetGalley and BenBella Books for the advance read.
It's not a "this is how you win an argument" instruction manual, but it offers something that's orders of magnitude more valuable: A refresher manual on how to connect, empathize, and enrich each other through talking things out. Guzman, in several instances, points out that we're all so very similar, but we let marked differences create the illusion that we're completely alien and lost to each other. Speaking directly and giving those around us respect and the time of day goes a long way; maybe we won't "convert" as a result, but dignity and respect is left intact (and ready for further discussion). We all learn, and we all grow.
I cannot recollect a more applicable book this day and age that has such wide and direct application to readers. If everyone read and observed the advice of Guzman, we'd be sitting pretty, emotionally, as a nation. Note that I'm not mentioning whether we'd be red or blue or whatever--we'd just function more like a family unit that's allowed to disagree with each other without treating those who think differently like a combatant.
Reading this is a civic duty as much as it is a quest for knowledge. My highest of recommendations and I hope it rocks the world when it comes out in 2022.
Many thanks to NetGalley and BenBella Books for the advance read.
March 3, 2022
I am absolutely stunned by this book. Monica Guzman uses her lived experience to write the How-To book of the moment.
If you live in the current climate of division and disinformation, I think it's really important to read this book. This book will provide you with the tools you need to stay curious in this world and to have productive conversations with others.
I don't think it's an exaggeration to suggest that reading this book and applying the steps within will help people save the valuable relationships in their lives. When you understand the systems in place that help divide us and keep us divided, you start to understand how to combat those systems.
Since I started reading this book I have caught myself many times thinking: What am I missing? and looking for my I Never Thought of it That Way Moments. From simple things like a billboard on the side of the road, to bigger things like divisive political conversations with my family members.
I think Monica Guzman saw a need in the current zeitgeist and wrote the book to fill it. I will always appreciate the honesty and gentleness that she brought to her writing.
If you live in the current climate of division and disinformation, I think it's really important to read this book. This book will provide you with the tools you need to stay curious in this world and to have productive conversations with others.
I don't think it's an exaggeration to suggest that reading this book and applying the steps within will help people save the valuable relationships in their lives. When you understand the systems in place that help divide us and keep us divided, you start to understand how to combat those systems.
Since I started reading this book I have caught myself many times thinking: What am I missing? and looking for my I Never Thought of it That Way Moments. From simple things like a billboard on the side of the road, to bigger things like divisive political conversations with my family members.
I think Monica Guzman saw a need in the current zeitgeist and wrote the book to fill it. I will always appreciate the honesty and gentleness that she brought to her writing.
September 12, 2022
Disappointing. Great concept but I deeply disliked the journalistic style. Her ideas were hard to track because it was so casual and action-oriented, and I feel like some of her ideas made generalizations or did not explore the entirety of the issues.
October 17, 2022
2nd read:
First off Monica is an amazing person. I’ve been extremely frustrated with talking to people with different political opinions for a while, so I decided to give this book another read. But upon reading it again almost a year later, I can honestly say I’ve had no luck with any of the strategies in this book. The problem is that regardless of how much you try to understand, it’s a complete waste of time if the person on the other side isn’t trying to do the same, nor are they trying to act in good faith.
Nothing against Monica and what Braver Angels is doing, but this really sees the world from this sort of naive, rose-colored lenses sort of way. What I’ve come to realize is that there’s a major sampling bias with what Braver Angels is doing. People who show up to their events want to change, learn or take some sort of action. That’s a very small portion of the population as a whole who has been divided into tribal sides and are unwilling to have any sort of good-faith conversations.
Lastly, someone needs to research and/or write a book about having these conversations online. It’s not really realistic to simply say, “Don’t have these conversations online,” where most of these conversations are taking place.
I recommend the book if (big if) you actually want to work on this stuff. For someone who wants to work on this, it’s the perfect book.
1st read:
There is not enough room in a review for me to explain how incredible this book is and why it’s one of the most important books out there. Monica was kind enough to send me an early copy, and I couldn’t stop reading it. I’ve read endless books on issues with polarization as well as just becoming a better thinker, and the common thread is curiosity. Most books touch on the aspect of curiosity, but it’s such a crucial aspect for living a better life that I’ve been waiting for a book to focus on it as the core concept. In this book, Guzman shares some of her personal stories of having to use these tools with her family members who have different political opinions as well as stories from the amazing organization she works for, Braver Angels. Most importantly, the reader is given tools throughout the book to foster curiosity, have better conversations, and learn to collaborate with people they might disagree with. If you’re someone who wants to start building bridges because you’re tired of all of the animosity, but you don’t know how, you need this book.
First off Monica is an amazing person. I’ve been extremely frustrated with talking to people with different political opinions for a while, so I decided to give this book another read. But upon reading it again almost a year later, I can honestly say I’ve had no luck with any of the strategies in this book. The problem is that regardless of how much you try to understand, it’s a complete waste of time if the person on the other side isn’t trying to do the same, nor are they trying to act in good faith.
