我们全新的系列issue观点来啦。在每期Issue观点中，我们都会遴选与GRE issue相关话题的国外优质文章，通过阅读这些文章，帮助大家塑造形成issue中的观点和立场。

　　本期话题

　　We can learn much more from people whose views we share than from people whose views contradict our own.

　　Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.

　　本期遴选文章

　　第一篇 'Escape The Bubble' And Learn From Opposing Views

　　Most of us cling to our personal opinions like Velcro. In fact, we prefer reinforcement from like-minded friends and commentators.

　　The problem with that kind of echo chamber is that we miss the opportunity to learn. I’m not suggesting that we abandon our values or opinions. What I’m saying is that opposing views can be surprisingly informative. And they can enrich our own understanding of issues that are important to us.

　　That’s a primary thesis of Love Your Enemies: How Decent People Can Save America from the Culture of Contempt, a terrific book by Arthur Brooks, president of the American Enterprise Institute.

　　In previous parts of this conversation, Brooks said our society doesn’t necessarily need less disagreement, we just need better disagreement. Here he offers productive skills we can adopt from resources as disparate as Nelson Mandela and a marriage counselor.

　　Rodger Dean Duncan: “Escape the bubble” is something you recommend. Please explain, and tell us about the benefits of that.

　　Arthur Brooks: Many of us live in intellectual silos, “friending” and following only the people and sources we already agree with. While it’s comforting to hear that you’re right all of the time, it skews our perspectives in a dangerous way, first by keeping our own ideas safe from any challenge and second by allowing perceptions of our political opponents to be shaped by caricatures of the people with whom we disagree, not the people themselves. In this way, we live in a dangerous unreality, which is why escaping the bubble is so important.

　　What does escaping the bubble look like? If you read the New York Times, pick up the Wall Street Journal’s op-ed page every now and then. If you listen only to conservative talk radio, try NPR’s Morning Edition once a week. Or better yet, befriend someone who doesn’t vote like you. When we escape the bubble, it humanizes those we would otherwise view and treat with contempt.

　　Duncan: In terms of loving our enemies, what can we learn from Nelson Mandela?

　　Brooks: The key lesson to learn from Mandela, and world-historical leaders like him, is that the best long-term strategy for victory is love.

　　To be clear, love in this context is not a mushy and temporal sentiment, but something tough and bracing. To truly love others is to embody a radical commitment to the good of all people, even those who treat you with contempt and abuse. Mandela was beaten, imprisoned, and assigned to forced labor for years, but he possessed the fortitude to love and even befriend his captors. Love does not mean apathy or inaction.

　　Mandela stood unwaveringly against the evils of apartheid. But as a leader, he understood that to respond in kind to those who hated him would only continue a vicious cycle of contempt. Our leaders would benefit greatly from emulating his example rather than continuing to wage a highly destructive ideological holy war.

　　Duncan: You equate thoughtful listening with missionary work. How can that analogy help someone exchange contempt for respect and even appreciation and love?

　　Brooks: When it comes to serious political disagreements, I’ll often ask people what their goal is with respect to those on the other side of an issue. Do you want to exile them? Jail them? Silence them? Almost everyone says, “No, of course not!” Most people say they just want their ideological opponents to think and behave differently—the goal of many missionaries.

　　So how do you win people over? Not by pouring scorn on those who think differently, but by expressing your own values with love and kindness. This is what missionaries do, and it will make you a magnetic force for your side of an argument. So in addition to being the morally right thing to do, listening and responding in a spirit of love ends up being the most pragmatic way to bring people to your side.

　　source：

　　https://www.forbes.com/sites/rodgerdeanduncan/2019/07/09/escape-the-bubble-and-learn-from-opposing-views/#c02c318448c2

　　第二篇

　　Why it's a good idea to listen to opposing views.

　　To be unbiased means to show no prejudice for or against something; to be impartial. So, I guess let’s talk about why it’s so hard to be unbiased.

　　There’s a certain pride inside all of us. If you’re thinking, “yeah but I’m really not prideful in any way”, then think about something you’re good at. Once you have that, imagine someone critiquing and criticizing it.

　　How do you feel now? You might feel like you have a chip on your shoulder or a reason to prove somebody wrong. That’s your pride swelling. There’s of course, as with anything, good and bad to your pride swelling.

