What a brilliant and authentic article Mihaela ! So necessary, so instructive. Otherness and discomfort are really what enable us to grow and evolve. The story with your stepfather moved me to tears. I love what you say of being present instead of wanting to guide. Something I learnt these past years is that each soul has its own journey. And sometimes when I don't understand the behaviour of a person around me I remind me that : it's the journey of her soul, it's unique and I can't judge it, even if I disagree. The beauty of the journey is in its uniqueness. Once again thank you for writing Mihaela, your articles are really necessary for our world and bring us so much light ✨🙏.
Thank you, Cécile. What you said about each soul having its own journey is something I also have to remind myself… often. I’ve found that most of my own lessons haven’t come through following well-intentioned advice, but through my (often painful) direct experience. I keep reminding myself of that. And I agree, there is something deeply liberating in learning to witness someone without needing to fix or guide them, even when it challenges us. I’m grateful you shared your reflection, and I’m glad the story resonated.
I've also learned this the hard way, as someone who strives to be logically consistent but also feels the need to argue just to be right. I had a boss give me the old "do you want to be right, or do you want to be happy?" 20 years ago; I dismissed it back then, but there's wisdom in it, which you've articulated in a very honest way here. Along similar lines, when someone tells me about a problem they're having, I tend to launch into "problem solving mode" as if I'm dealing with an LSAT logic game; it's taken me way too long to learn that most of the time, people just need you to be there to listen.
As far as listening to people you don't agree with, I think podcasts are actually great for this, for many of the reasons you mentioned. While not being able to participate or respond is frustrating, it's also "safe" in the sense that you're not required to react, so you can take the time to both sort out what they're saying, then ask yourself why it's so triggering. It's a great way to practice for actual conversations with people you disagree with, and as you say, it's also good for sharpening your own arguments.
I try to judge people based not on what they think, but how they got there. I'd rather someone disagree with me for reasons that are logically coherent than agree with me arbitrarily, based on "vibes". Whether someone agrees or not, the more sound their reasoning is, the more likely it is that you can come to some reasonable understanding about where you and they differ. And if you really trust their reasoning skills, disagreements become more signal than noise, and an opportunity worth exploring for both of you.
Thank you for such a rich and articulate response. I completely relate to what you said about the instinct to jump into “problem-solving mode”, as I’ve been guilty of that more times than I care to admit. It’s taken me a while to understand that most people don’t want fixing, but just someone to witness their experience. I’m working on it too (at least in my conversations with others). I love how you describe listening to podcasts as “safe practice” for hearing opposing views. That’s exactly it! I used to have several triggers in conversation, and this one-sided listening helped me notice where I still had work to do, and gave me the space to actually do it. (Yes, I still default to problem-solving... just now I turn it inward, unless someone specifically asks for help.) And I really resonate with what you said about caring less about what someone thinks, and more about how they got there (the reasoning, the thought process, the framework, etc). You actually reminded me of something I’ve always appreciated about Immanuel Kant. (Perhaps you already know this). He credited David Hume with waking him from his “dogmatic slumber.” What I’ve always found most fascinating is that Kant wasn’t praising Hume because he agreed with him. In fact, he PASSIONATELY disagreed. But it was the clarity and precision of Hume’s arguments that gave Kant the friction he needed to rework his own ideas into what would become his masterpiece, “The Critique of Pure Reason”.
Thank you again for sharing your perspective. I’m really grateful for this exchange.
I didn't know about Kant crediting Hume in that way. Very cool, and a perfect reference to how I try to treat opposing viewpoints. That friction is essential.
And thank you as well. It's great finding like-minded writers and thinkers on here.
What a brilliant and authentic article Mihaela ! So necessary, so instructive. Otherness and discomfort are really what enable us to grow and evolve. The story with your stepfather moved me to tears. I love what you say of being present instead of wanting to guide. Something I learnt these past years is that each soul has its own journey. And sometimes when I don't understand the behaviour of a person around me I remind me that : it's the journey of her soul, it's unique and I can't judge it, even if I disagree. The beauty of the journey is in its uniqueness. Once again thank you for writing Mihaela, your articles are really necessary for our world and bring us so much light ✨🙏.
Thank you, Cécile. What you said about each soul having its own journey is something I also have to remind myself… often. I’ve found that most of my own lessons haven’t come through following well-intentioned advice, but through my (often painful) direct experience. I keep reminding myself of that. And I agree, there is something deeply liberating in learning to witness someone without needing to fix or guide them, even when it challenges us. I’m grateful you shared your reflection, and I’m glad the story resonated.
This resonates.
I've also learned this the hard way, as someone who strives to be logically consistent but also feels the need to argue just to be right. I had a boss give me the old "do you want to be right, or do you want to be happy?" 20 years ago; I dismissed it back then, but there's wisdom in it, which you've articulated in a very honest way here. Along similar lines, when someone tells me about a problem they're having, I tend to launch into "problem solving mode" as if I'm dealing with an LSAT logic game; it's taken me way too long to learn that most of the time, people just need you to be there to listen.
As far as listening to people you don't agree with, I think podcasts are actually great for this, for many of the reasons you mentioned. While not being able to participate or respond is frustrating, it's also "safe" in the sense that you're not required to react, so you can take the time to both sort out what they're saying, then ask yourself why it's so triggering. It's a great way to practice for actual conversations with people you disagree with, and as you say, it's also good for sharpening your own arguments.
I try to judge people based not on what they think, but how they got there. I'd rather someone disagree with me for reasons that are logically coherent than agree with me arbitrarily, based on "vibes". Whether someone agrees or not, the more sound their reasoning is, the more likely it is that you can come to some reasonable understanding about where you and they differ. And if you really trust their reasoning skills, disagreements become more signal than noise, and an opportunity worth exploring for both of you.
Great work, Mihaela.
Thank you for such a rich and articulate response. I completely relate to what you said about the instinct to jump into “problem-solving mode”, as I’ve been guilty of that more times than I care to admit. It’s taken me a while to understand that most people don’t want fixing, but just someone to witness their experience. I’m working on it too (at least in my conversations with others). I love how you describe listening to podcasts as “safe practice” for hearing opposing views. That’s exactly it! I used to have several triggers in conversation, and this one-sided listening helped me notice where I still had work to do, and gave me the space to actually do it. (Yes, I still default to problem-solving... just now I turn it inward, unless someone specifically asks for help.) And I really resonate with what you said about caring less about what someone thinks, and more about how they got there (the reasoning, the thought process, the framework, etc). You actually reminded me of something I’ve always appreciated about Immanuel Kant. (Perhaps you already know this). He credited David Hume with waking him from his “dogmatic slumber.” What I’ve always found most fascinating is that Kant wasn’t praising Hume because he agreed with him. In fact, he PASSIONATELY disagreed. But it was the clarity and precision of Hume’s arguments that gave Kant the friction he needed to rework his own ideas into what would become his masterpiece, “The Critique of Pure Reason”.
Thank you again for sharing your perspective. I’m really grateful for this exchange.
I didn't know about Kant crediting Hume in that way. Very cool, and a perfect reference to how I try to treat opposing viewpoints. That friction is essential.
And thank you as well. It's great finding like-minded writers and thinkers on here.
Keep writing!