Nothing against Monica and what Braver Angels is doing, but this really sees the world from this sort of naive, rose-colored lenses sort of way. What I’ve come to realize is that there’s a major sampling bias with what Braver Angels is doing. People who show up to their events want to change, learn or take some sort of action. That’s a very small portion of the population as a whole who has been divided into tribal sides and are unwilling to have any sort of good-faith conversations.
Lastly, someone needs to research and/or write a book about having these conversations online. It’s not really realistic to simply say, “Don’t have these conversations online,” where most of these conversations are taking place.
I recommend the book if (big if) you actually want to work on this stuff. For someone who wants to work on this, it’s the perfect book.
1st read:
There is not enough room in a review for me to explain how incredible this book is and why it’s one of the most important books out there. Monica was kind enough to send me an early copy, and I couldn’t stop reading it. I’ve read endless books on issues with polarization as well as just becoming a better thinker, and the common thread is curiosity. Most books touch on the aspect of curiosity, but it’s such a crucial aspect for living a better life that I’ve been waiting for a book to focus on it as the core concept. In this book, Guzman shares some of her personal stories of having to use these tools with her family members who have different political opinions as well as stories from the amazing organization she works for, Braver Angels. Most importantly, the reader is given tools throughout the book to foster curiosity, have better conversations, and learn to collaborate with people they might disagree with. If you’re someone who wants to start building bridges because you’re tired of all of the animosity, but you don’t know how, you need this book.
January 12, 2023
Not quite sure what to say on this one. The older I get, the more interested I am in hearing opposing viewpoints and seeing the goodness in all people. That said, there can be serious consequences in voting, and I’m struggling to understand how one person getting a bigger bonus in a new tax structure is apples to apples with my inability to terminate an unviable pregnancy. Tough questions not easily solved with cheery conversation.
February 27, 2023
The audiobook is eight parts in length, about 8+ hours of listening. And I got through five parts which is probably close to 60 or 70% of the book and I had to step away from it. This book came out before Roe v. Wade was overturned and the catastrophic consequences of voting Republican were not completely made manifest yet. But everybody could see where this was going. Everybody could see what was happening. Trump was packing the supreme court with republican leaning judges, packing all the courts, not just the Supreme Court. And as a result women have fewer rights today than they did before her book was published. So being curious about the other side is all well and good, but at some point we have to draw a line in the sand and say if you cross this line you are no longer someone to be respected. I don’t wanna make nice with people who do not see my full humanity, or simply can’t even acknowledge it. I am the person she writes about who digs her heels in and doesn’t give in. But I also know I’m setting the bar very low; see my full humanity. Do not create laws that force me to surrender autonomy over my body. Do not vote for people who will take control of my body away from me. When you vote against me I will no longer respect you and I won’t finish reading a book that asks me to make nice with people who hate me.
November 5, 2022
Important concepts but the writing prevented me from giving a higher score. So casual at times -almost insulting. Perhaps that is by design, to be like a conversation.
I definitely feel a shift in thinking regarding contentious conversations and feel thankful for the INTOIT way of thinking/communicating. I’d like to find a Braver Angels program in my area.
I definitely feel a shift in thinking regarding contentious conversations and feel thankful for the INTOIT way of thinking/communicating. I’d like to find a Braver Angels program in my area.
February 14, 2024
Listened to this on audiobook! I picked it up because one of my work mentor figures mentioned she was reading it.
I give this book a middle-of-the road rating, because though it emphasizes important points about making bridging conversations with people, I didn't find it super groundbreaking or find much in it that I didn't already know.
The first part of this book discussing SOS (Sorting, Othering, Siloing) could be boiled down to a principle I learned from Tyler Merritt and his book - it's that “proximity creates empathy.”
It was interesting learning about some of the sociology studies done on why humans love to perform SOS, but I learned more about the science of human behavior in a memoir like What My Bones Know, which was just so incredibly well-researched, it kind of blew my mind haha.
Here are some useful reminders this book gave me:
(1) When talking to someone, don't focus on winning, focus on understanding.
(2) Someone on the opposite side of an issue as me isn't necessarily against my most important values. They might just be prioritizing different ones.
(3) Just because someone is less skilled or practiced in articulating their arguments does not mean their opinions are less valid.
(4) Maintaining bridges is more important than crossing them. More understanding can develop over time if these bridges with other people are not burned down.
I think what this book is trying to do is tough. It presents practical tips for having curious conversations, which in turn does improve the relationships in one's life, and I think that's important. However, its language suggests really wanting to affect positive systemic change, and affecting change on these small individual/personal levels simply does not achieve that.
This is a good introduction for someone who has perhaps never considered having more curious and empathetic conversations, or stopped to remember that people on “the other side” are still people too.
