What do you think?
Rate this book
I Never Thought of It That Way: How to Have Fearlessly Curious Conversations in Dangerously Divided Times
"I can see this book helping estranged parties who are equally invested in bridging a gap—it could be assigned reading for fractured families aspiring to a harmonious Thanksgiving dinner." —New York Times
"Like all skills, these techniques take practice. But anyone who sincerely wants to bridge the gaps in understanding will appreciate this book. Guzmán is emphatic about making an effort to work on difficult conversations." —Manhattan Book Review
We think we have the answers, but we need to be asking a lot more questions. 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 built-in curiosity.
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 one another is hurting our relationships and our society. 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 certainty that surround us to finally do what only seems impossible: understand and even learn from people in your life whose whole worldview is different from or even opposed to yours.
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 not a fan of 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.
"Like all skills, these techniques take practice. But anyone who sincerely wants to bridge the gaps in understanding will appreciate this book. Guzmán is emphatic about making an effort to work on difficult conversations." —Manhattan Book Review
We think we have the answers, but we need to be asking a lot more questions. 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 built-in curiosity.
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 one another is hurting our relationships and our society. 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 certainty that surround us to finally do what only seems impossible: understand and even learn from people in your life whose whole worldview is different from or even opposed to yours.
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 not a fan of 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
1051 people are currently reading
18514 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 511 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!
September 4, 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, individual 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, individual 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.
September 23, 2024
I lean very far left on the political and social spectrums, and I wasn’t sure I’d want to read this, but tired of all the bad news from the right, I needed to read it. I’ve gotten reluctant to discourse with people on the other side because it’s been feeling so useless - we end up shouting, angry, and so turned off that the friendship is tested to a point of no return.
But one day, my very conservative brother and I started to ask questions of each other for the purpose of understanding each other better, and with that in my hip pocket, I read this book and realized I actually can listen and probe others with a much more open mind and maybe find more commonality in this world than otherness. I’ll be rereading this book throughout my life and sharing it with my teens.
But one day, my very conservative brother and I started to ask questions of each other for the purpose of understanding each other better, and with that in my hip pocket, I read this book and realized I actually can listen and probe others with a much more open mind and maybe find more commonality in this world than otherness. I’ll be rereading this book throughout my life and sharing it with my teens.
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.
February 24, 2025
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
August 2, 2023
As important as this book's topic is, it was a pain to read as in every sentence you are confronted with the author's love for herself.
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.
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.
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."
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.
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)_/¯
February 14, 2024
Not sure I want to get to know too many people from the 'other side'
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.
January 21, 2025
There was nothing earth-shattering in this book, but it's a good reminder to talk to people, especially those you might not agree with. Really listen and learn and ask questions that help to bridge divides instead of create them. Here are some quotes I liked:
"If there's one thing that most people on the left and right can agree on, it's that the way we treat and talk to the other side is broken. We can't stomach the ideas across the political divide, let alone the people who hold them (p. xvii)."
"It didn't occur to me until recently, but every one of my now thousands of interviews was something everyone craves but rarely encounters: a conversation bent on understanding without judgment (p. xx)."
"I began to see political polarization as the problem that eats other problems, the monster who convinces us that the monsters are us (p. xxii)."
"We know what happens when the people we love don't think we really see them: they go find someone who will... Misinformation isn't the product of a culture that doesn't value truth. It's the product of a culture in which we've grown too afraid to turn to each other and hear it (p. xxiii)."
"How do we see different people around us more clearly (p. xxv)?"
"We see people by talking with them, not just about them and mining the boundary between our diverging perspectives for fresh angles on truth (p. xxv)."
"Find your own powerful reason to have one more conversation with someone who confounds you, or ask one more bold, curious question (p. xxvi)."
"You and I are stumbling around a confounding world because we are too divided to see it clearly... who we like to be around... who we don't like to be around... how we explain our worlds to each other (p. 1)."
