Becoming Human Tyler Kleeberger

This is how the conflict resolution technique called mapmaking works.
If you want to stop arguing, you have to be honest about your finite, limited perspective. Since neither person in the conflict is working with all the information, constructive possibilities remain.
Then, there are four concepts and two ground rules: Empathy, humanization, trust and vulnerability, and invitation.
Collaboration through asking questions is the result.
Here's a snippet:It is my belief that any addition that we can mutually disclose to each other’s limited perspectives is not only worth the endeavor, it is more promising and constructive than us, at best, agreeing to disagree, and, at worst, wielding verbal swords in a battle that is destined for unnecessary animosity.

Stop arguing. Do this instead! If you don't know everything, maybe your conflicts and disagreements could be opportunities to see the world more than you currently do. Mapmaking is a conflict resolution technique based on the collaborative approach. In this episode, we explore how mapmaking works and what makes it different from arguing.
Episode Overview:
"Mending Wall" by Robert Frost
Arguments in our culture
What mapmaking isn't (competition)
What mapmaking is (collaboration)
Why we resort to competition
Unity in diversity

Our perspectives are limited and finite; we can't know everything, we aren't working with all the information, and we desire certainty even though it is quite impossible. But why does this cause problems?
When we are certain about our perspective, we act like our perceptions aren't perception; and when perception is reality, we can only argue and defend.
What's a better solution to our lack of certainty?

What is a perspective and how does it work? This is a topic that deals with everyone and it's one of the biggest causes of conflict.
You have a lens of the world that shapes your experience and understanding.
We cover epistemology, the nature of perspective, and the phenomenology of egocentric perspectives. You know things with your mind (consciousness, logic, rationalism) and your experience (sense observation, empiricism). Both are finite and limited.
You can't see and know everything, as a result.

We put a lot of focus on the content of our disagreements; we don't even seem to consider what causes us to have such different perspectives in the first place.
This episode covers the methods we use to approach issues that act as our interpretive lens for our arguments:
Rule Based
Greatest Good
Teleological
Based on Lawerence Kohlberg's "Methods of Moral Reasoning" and the social ethics of Deontology, Consequentialism, Utilitarianism, and Teleology, we see what causes us to have such divergent thoughts and irreconcilable differences.

We have conflicts and disagreements, but do we know why we have them? Do we know why they often fail to be productive?
This episode covers the categories that contain our disagreements through six argumentative approaches: Pseudo, Fact, Value, Ego, and Meta.
If we are going to have better arguments, we need to know what kind of arguments we are having.