For me, I've simply read books that have inspired me more. INTOITW isn't as practically useful as How to Keep House While Drowning, it's not as well-researched as What My Bones Know, and it's not as moving as I Take My Coffee Black. I've seen tons of shorter thought pieces that have basically summarized what INTOITW is trying to get at. Take that as you will. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I give this book a middle-of-the road rating, because though it emphasizes important points about making bridging conversations with people, I didn't find it super groundbreaking or find much in it that I didn't already know.
The first part of this book discussing SOS (Sorting, Othering, Siloing) could be boiled down to a principle I learned from Tyler Merritt and his book - it's that “proximity creates empathy.”
It was interesting learning about some of the sociology studies done on why humans love to perform SOS, but I learned more about the science of human behavior in a memoir like What My Bones Know, which was just so incredibly well-researched, it kind of blew my mind haha.
Here are some useful reminders this book gave me:
(1) When talking to someone, don't focus on winning, focus on understanding.
(2) Someone on the opposite side of an issue as me isn't necessarily against my most important values. They might just be prioritizing different ones.
(3) Just because someone is less skilled or practiced in articulating their arguments does not mean their opinions are less valid.
(4) Maintaining bridges is more important than crossing them. More understanding can develop over time if these bridges with other people are not burned down.
I think what this book is trying to do is tough. It presents practical tips for having curious conversations, which in turn does improve the relationships in one's life, and I think that's important. However, its language suggests really wanting to affect positive systemic change, and affecting change on these small individual/personal levels simply does not achieve that.
This is a good introduction for someone who has perhaps never considered having more curious and empathetic conversations, or stopped to remember that people on “the other side” are still people too.
For me, I've simply read books that have inspired me more. INTOITW isn't as practically useful as How to Keep House While Drowning, it's not as well-researched as What My Bones Know, and it's not as moving as I Take My Coffee Black. I've seen tons of shorter thought pieces that have basically summarized what INTOITW is trying to get at. Take that as you will. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
July 2, 2022
Monica Guzman is on a mission: to get people curious and open-minded so that we can see each other's humanity. It's a tall order in this politically divided climate, where so many are trapped us into our own silos. Monica knows this: she's a liberal Latina living in Seattle, the daughter of Mexican immigrants who voted Trump in 2020. Is it possible to remember our mutual humanity, even when there's so much pulling us apart?
Lots of fascinating ideas to consider here! The author discusses how we've become so divided (based on social psychology!) and gives practical ideas on how to reconnect with others who have different political opinions. I particularly appreciated the distinction between listening to a different pointing of view and accepting it; just because you listen with civility doesn't mean you have to let others change your mind (though hopefully you'll at least recognize how they might have come to that conclusion!). I also appreciated that the author reminds us that "the other political party" isn't without values; they just prioritize our shared values differently than we do.
I really loved that I got a chance to talk about this book with my book club friends! We had lots of INTOIT (I Never Thought Of It That Way) moments, and I came away from the conversation loving my friends more deeply (even the ones who voted differently than I did). I also tried this online, with an stranger on Twitter who seemed to want to pick a fight in the comments section, and the whole conversation diffused from angry barbs to an INTOIT moment for me -- it was like magic!
Very conversational writing throughout. My friend Lisa listened to this on audio, read by the author, and she said it was really easy to get through.
---
Some quotes:
"Every one of my now thousands of interviews was something everyone craves but rarely encounters: a conversation bent on understanding without judgment."
"When you're surrounded by people who share your gut instincts, you end up sharing your blind spots, too."
"Siloing goes too far when the stories we tell about each other are not only wrong but demeaning. When we spend so much time in spaces that intensify our basest judgments that we believe the other side is barely human at all."
"'What am I missing?' is not just any question. It's THE question. It's the doorstop to put down in the hallways of your mind, pathway after pathway, to keep open possibilities from slamming into harmful assumptions."
"Confusion is just complexity before you put curiosity to work."
"People are mysteries, not puzzles."
"A lot of discourse happens on the Internet, a nonplace that makes us into nonpeople."
"In divided times, being curious in online conversation is an act of resistance."
"Value truth more than your own opinion."
"When you feel you've won online, you've rarely changed anyone's mind. Instead, you stand as the triumphant king of a lonely lang, smoldering with the ashes of people you've decimated with your words who are less likely than ever to ever listen to your side again." -- Elizabeth G Saunders
"When we're divded, politics feels like it's exclusively about stopping the other side. But at its core, politics is about how we coexist wisely, how we create and recreate societies that support us in all our different priorities and preferences."
"Curiosity requires uncertainty and uncertainty requires flexibility."
"Your opinion is not a final answer. It's a snapshot of where your mind is right now. It's not something you have to defend. It's not even something you have to have at all."
"The most important thing about bridges is not to cross them but to keep them."
"Listening is showing people they matter. And when you stay long enough to hear people all the way through on something they care about, you show them they matter loads."
Lots of fascinating ideas to consider here! The author discusses how we've become so divided (based on social psychology!) and gives practical ideas on how to reconnect with others who have different political opinions. I particularly appreciated the distinction between listening to a different pointing of view and accepting it; just because you listen with civility doesn't mean you have to let others change your mind (though hopefully you'll at least recognize how they might have come to that conclusion!). I also appreciated that the author reminds us that "the other political party" isn't without values; they just prioritize our shared values differently than we do.