"If there's one law of human nature that rules them all these days, it's that it's way, way easier to like people who are like us... When you know and like someone, conversations pick up where you left off. You steer the discussion to topics and ideas you know will be interesting or useful (p. 3)."
"Sorting makes us happier, less bothered, more content, and more linked (p. 5)."
"Republicans are more Christian, white, and conservative. Democrats are more non-Christian, nonwhite, and liberal (p. 6)."
"Social media platforms give us way, way more freedom to curate our social lives than we get in the real world (P. 9)."
"Gingrich made one of the most consequential changes to the culture of Congress... He changed its workweek from five days to three in 1995, encouraging Republican Congresspeople to stay in their home states and not relocate with their families to the capital. Instead, the members would commute to DC weekly... The separation helped both parties build their own muscle and power. It made it easier for legislators to talk tough about the other party and build more loyalty within their own (p. 11)."
"You can't bump into people if you're rarely around them... Why is it so important to be around people we don't agree with (p. 12)?"
"Can there be an us without a them? (p. 17)"
"Living in politically sorted spaces around people who are all worried about the same things didn't exactly cam us down (p. 18)."
"It gets depressing to dive into division (p. 23)."
"Just in the last century, America has pulled through some seriously divisive periods (p. 23)."
"Seeing how all those wrong ideas about what the other side thinks were tearing the country apart, a group of researchers asked a slightly different question: How good ware we are guessing what the other side thinks of us?... Othering blinds us (p. 26)."
"'Unfollow if you disagree.' The phrase is everywhere on social media, directing people to unsubscribe from the author's posts if they don't endorse what those posts are saying (p. 28)."
"'It's OK to give up on people that you love' (p. 29)."
"Othering goes too far when it tricks us into shrinking our world instead of expanding it (p. 30)."
"If sorting is about the people you see and othering is about the people you don't see, siloing is about the stories you see and don't see as a result (p. 32)."
"In some ways, a silo is like a black hole. You're not just in it. You're pulled into it, sometimes farther than you meant to go (p. 33)."
"'Our brains are most productive when there is no demand that they be reactive' (p. 37)."
"If you stop considering other points of view, if even your brain wants you locked in where you're comfortable, how can you be sure that the group battles you're waging are justified? (p. 43)"
"Understanding people who hold opposing political beliefs is hard enough when you rarely meet anyone like that (sorting), harder when they're a them to your us (othering), and harder still when the stories that surround you give you little if any reason to take even small, slow steps in their direction (siloing) (p. 43)."
"Bridging is the answer to sorting, othering, and siloing. It's what we do when we step out of our silos and try to see things from a different point of view. It can take patience, humility, and a good heap of courage. But it works (p. 45)."
"If there's one question I want to persuade you to ask more often, it's 'What am I missing?' (p. 49)"
"Let's start with a big, beautiful mess: everyone else's perspectives (p. 50)."
"How you see the world determines how you want to talk about it (p. 51)."
"Pay more attention to perspectives (p. 52)."
"Leave our harbor and learn from each other about each other for each other's own sake (p. 56)."
"'I never thought of it that way' (p. 57)."
"1. Mind the gap
2. Collect knowledge
3. Reject easy answers
4. Embrace complexity (p. 63)"
"When you're thirsty, you need to drink. When you're curious, you need to know (p. 63)."
"The more pleasure you get from learning, the less it matters if the learning is hard (p. 65)."
"The broader your baseline knowledge about something, the more curious you will get about it (p. 66)."
"If you think you know, you don't think to ask. The voices in your silos have all the answers anyway (p. 67)."
"To bridge divides, we need friction. To make sure that friction sparks the kinds of insights that serve as a check on the warped, narrow view from our silos, we need to put our curiosity to work--minding the gaps between what we know and what we don't, collecting knowledge that inspires different questions, charging ahead on the most complicated issues, and not letting lazy, easy answers suffice (p. 71)."