　　But what gives us that feeling? Why am I so hung up on proving to you that a Ford is just a better-oiled machine than a Chevy, or vice versa? Why does Walmart suck? Does anyone even know?

　　I remember a fellow student telling me a while back that Walmart put food on the table when she was growing up. Her mom worked there and the steady paycheck took care of them. So, without listening to her story, would I have been able to see the good?

　　Challenging a bias is one of the most frustrating experiences you will endure. I try to do it often. There is nothing quite like the final resolve after the initial internal storm of thought and feelings. The reason I try to do it often is that I believe it’s difficult to gain wisdom and growth as a person if you just believe the way you do without questioning how you came to that belief.

　　Not to mention, without giving consideration to the opposing side of said belief. If someone told you a story about a homeless guy that wasn’t really homeless, but he just held a cardboard sign at a busy corner because he knew he’d get a lot of random cash, you probably wouldn’t feel great about volunteering your time to the homeless population.

　　It might reinforce your belief that they’re just “beggars” hoping to score some drugs with fast cash. On the contrary, if someone told you a story of a homeless man that had a bachelor’s degree but couldn’t get a job and didn’t have a family to support him, so now he’s on the street, you may be a bit more inclined to volunteer some of your time to help the population.

　　Either way, to be sold entirely on one position or the other would be a little irresponsible. Frankly, you’d be limiting yourself.

　　Back to the Chevy and Ford example…

　　Let’s just pretend for a second that you think Chevy is better than Ford because that’s what your best friend thinks. You trust your best friend. You know that he or she has ample knowledge of the way the components are manufactured and put together.

　　Without researching how the vehicle is made, this would mean that any conversation or argument you’ve had with a wicked Ford supporter is based on your belief in the Chevy product because your best friend likes it.

　　Wouldn’t it be great if we could just win arguments like that? “Oh yeah, well you’re wrong, because Timmy likes it”, “Wait, what? Timmy likes Chevy? Ugh, man… can’t believe I’ve been so wrong this whole time”. I’m using an overly simplified example but again, it’s to support my belief that you have to do some research and know why you actually believe what you do for it to even hold water.

　　Do you want to believe in something and perhaps stand for something that you haven’t solidified soundly in your own mind? What if someone discredited Timmy by simply stating that he picks his nose? “Oh no, internal conflict… I hate nose-pickers! But Timmy likes Chevy! I’m not sure I can like Chevy anymore”.

　　Cognitive dissonance is a fascinating thing. We tend to flock toward our own opinions and beliefs. We like to only listen to what leaders and peers have to say in support of those areas because otherwise, we’ll be uncomfortable.

　　The problem is, once someone throws in there that Timmy picks his nose, we have to decide if that character flaw is going to sway us in another direction or if we can make the exception that although Timmy picks his nose, he still knows a lot about Chevy.

　　You have to find a way to identify a truth in your heart while still having the ability to be tolerant of the truth in an opposing viewpoint.

　　You won’t be able to function in a relationship with others if you can’t. I’ve heard it said quite interestingly in a college class I attended a long time ago. The professor pointed to the white wall in the room and he said, “This wall is green. It is. This is a green wall. I know you think it’s white, but it’s not”, and he began shouting, “This wall is green!”.

　　He actually did it for a while and it was kind of intense. But he got his point across. I know that the wall was white, but in the same way the wall was white to me, it was absolutely the greenest green to him.

　　To be intolerant of another viewpoint provides a huge disadvantage when it comes to being able to have any critical conversation. Have fun with the surface level he-said-she-said gossip, because that’s about the extent of what your interactions will be diminished to if you choose to limit yourself to intolerance.

　　The moment you become convinced that you’ve learned it all, is the moment you lose yourself to your pride. You’ve now created a wall that limits your potential to understand another viewpoint.

　　Do yourself a big favor. The next time you recognize a large bias that you possess, research something in support of the opposing view. It might take you a few tries to actually do it. It might hurt a little and make you cringe. But if you can just open your mind to it and be tolerant of the intolerance, you may find the growth you’re looking for.

（责任编辑：admin）

姓 名：

电 话：

我接受并同意《用户服务条款》和《隐私权相关政策》

免费预约