I really loved that I got a chance to talk about this book with my book club friends! We had lots of INTOIT (I Never Thought Of It That Way) moments, and I came away from the conversation loving my friends more deeply (even the ones who voted differently than I did). I also tried this online, with an stranger on Twitter who seemed to want to pick a fight in the comments section, and the whole conversation diffused from angry barbs to an INTOIT moment for me -- it was like magic!
Very conversational writing throughout. My friend Lisa listened to this on audio, read by the author, and she said it was really easy to get through.
---
Some quotes:
"Every one of my now thousands of interviews was something everyone craves but rarely encounters: a conversation bent on understanding without judgment."
"When you're surrounded by people who share your gut instincts, you end up sharing your blind spots, too."
"Siloing goes too far when the stories we tell about each other are not only wrong but demeaning. When we spend so much time in spaces that intensify our basest judgments that we believe the other side is barely human at all."
"'What am I missing?' is not just any question. It's THE question. It's the doorstop to put down in the hallways of your mind, pathway after pathway, to keep open possibilities from slamming into harmful assumptions."
"Confusion is just complexity before you put curiosity to work."
"People are mysteries, not puzzles."
"A lot of discourse happens on the Internet, a nonplace that makes us into nonpeople."
"In divided times, being curious in online conversation is an act of resistance."
"Value truth more than your own opinion."
"When you feel you've won online, you've rarely changed anyone's mind. Instead, you stand as the triumphant king of a lonely lang, smoldering with the ashes of people you've decimated with your words who are less likely than ever to ever listen to your side again." -- Elizabeth G Saunders
"When we're divded, politics feels like it's exclusively about stopping the other side. But at its core, politics is about how we coexist wisely, how we create and recreate societies that support us in all our different priorities and preferences."
"Curiosity requires uncertainty and uncertainty requires flexibility."
"Your opinion is not a final answer. It's a snapshot of where your mind is right now. It's not something you have to defend. It's not even something you have to have at all."
"The most important thing about bridges is not to cross them but to keep them."
"Listening is showing people they matter. And when you stay long enough to hear people all the way through on something they care about, you show them they matter loads."
June 16, 2022
I wrote an extensive review of this book, and then my internet died when it was uploading, and Goodreads only saved part of the review. The truncated review is below. I may finish it later when COVID and internet troubles don't have the better of me. Suffice it to say that I found the book useful and may be purchasing a copy to remind myself of its practical advice. I fall into too many of the pitfalls described in the book.
I read about this book in two different NY Times articles, yet there wasn't a single copy in my two-county library system that serves half a million people! I requested one of the libraries to purchase, and now there is a waiting list for it, so I did my good deed while I had COVID and read through it quickly so it could get to others on the list.
The author writes in a down-to-earth easily understandable way on how to talk with each other across divides. Her approach centers on PEOPLE not ideas or philosophies. I especially enjoyed the discussion of how the left-leaning author and her right-leaning parents talk. Their love for each other shone through in this book and was a nice change from what I have often been hearing lately - people cutting off all contact with relatives because of their political leanings. I also appreciated the discussion about how people assume certain things about her parents, Mexican immigrants, that are not true. If only the Democratic party would do less of this, but that is a diatribe for another day.
I read this book and caught myself being guilty of many of the pitfalls she outlines, especially the othering of people who think differently than I do. She explains well how our tendency to Sort, Other, and Silo can keep us from reaching compromises that benefit all. But she acknowledges that it is natural to sort, other, and silo. It is partly a survival mechanism, and the trick is to overcome this when the conditions are right.
I read about this book in two different NY Times articles, yet there wasn't a single copy in my two-county library system that serves half a million people! I requested one of the libraries to purchase, and now there is a waiting list for it, so I did my good deed while I had COVID and read through it quickly so it could get to others on the list.
The author writes in a down-to-earth easily understandable way on how to talk with each other across divides. Her approach centers on PEOPLE not ideas or philosophies. I especially enjoyed the discussion of how the left-leaning author and her right-leaning parents talk. Their love for each other shone through in this book and was a nice change from what I have often been hearing lately - people cutting off all contact with relatives because of their political leanings. I also appreciated the discussion about how people assume certain things about her parents, Mexican immigrants, that are not true. If only the Democratic party would do less of this, but that is a diatribe for another day.
I read this book and caught myself being guilty of many of the pitfalls she outlines, especially the othering of people who think differently than I do. She explains well how our tendency to Sort, Other, and Silo can keep us from reaching compromises that benefit all. But she acknowledges that it is natural to sort, other, and silo. It is partly a survival mechanism, and the trick is to overcome this when the conditions are right.
February 18, 2022
I Never Thought if it That Way is an inspiring call to action for civility when it seems so much easier to dismiss or demonize those who think differently than us. Guzmán goes deep into how to open your mind, be curious, and have meaningful conversations that otherwise may be contentious. A must read.