"Why do grown-ups think that sitting around and talking is fun (p. 73)?"
"How powerful it is when people come together just to talk (p. 74)."
"Conversation is by far the most powerful tool for understanding people across divides (p. 75)."
"All conversations benefit from the freedom to wander where they will, and the close attention of participants to lead them there (p. 77)."
"Getting interested in people opens a bottomless supply of questions and the best kind of drive to explore them (p. 81)."
"Conversations need time to develop knowledge that reveals gaps, form bonds that build trust and depth, and find their fuel and direction to let people explore the boundary between their perspectives (p. 84)."
"One of the most beautiful things in the world is when people change their plans for each other (p. 94)."
"Listening... is about showing people they matter (p. 95)."
"'In my head I dehumanized people who did vote for Trump because I couldn't understand it' (p. 102)."
"Fail to notice your assumptions and they might harden into lies. Turn them into questions and they'll get you closer to truth (p. 115)."
"Different people with different perspectives come together around a topic and insist on their own perspectives to each other, rarely asking about or considering how different people there might see things (p. 121)."
"When we don't have all the information about someone's ideas, our minds are happy to fill in the blanks with baloney (p. 129)."
"'Are you willing to believe that you are wrong about something?' (p. 134)"
"Instead of asking 'Whose perspective wins?' ask, 'What makes each perspective understandable?' (p. 145)"
"Learning about someone else's experiences is the most powerful way to understand them, to see the world as they see it--even for a second--and open your own eyes a little wider to everything as a result (p. 152)."
"Our experiences explain our perspectives (p. 155)."
"'The shortest distance between two people... is a story' (p. 157)."
"When we genuinely change our minds, it's not because we give in to pressure from someone else (p. 157)."
"One of the best ways to meet people where they are is to ask them where they've been (p. 158)."
"Asking the question 'What am I missing?' reminds us that our perspectives are always limited and we're always missing something, keeping our curiosity on standby (p. 159)."
"Once you've shared your own personal experience around a topic, invite someone else in the conversation to share theirs (p. 164)."
"'Where are you coming from?'... 'What are your concerns?'... 'What worries you about this?'... 'What are you afraid might happen with that?' (p. 174)"
"Asking what concerns people about a tricky topic is the best way to pull out what matters to them (p. 179)."
"1. Get hypothetical
2. Present the strongest argument (for the other side)
3. Acknowledge your attachments
4. Assume absolutely nothing (p. 192)"
"Each one of us looks at the world with a unique pair of eyes, on a path paved with unique experiences, from our uniquely ranked values (p. 199)."
"Listening is about showing people they matter. But people don't feel they matter if their meaning floats out over someone and they get that sense, that sneaking suspicion, that it didn't land right (p. 199)."
"When was the last time someone heard you out on some complex thought until they knew completely and precisely what you meant (p. 200)?"
"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 (p. 202)."
"Working to get someone's meaning right can be one of the most direct ways to show you're really listening, and not just faking it with nods, silence, and stillness (p. 204)."
"How much of that genuine meaning are we interested in passing on to someone on the other side of a big divide? How much of our true perspective will we even let them see (p. 210)?"
"The only way to hear... what people are really thinking is to earn the privilege... Maintaining a good relationship with someone you're talking to beyond the time you're talking to them is outside the scope of this book. But! You absolutely can craft a conversation where it's easier to put it all out there (p. 212)."
"Show your work. Be humble. Repair with candor. Ask CARE questions (p. 213)."
"'That's how you avoid arrogancy... with curiosity' (p. 219)."
"Questions are most powerful when they're raw--when nothing else is baked in (p. 228)."
"My second-favorite word in Spanish that has no translation in English is 'convivir.' It is a verb that means 'to live together.' The closest we get to it in English is the verb 'coexist,' which in my humble opinion aims a bit low. All we need to do to coexist is not kill each other. Co-living takes more (p. 233)."
