On the nature of disagreement!

Over the years I have been involved in many arguments, debates and disagreements on political, social and spiritual issues. Strongly held views and heated rhetoric, each side trying to demonstrate both the rightness of their analysis and recommendations and the wrongness of the alternatives. Sometimes the disagreement boils down to definitional differences and this Blog will try and be extremely strict on defining precisely what is meant by any controversial word or concept.

By far the most common form of disagreement in my view comes when protagonists take what is a partially true and valid, though limited,  perspective on an issue as the whole objective truth about that issue. The discussion then becomes intractable as there, by definition, can’t be two objective truths about something. Most left wing vs right wing political arguments are of this form.

The solution to such debates is to recognize the validity of both perspectives and seek a wider context or synthesis that honours the partial truth of both. In other words we must find a wider perspective that transcends and includes the two partial perspectives that appear to be in conflict.

In Integral theory this ‘transcend and include’ concept is absolutely crucial and is at the heart of building a more inclusive worldview.