November 8, 2021
I loved this book because I feel like I am at the point in my life where I keep learning new things by asking myself "what am I missing?" and drawing from her journalism background, Monica shares insights on how to have tough conversations, or more so how to make some headway in a deeply divided situation.
In the blurb the book promises that in reading it you’ll learn:
• How to ask what you really want to know (even if you’re afraid to)
• How to grow smarter from even the most tense interactions, online or off
• How to cross boundaries and find common ground—with anyone
Above all, I feel like this is good for a general audience who have the patience to get through each chapter- to build upon each tenet as she shares in the book, what's great is that she delves into the conversations we have online and how a tweet or comment can trigger such furious remarks and cause so much division.
It's an interesting book, a challenging one when it comes to perspective and the stories we tell ourselves.
Thanks Netgalley for the eARC
In the blurb the book promises that in reading it you’ll learn:
• How to ask what you really want to know (even if you’re afraid to)
• How to grow smarter from even the most tense interactions, online or off
• How to cross boundaries and find common ground—with anyone
Above all, I feel like this is good for a general audience who have the patience to get through each chapter- to build upon each tenet as she shares in the book, what's great is that she delves into the conversations we have online and how a tweet or comment can trigger such furious remarks and cause so much division.
It's an interesting book, a challenging one when it comes to perspective and the stories we tell ourselves.
Thanks Netgalley for the eARC
September 23, 2023
Read for work professional development book club. We’ll researched and good reminders about how holding our shared humanity higher than our divided opinions makes true conversation easier. Nothing revolutionary here but we could all use these reminders.
November 4, 2022
"What if I told you that the left wing and the right wing belong to the same bird?" origin unknown.
The 21st century so far has become known as the age of polarization, when people clung more rigidly to identities than ever before, sorting themselves into churches, workplaces, neighborhoods, and media zones based on ideological purity. Whether one is liberal or conservative has become something of a "mega-identity", that greatly influences almost all other choices. How can a society continue to function when it divides into two camps, each one convinced that the the opposite camp is literally evil?
Monica Guzman tackles this thorny problem in her new book, I Never Thought of It That Way. The author is a journalist from Seattle who has made it her life's work to bridge the divide between political camps, and her organization, Braver Angels, is at the forefront of this attempt. While she admits to being a liberal herself, her two parents, both immigrants from Mexico, are Trump voters and hard-line conservatives. Much of this book comes from her personal experience trying to dialogue with her family, and a lot of it applies to difficult conversations everywhere- not necessarily just about politics.
The author sees three stages of polarization- sorting into like-minded people, othering people who are not like-minded into something bad and inferior, and siloing, where one's entire world revolves around a carefully cultivated reality. These three factors have made communication between the two polar opposites difficult if not impossible, as we've seen. In just the last forty years America has transformed from a land with about 10% of its counties in "landslide" territory where only one party dominates, to a place where over half of them do. And the few parts of the country that are equally divided like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania have devolved into war zones politically.
Guzman talks about an experiment that was done near Seattle where groups of liberals traveled to rural Oregon to have a dialogue with nearby conservatives. I've read about other attempts like this, and they can be inspiring, but the draw of feeling superior is a hard one to get over, for both sides. She talks about several moments during that dialogue where her mind was "blown" by ideas she'd never considered before. That's where the title of the book comes in- I Never Thought Of It That Way, or INTOIT as she calls it. Getting to that point, and being open to it, is the tricky part.
The book is full of many helpful tips on how to build what she calls bridging conversations. Trying to convince someone that you're 100% right and they're 100% wrong rarely works, even if it's true. Rather than going into battle to defeat an opponent, why not make political discussions an exercise in intellectual curiosity? How did they come to believe what they believe? Don't fall for easy assumptions like they're stupid, evil, or misled. Everybody has a story and a reason, and only once you see that story can you begin to connect and possibly persuade. In order to build a safe space for real bridging, the conversation needs to be private- meaning not on social media or in front of groups. Those conversations are all about scoring points for your side and rarely go anywhere. They need to have all people fully engaged (not multitasking), and they need to look for balance that respects all participants.
We are all shaped by our experiences. Before judging each other, it's best to look at how someone's unique experiences may have shaped their viewpoints. A liberal who is mugged may decide to become a conservative based on their experience with the criminal justice system. Likewise, a conservative who is laid off may suddenly grow to appreciate the social safety net that keeps their family from starving and grow in compassion. Experiences trump ideology, but once people move within a hardened silo, ideology becomes unquestioned dogma and even experiences have trouble breaking through.
Political views are shaped by what we value most. Those who value tradition, power, and security over everything else gravitate to conservatism. Those who value universalism, creativity, and empathy lean into liberalism. There are always trade-offs- more security means less creativity, and vice versa. We all choose how to stack our values in order of importance, and the trade-offs can get tricky. Our values can vary according to our environment and experiences, but that's always a good place to start in a difficult conversation- "What do you value most, and why?" When we share our own story of how we found our values, that makes more of an impact than charts or statistics.