"Surprise yourself. Take one step closer to someone who disagrees with you--whether that means spending time with a friend or relative you've been driving apart from, reading an opinion form an earnest voice on the other side, or sparking a conversation you've been both eager and hesitant to have (p. 235)."
"If there's one thing that most people on the left and right can agree on, it's that the way we treat and talk to the other side is broken. We can't stomach the ideas across the political divide, let alone the people who hold them (p. xvii)."
"It didn't occur to me until recently, but every one of my now thousands of interviews was something everyone craves but rarely encounters: a conversation bent on understanding without judgment (p. xx)."
"I began to see political polarization as the problem that eats other problems, the monster who convinces us that the monsters are us (p. xxii)."
"We know what happens when the people we love don't think we really see them: they go find someone who will... Misinformation isn't the product of a culture that doesn't value truth. It's the product of a culture in which we've grown too afraid to turn to each other and hear it (p. xxiii)."
"How do we see different people around us more clearly (p. xxv)?"
"We see people by talking with them, not just about them and mining the boundary between our diverging perspectives for fresh angles on truth (p. xxv)."
"Find your own powerful reason to have one more conversation with someone who confounds you, or ask one more bold, curious question (p. xxvi)."
"You and I are stumbling around a confounding world because we are too divided to see it clearly... who we like to be around... who we don't like to be around... how we explain our worlds to each other (p. 1)."
"If there's one law of human nature that rules them all these days, it's that it's way, way easier to like people who are like us... When you know and like someone, conversations pick up where you left off. You steer the discussion to topics and ideas you know will be interesting or useful (p. 3)."
"Sorting makes us happier, less bothered, more content, and more linked (p. 5)."
"Republicans are more Christian, white, and conservative. Democrats are more non-Christian, nonwhite, and liberal (p. 6)."
"Social media platforms give us way, way more freedom to curate our social lives than we get in the real world (P. 9)."
"Gingrich made one of the most consequential changes to the culture of Congress... He changed its workweek from five days to three in 1995, encouraging Republican Congresspeople to stay in their home states and not relocate with their families to the capital. Instead, the members would commute to DC weekly... The separation helped both parties build their own muscle and power. It made it easier for legislators to talk tough about the other party and build more loyalty within their own (p. 11)."
"You can't bump into people if you're rarely around them... Why is it so important to be around people we don't agree with (p. 12)?"
"Can there be an us without a them? (p. 17)"
"Living in politically sorted spaces around people who are all worried about the same things didn't exactly cam us down (p. 18)."
"It gets depressing to dive into division (p. 23)."
"Just in the last century, America has pulled through some seriously divisive periods (p. 23)."
"Seeing how all those wrong ideas about what the other side thinks were tearing the country apart, a group of researchers asked a slightly different question: How good ware we are guessing what the other side thinks of us?... Othering blinds us (p. 26)."
"'Unfollow if you disagree.' The phrase is everywhere on social media, directing people to unsubscribe from the author's posts if they don't endorse what those posts are saying (p. 28)."
"'It's OK to give up on people that you love' (p. 29)."
"Othering goes too far when it tricks us into shrinking our world instead of expanding it (p. 30)."
"If sorting is about the people you see and othering is about the people you don't see, siloing is about the stories you see and don't see as a result (p. 32)."
"In some ways, a silo is like a black hole. You're not just in it. You're pulled into it, sometimes farther than you meant to go (p. 33)."
"'Our brains are most productive when there is no demand that they be reactive' (p. 37)."
"If you stop considering other points of view, if even your brain wants you locked in where you're comfortable, how can you be sure that the group battles you're waging are justified? (p. 43)"
"Understanding people who hold opposing political beliefs is hard enough when you rarely meet anyone like that (sorting), harder when they're a them to your us (othering), and harder still when the stories that surround you give you little if any reason to take even small, slow steps in their direction (siloing) (p. 43)."
