A lot of good sense talked at this one, about how to change people's minds on social (justice) issues. I got quite a bit out of it.
No silver bullets and much acknowledgement of such bullets' non-existence, and a useful - and impressive - balance between pointing out things that are common-places, such as:
building on them with many nuggets of handy techniques, nuances and distinctions, e.g.:
Panelists Adolfo Aranjuez, Ruby Hamad and Jane Gilmore, with active chairing by Roselina Press.
No silver bullets and much acknowledgement of such bullets' non-existence, and a useful - and impressive - balance between pointing out things that are common-places, such as:
- telling stories,
- thinking about your audience,
- putting arguments in the language of those you're trying to persuade (e.g. by reference to religious tenets and frameworks),
- seeking to generate empathy,
- not relying on facts and data,
- being aware of language (e.g. 'people seeking asylum' rather than 'asylum seekers' ), and
- coming at things from different perspectives, and
building on them with many nuggets of handy techniques, nuances and distinctions, e.g.:
- 'sneaky subversion',
- being thoughtful about when to alienate and aware that polarisation is something else again,
- avoiding the trap of putting people into a position where they are the enemy if they don't agree with every single aspect of one's own argument,
- accepting that it will never be possible to convince everyone, and
- the extent of individual responsibility to understand and seek to change others' minds.
Panelists Adolfo Aranjuez, Ruby Hamad and Jane Gilmore, with active chairing by Roselina Press.