Bridging conversations have to be made in good faith- no name calling or gotcha questions. Arguments have to be based in some kind of reality and open to challenge, The question that often comes up in this book is "What could I be missing?" None of us can see the entire picture, so we need to be always on the lookout for gaps in our experience that new viewpoints can enlighten us. The problem for many comes with the Dunning-Kruger effect, where a little bit of knowledge produces a great deal of certainty, even though the person knows deep down that the great body of knowledge they aren't looking at would force them to reconsider everything. Often we don't know what we don't know.
The two questions that most got me thinking were:
- Are you willing to believe that you are wrong about something?
- What do you value more- the truth, or your beliefs?
Are we willing to follow despots, disown family members, or stop doing business with companies based on how much they support or threaten our faulty beliefs? None of us has a monopoly on truth, though you'd never guess it reading comments on social media.
Our beliefs form a comfortable structure around which we can make sense of all of the confusing inputs we see every day. To get stronger and have a clearer picture of the truth, we need to loosen that structure just enough to let some discomfort in. A little bit of chaos, but not too much, forces us to ask the question of this book- why have I never thought of it that way before? We're all here to learn, not to bludgeon our fellow humans with our obvious intelligence and righteousness. This book goes beyond the red/blue divide and has valuable insights on communication in general. I recommend it to anybody trying to raise the bar of communication in a very closed-off world.
August 4, 2022
An interesting combination of things - a quick, fun read that's directly confronting for those of us who are drifting along happily, angry with our neighbors. It's easy to come up with objections to the central thesis as you're reading - which is basically that you should treat your neighbors with respect even if you think their beliefs are terrible - but it's hard to deny in the end that what the author is arguing for is one of the basic building blocks of any functioning society. It's a book that identifies a significant problem (political and social division breaking down relationships at a family/friend level) and provides a lot of tools to address it - if not at the level of government policy, at least in your own personal relationships. Very much worth a read for anyone hoping to maintain their sanity and humanity in the United States. Loved it.
July 15, 2022
An excellent read for those longing to be bridge builders. For those who want to obliterate the us vs. them mentality.
The author asks, "What am I missing?" And invites readers to make this a regular habit as well.
The author asks, "What am I missing?" And invites readers to make this a regular habit as well.
April 14, 2023
You can tell that Guzmán has managed what feels impossible--clarity about what she believes held in equal importance with the life experiences and perspectives of others. Such a great guide to having meaningful, honest conversations about the most polarizing topics.
August 14, 2022
Reading this made me positively look forward to the next time I talk with someone who disagrees with me about something fundamental, not because I want to argue but because I want to learn.
June 3, 2023
Too reliant on lists and acronyms, too repetitive, and often naive. If two people’s politics differ substantially, they tend to have very different moral worldviews. If you believe vaccines are poison, queer folks shouldn’t exist, and Trump is America’s savior, I don’t feel a strong urge to hear your “why”s in hopes of experiencing an “INTOIT” moment. One reviewer called the author’s tone (as the reader for the audiobook) “relentlessly cheerful,” and I must admit, I agree. She’s closer to the political center than I am, so maybe that’s why her whole philosophy works better for her than for me.
April 7, 2024
If you feel called to disarming / depolarizing political conversations, this is a must! The creativity it takes to step into tense subject matter and walk away showing respect and dignity to others is a great feat.
January 2, 2023
I Never Thought of It That Way is a reread, read again because I felt like the information in it was so important that I wanted to digest it again more slowly than I did the first round.
It's a great book that really elucidates things I've figured out by experience: the importance of having a wide range of voices, the importance of asking questions and actually listening... But beyond that, her book gives a bunch of very practical tips and strategies for having important conversations across disagreement, especially in the current political climate.
That said, I wish this book had existed and I'd read it, maybe as early as 2012, because I've made (and will continue to make!) mistakes in how I communicate to people whose values are different than mine. If you have family or dear friends whose stances on vaccination or racial injustice or Hillary's emails have strained your relationship, I'd definitely recommend this one. But it's a great read, as well, if you've managed to ensconce yourself into a bubble that hasn't resulted in that experience - so you can get out of it, and so you can be equipped before a crucial conversation happens and you make the same mistakes I've made!!
It's a great book that really elucidates things I've figured out by experience: the importance of having a wide range of voices, the importance of asking questions and actually listening... But beyond that, her book gives a bunch of very practical tips and strategies for having important conversations across disagreement, especially in the current political climate.
That said, I wish this book had existed and I'd read it, maybe as early as 2012, because I've made (and will continue to make!) mistakes in how I communicate to people whose values are different than mine. If you have family or dear friends whose stances on vaccination or racial injustice or Hillary's emails have strained your relationship, I'd definitely recommend this one. But it's a great read, as well, if you've managed to ensconce yourself into a bubble that hasn't resulted in that experience - so you can get out of it, and so you can be equipped before a crucial conversation happens and you make the same mistakes I've made!!