"Bridging is the answer to sorting, othering, and siloing. It's what we do when we step out of our silos and try to see things from a different point of view. It can take patience, humility, and a good heap of courage. But it works (p. 45)."
"If there's one question I want to persuade you to ask more often, it's 'What am I missing?' (p. 49)"
"Let's start with a big, beautiful mess: everyone else's perspectives (p. 50)."
"How you see the world determines how you want to talk about it (p. 51)."
"Pay more attention to perspectives (p. 52)."
"Leave our harbor and learn from each other about each other for each other's own sake (p. 56)."
"'I never thought of it that way' (p. 57)."
"1. Mind the gap
2. Collect knowledge
3. Reject easy answers
4. Embrace complexity (p. 63)"
"When you're thirsty, you need to drink. When you're curious, you need to know (p. 63)."
"The more pleasure you get from learning, the less it matters if the learning is hard (p. 65)."
"The broader your baseline knowledge about something, the more curious you will get about it (p. 66)."
"If you think you know, you don't think to ask. The voices in your silos have all the answers anyway (p. 67)."
"To bridge divides, we need friction. To make sure that friction sparks the kinds of insights that serve as a check on the warped, narrow view from our silos, we need to put our curiosity to work--minding the gaps between what we know and what we don't, collecting knowledge that inspires different questions, charging ahead on the most complicated issues, and not letting lazy, easy answers suffice (p. 71)."
"Why do grown-ups think that sitting around and talking is fun (p. 73)?"
"How powerful it is when people come together just to talk (p. 74)."
"Conversation is by far the most powerful tool for understanding people across divides (p. 75)."
"All conversations benefit from the freedom to wander where they will, and the close attention of participants to lead them there (p. 77)."
"Getting interested in people opens a bottomless supply of questions and the best kind of drive to explore them (p. 81)."
"Conversations need time to develop knowledge that reveals gaps, form bonds that build trust and depth, and find their fuel and direction to let people explore the boundary between their perspectives (p. 84)."
"One of the most beautiful things in the world is when people change their plans for each other (p. 94)."
"Listening... is about showing people they matter (p. 95)."
"'In my head I dehumanized people who did vote for Trump because I couldn't understand it' (p. 102)."
"Fail to notice your assumptions and they might harden into lies. Turn them into questions and they'll get you closer to truth (p. 115)."
"Different people with different perspectives come together around a topic and insist on their own perspectives to each other, rarely asking about or considering how different people there might see things (p. 121)."
"When we don't have all the information about someone's ideas, our minds are happy to fill in the blanks with baloney (p. 129)."
"'Are you willing to believe that you are wrong about something?' (p. 134)"
"Instead of asking 'Whose perspective wins?' ask, 'What makes each perspective understandable?' (p. 145)"
"Learning about someone else's experiences is the most powerful way to understand them, to see the world as they see it--even for a second--and open your own eyes a little wider to everything as a result (p. 152)."
"Our experiences explain our perspectives (p. 155)."
"'The shortest distance between two people... is a story' (p. 157)."
"When we genuinely change our minds, it's not because we give in to pressure from someone else (p. 157)."
"One of the best ways to meet people where they are is to ask them where they've been (p. 158)."
"Asking the question 'What am I missing?' reminds us that our perspectives are always limited and we're always missing something, keeping our curiosity on standby (p. 159)."
"Once you've shared your own personal experience around a topic, invite someone else in the conversation to share theirs (p. 164)."
"'Where are you coming from?'... 'What are your concerns?'... 'What worries you about this?'... 'What are you afraid might happen with that?' (p. 174)"
"Asking what concerns people about a tricky topic is the best way to pull out what matters to them (p. 179)."
"1. Get hypothetical
2. Present the strongest argument (for the other side)
3. Acknowledge your attachments
4. Assume absolutely nothing (p. 192)"
"Each one of us looks at the world with a unique pair of eyes, on a path paved with unique experiences, from our uniquely ranked values (p. 199)."