June 9, 2022
This is a very important book for the times we are living in. The partisanship, the disinformation, the outright meanness of some people; it seems like we cannot catch a break and just have civil conversations and discussions. How are we to ever come to a thoughtful, well thought out and reasoned opinion?
Fortunately, the author recognizes the problem and explains how to navigate the stormy waters and become a more reasonable, informed citizen.
Perhaps if I bought this for all of my relatives, and could get them to read it, our next family gathering would be less contentious and argumentative, like they were 20 years ago!
Fortunately, the author recognizes the problem and explains how to navigate the stormy waters and become a more reasonable, informed citizen.
Perhaps if I bought this for all of my relatives, and could get them to read it, our next family gathering would be less contentious and argumentative, like they were 20 years ago!
April 5, 2024
Ever-blooming optimism is the overall theme of this book, which seeks to build a sturdy bridge of respectful dialogue between the widening chasm of political partisanship in the U.S.
Nearly all politically-aware adults have placed themselves into “silos,” the author posits, with likeminded acquaintances, news sources, entertainment, and sometimes even geographical regions.
The farther away we distance ourselves from “the other,” the more threatening and remote they seem. (I’m a left-wing person in a deep red state, so I often feel out of my silo. I’m also an introvert who mercifully tends to avoid in-depth conversations on any controversial topic with the majority of people. )
A person on one side may care intensely about something the other doesn't even realize exists. In other cases, different sides may be looking at completely different aspects of the same issue. I thought the book excelled when pointing this out.
I’m someone with a longstanding interest in animal protection (and we're not just talking dogs and cats, but farm animals and wildlife, too), a topic that tends to stir big emotions and defensiveness in conservatives and liberals in equal measure. Regarding this cause, I favor voices that engage in negotiation and cross-communication, as it's usually the supposed opposition that can actually do something concrete to reduce animal suffering (see Grilled: Turning Adversaries into Allies to Change the Chicken Industry). If inroads aren't made, policies won’t change and neither will the suffering.
When the book modelled a conversation in which people on one side of an issue asked those on the other to elaborate and share personal experiences that brought them to that conclusion, I thought that was pretty refreshing. Same when it related how an individual respectfully bowed out off a conversation that was going off the rails—and ended up influencing the other members of the group to rein themselves in.
At the same time, it is true that political policies have real-world effects—and some are very serious and have terrible consequences, often for those who are the most vulnerable. I don’t think we should get to the point where we ignore or suppress things that we care about, or subject ourselves to views that make us feel unsafe in the name of compromise and harmony. It’s a fine line to walk, and it’s not always simple.
Nearly all politically-aware adults have placed themselves into “silos,” the author posits, with likeminded acquaintances, news sources, entertainment, and sometimes even geographical regions.
The farther away we distance ourselves from “the other,” the more threatening and remote they seem. (I’m a left-wing person in a deep red state, so I often feel out of my silo. I’m also an introvert who mercifully tends to avoid in-depth conversations on any controversial topic with the majority of people. )
A person on one side may care intensely about something the other doesn't even realize exists. In other cases, different sides may be looking at completely different aspects of the same issue. I thought the book excelled when pointing this out.
I’m someone with a longstanding interest in animal protection (and we're not just talking dogs and cats, but farm animals and wildlife, too), a topic that tends to stir big emotions and defensiveness in conservatives and liberals in equal measure. Regarding this cause, I favor voices that engage in negotiation and cross-communication, as it's usually the supposed opposition that can actually do something concrete to reduce animal suffering (see Grilled: Turning Adversaries into Allies to Change the Chicken Industry). If inroads aren't made, policies won’t change and neither will the suffering.
When the book modelled a conversation in which people on one side of an issue asked those on the other to elaborate and share personal experiences that brought them to that conclusion, I thought that was pretty refreshing. Same when it related how an individual respectfully bowed out off a conversation that was going off the rails—and ended up influencing the other members of the group to rein themselves in.
At the same time, it is true that political policies have real-world effects—and some are very serious and have terrible consequences, often for those who are the most vulnerable. I don’t think we should get to the point where we ignore or suppress things that we care about, or subject ourselves to views that make us feel unsafe in the name of compromise and harmony. It’s a fine line to walk, and it’s not always simple.
October 3, 2022
"People aren't puzzles; they're mysteries."
Guzman uses this saying to drive her point home that people aren't always going to fit together perfectly. Instead of there being a true solution, there are sometimes clues and things that don't necessarily add up. Puzzles are neat. Mysteries aren't. The same goes with people: we are messy, opinionated, and prideful. So when it comes to politics, shouldn't we give each other some grace?
Many would say no. Guzman would absolutely say yes. We never truly know how or why a person votes the way they do, or which politicians they admire or detest. There's too many facets involved in interpersonal relationships and many more involved in policy-making. As the daughter of Mexican immigrants who voted for Trump, she opens her book with a question rather than an accusation. What follows makes all the difference.