"Listening is about showing people they matter. But people don't feel they matter if their meaning floats out over someone and they get that sense, that sneaking suspicion, that it didn't land right (p. 199)."
"When was the last time someone heard you out on some complex thought until they knew completely and precisely what you meant (p. 200)?"
"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 (p. 202)."
"Working to get someone's meaning right can be one of the most direct ways to show you're really listening, and not just faking it with nods, silence, and stillness (p. 204)."
"How much of that genuine meaning are we interested in passing on to someone on the other side of a big divide? How much of our true perspective will we even let them see (p. 210)?"
"The only way to hear... what people are really thinking is to earn the privilege... Maintaining a good relationship with someone you're talking to beyond the time you're talking to them is outside the scope of this book. But! You absolutely can craft a conversation where it's easier to put it all out there (p. 212)."
"Show your work. Be humble. Repair with candor. Ask CARE questions (p. 213)."
"'That's how you avoid arrogancy... with curiosity' (p. 219)."
"Questions are most powerful when they're raw--when nothing else is baked in (p. 228)."
"My second-favorite word in Spanish that has no translation in English is 'convivir.' It is a verb that means 'to live together.' The closest we get to it in English is the verb 'coexist,' which in my humble opinion aims a bit low. All we need to do to coexist is not kill each other. Co-living takes more (p. 233)."
"Surprise yourself. Take one step closer to someone who disagrees with you--whether that means spending time with a friend or relative you've been driving apart from, reading an opinion form an earnest voice on the other side, or sparking a conversation you've been both eager and hesitant to have (p. 235)."
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.
January 21, 2025
Ok, so: it’s INTERPERSONALLY ACTIONABLE, and she gives a lot of tips and scenarios for how to have more connective conversations. She highlights the need for curiosity, the concept of asking question to understand versus win, and the power of stories (as well as proximity). She offers various tools and frameworks to figure out if you should have a serious conversation and how to do so should you wish, and prompts for consideration even when alone like “What’s your most generous interpretation of why they disagree with you?” She clearly outlines strategic ways of engaging with people on a 1-1 level to, again, connect and learn more than anything else.
Is it also too long and kinda repetitive? yes. Is it also kind of naive and rosy colored at times? Also yes. (I have no beef with the informal casual tone, but I know some other folks did…?) Is this going to unfuck your convos if the other person is not coming with similar energy? Not really. BUT I wasn’t terribly mad about all this, and just stayed curious for what I didn’t already know.
Personally, not much new in here because this sort of thing is my professional field(s) and I’ve been doing for uh decades. Like, yes perspective taking, yes lead with curiosity over assumptions, yes nuance good binaries bad, yes be mindful of when/where/how you talk, values ranking and ethical dilemmas are a thing, etc. So if you’ve been a mediator or bridge builder or professional people interpreter for a while there is likely not much new here BUT it can be a quick read if you wanna skim and peep! If you’re Not someone in those worlds or in strategic communications and things like that, this book may prove useful! If you’re looking for now to be persuasive, how to politically mobilize, etc, this won’t give you that though.
However, could you use some of the knowledge here IN organizing, creating coalitions, and mobilizing for justice? Yeah. Because if and when we want to be persuasive, we need to understand what those who disagree with us value and how they do so, what info they see as fact, what makes up their position.
One question that stuck with me was the “Tell me about a problem you’re having in your life. • Tell me everything I need to know to fully understand the problem.” (Mostly because of the second sentence frame)
All this said, when fascism is trying to kick your ass, it’s time for greater decisive action and not as much ~dialoguing over a meal~ so spend your time wisely!
Is it also too long and kinda repetitive? yes. Is it also kind of naive and rosy colored at times? Also yes. (I have no beef with the informal casual tone, but I know some other folks did…?) Is this going to unfuck your convos if the other person is not coming with similar energy? Not really. BUT I wasn’t terribly mad about all this, and just stayed curious for what I didn’t already know.
Personally, not much new in here because this sort of thing is my professional field(s) and I’ve been doing for uh decades. Like, yes perspective taking, yes lead with curiosity over assumptions, yes nuance good binaries bad, yes be mindful of when/where/how you talk, values ranking and ethical dilemmas are a thing, etc. So if you’ve been a mediator or bridge builder or professional people interpreter for a while there is likely not much new here BUT it can be a quick read if you wanna skim and peep! If you’re Not someone in those worlds or in strategic communications and things like that, this book may prove useful! If you’re looking for now to be persuasive, how to politically mobilize, etc, this won’t give you that though.
However, could you use some of the knowledge here IN organizing, creating coalitions, and mobilizing for justice? Yeah. Because if and when we want to be persuasive, we need to understand what those who disagree with us value and how they do so, what info they see as fact, what makes up their position.
One question that stuck with me was the “Tell me about a problem you’re having in your life. • Tell me everything I need to know to fully understand the problem.” (Mostly because of the second sentence frame)
All this said, when fascism is trying to kick your ass, it’s time for greater decisive action and not as much ~dialoguing over a meal~ so spend your time wisely!
September 9, 2024
I became aware because the University of the Pacific started a university wide convocation on the ideas in her book - the book is being given to incoming students this fall.
Guzman is a naturalized citizen whose parents immigrated from Monterey Mexico. She tells the story of her going to visit her parents, as a progressive reporter in Seattle on Election Day in 2016 with some trepidation because her parents were and are Trump supporters.
The book then offers are series of strategies for readers to address the wide political chasm that we find ourselves in today. The basic recommendation is that we address the rifts with Honesty, Curiosity and Respect. The American political system was based on a set of assumptions that our political engagements would nor be based on uniformity of thought and yet the sides of our current political debates often assume a certainty for complex questions that ignore the rich diversity of (as Hayek called it) the "Knowledge of time and place" that will enrich our public discussions.
This is a relatively short book packed with good ideas about how to move us away from the Orwellian notions of stylized discussion - which ultimately is repressive for all of us.
Guzman is a naturalized citizen whose parents immigrated from Monterey Mexico. She tells the story of her going to visit her parents, as a progressive reporter in Seattle on Election Day in 2016 with some trepidation because her parents were and are Trump supporters.
The book then offers are series of strategies for readers to address the wide political chasm that we find ourselves in today. The basic recommendation is that we address the rifts with Honesty, Curiosity and Respect. The American political system was based on a set of assumptions that our political engagements would nor be based on uniformity of thought and yet the sides of our current political debates often assume a certainty for complex questions that ignore the rich diversity of (as Hayek called it) the "Knowledge of time and place" that will enrich our public discussions.
This is a relatively short book packed with good ideas about how to move us away from the Orwellian notions of stylized discussion - which ultimately is repressive for all of us.
September 19, 2024
Guzman is a liberal daughter of parents who voted for Trump. She works for Braver Angels anti-polarization group, and she has many ideas for resisting siloing ourselves with only our opinions. She encourages us to cultivate curiosity as a way to have difficult conversations and build bridges. I don’t know how much of her strategies I’ll be able to use, as I’m married to a man I vehemently disagree with politically and my main way to cope is to refuse to discuss politics with him. But I’m genuinely interested to try some of the things she’s offered in this book.
February 1, 2025
Definitely a good read that made me check my biases, while giving good advice on how to have tough conversations - mostly I took away the idea of curiosity as a way to connect and learn
I also now want to deep dive into political issues that I don’t know enough about and have a list of topics to research and organizations to look up
I also now want to deep dive into political issues that I don’t know enough about and have a list of topics to research and organizations to look up
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.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 511 reviews