Her book is an appeal to common sense rather than vitriol. She argues that asking questions, interacting with one another, and learning to respect boundaries (personally and on social media) can help us save each other from each other. She argues that politics don't always need to be about arguments or the better man. Sometimes, politics and how we discuss it needs to come from a place of empathy. What is good for one may not be good for another--and how do we balance this when everything is interconnected?
Monica Guzman writes a compelling and empathetic book. IMHO, this should be required reading for all adults.
Guzman uses this saying to drive her point home that people aren't always going to fit together perfectly. Instead of there being a true solution, there are sometimes clues and things that don't necessarily add up. Puzzles are neat. Mysteries aren't. The same goes with people: we are messy, opinionated, and prideful. So when it comes to politics, shouldn't we give each other some grace?
Many would say no. Guzman would absolutely say yes. We never truly know how or why a person votes the way they do, or which politicians they admire or detest. There's too many facets involved in interpersonal relationships and many more involved in policy-making. As the daughter of Mexican immigrants who voted for Trump, she opens her book with a question rather than an accusation. What follows makes all the difference.
Her book is an appeal to common sense rather than vitriol. She argues that asking questions, interacting with one another, and learning to respect boundaries (personally and on social media) can help us save each other from each other. She argues that politics don't always need to be about arguments or the better man. Sometimes, politics and how we discuss it needs to come from a place of empathy. What is good for one may not be good for another--and how do we balance this when everything is interconnected?
Monica Guzman writes a compelling and empathetic book. IMHO, this should be required reading for all adults.
June 16, 2023
The thing I most enjoyed about this book was its delivery of one very important message, which I would summarize this way: In an extremely divided time, do not waste your energy arguing about politics. However, it's still worthwhile to discuss politics with those who have different political views. In fact, one of the best things you can do is to reach out to someone who disagrees with you, and earnestly try to build bridges and fill the gaps in your understanding.
Arguing with someone over their deeply-held beliefs is really a no-win situation. Even if you "win" the argument, the best you'll get is a brief moment of satisfaction (something the author describes as a "dopamine lollipop"). At the same time, you will likely leave the other participant feeling wounded and even more entrenched in their beliefs than before. On the other hand, when you work on building bridges of understanding, you give yourself the opportunity to come away wiser and improve relationships.
Apart from that message, I would say that I enjoyed the book, but that's probably as far as my praise will go. One personal complaint relates to the author's tone. The author uses a very casual, even playful tone, that at times felt like an impediment to taking her words too seriously. I'll admit that this is a personal preference and others might feel differently. Finally, a large portion of this book consisted of a long list of tips for having productive bridging conversations. A worthy enough idea, but I know that I'm never going to have the presence of mind to employ these tips in the moments when such conversations spring up.
All in all, a worthwhile read, but not a captivating one.
Arguing with someone over their deeply-held beliefs is really a no-win situation. Even if you "win" the argument, the best you'll get is a brief moment of satisfaction (something the author describes as a "dopamine lollipop"). At the same time, you will likely leave the other participant feeling wounded and even more entrenched in their beliefs than before. On the other hand, when you work on building bridges of understanding, you give yourself the opportunity to come away wiser and improve relationships.
Apart from that message, I would say that I enjoyed the book, but that's probably as far as my praise will go. One personal complaint relates to the author's tone. The author uses a very casual, even playful tone, that at times felt like an impediment to taking her words too seriously. I'll admit that this is a personal preference and others might feel differently. Finally, a large portion of this book consisted of a long list of tips for having productive bridging conversations. A worthy enough idea, but I know that I'm never going to have the presence of mind to employ these tips in the moments when such conversations spring up.
All in all, a worthwhile read, but not a captivating one.
December 26, 2023
This was a good primer on having meaningful conversations with those who don't share your same views. I really liked the structure and background Guzman presents regarding building bridges through communication.
Overall, the tone is a bit rosy and optimistic, which I don't think is always the most realistic. It might be triggering for some to pursue conversations with others who have a problem with their core identity. This book is aimed at people who want to have those conversations and make connections.
The author is liberal, but presents left and right leaning perspectives and engagement. I did appreciate the sections on how to converse in a curious way and considering why we hold the specific beliefs we do. Structured suggestions and questions are provided, making the process more straightforward. This is a helpful guide to connection and conversation.
Thank you to the publisher for providing this ebook. All thoughts are my own.
Overall, the tone is a bit rosy and optimistic, which I don't think is always the most realistic. It might be triggering for some to pursue conversations with others who have a problem with their core identity. This book is aimed at people who want to have those conversations and make connections.
The author is liberal, but presents left and right leaning perspectives and engagement. I did appreciate the sections on how to converse in a curious way and considering why we hold the specific beliefs we do. Structured suggestions and questions are provided, making the process more straightforward. This is a helpful guide to connection and conversation.
Thank you to the publisher for providing this ebook. All thoughts are my own.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 316 reviews