Perspectives

Someone's perspective is their personal interpretation of a situation, which is based primarily on their personal experiences, personal opinions, and personal beliefs. Therefore, if we choose to discount, discredit, or ignore someone's perspective then we are effectively saying that their experiences, opinions, and beliefs don't matter.

Everyone experiences life differently: Some people struggled in school, some people found it easy; some people had to try different careers to find the one they liked, others knew what they wanted to do from a young age; some people came from a stable, loving family that was supportive of their goals, others less so. These are just a few of the different types of experiences that can shape someone's opinion and solidify what they believe.

Generally speaking, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but the phrase, "You are entitled to your opinion," is often used as a rude rebuttal when we don't agree with someone. The fact is, however, that in a free society everyone is entitled to their opinion. Everyone is free to form an opinion and hold that opinion for as long as they want. A society in which certain opinions are suppressed or forbidden would not be a free society.

This then leads to a major challenge in the modern age, especially when topics are debated in the comment sections of social media. If everyone is entitled to their opinion in a free society, what if their opinion is wrong, divisive, or destructive? What if their opinion is so wrong, it's dangerous?

Imagine that you and a total stranger are stranded in a lifeboat at sea, and that they believe that drinking seawater will save them from dying of thirst. Now imagine that you believe that drinking seawater will cause them to die of thirst. Their perspective is that seawater - due to its water content - will save their life when they are in need of water. Your perspective is that seawater - due to its salt content - will end their life as too much salt will lead to dehydration. If your goal was to save their life, you would need to persuade them to change their opinion from seawater being safe to drink, to seawater being dangerous if not deadly to drink.

Your approach might be to say, "If you drink that salt water, you will die," at which point they may sip a handful of seawater, and say, "See, I didn't die." You might change your approach and say, "Everyone knows that drinking salt water will kill you," to which they reply, "Everyone is wrong, since I just drank salt water, and I am fine." You then say, "Salt creates an osmotic reaction within the cells of your body that draws water out of your cells, and as your kidneys work to flush the salt out of your body you will dehydrate even faster and die even quicker than if you didn't drink the salt water," to which they reply, "If I'm going to die anyway, I may as well not die thirsty."

This is the maddening conundrum of communicating with someone who has a different perspective: to them, their perspective is correct, and you are the one who is wrong.

A better approach is to shift to their point of view to better understand their perspective. The fact is, seawater is primarily made of water, and when you're dying of thirst, water is what you need. Further, seawater does not kill you instantly, so is it really that much more of a gamble to drink seawater than to drink nothing at all? Finally, without a team of medical professionals and scientists that they trust in the lifeboat with you to credibly explain the phenomenon of excess blood salinity, the function of the kidneys, and the inevitable outcome of drinking seawater, to them it is just your word against theirs. The bottom line is that from their perspective, you are wrong, and you are trying to prevent them from saving their own life.

Once we can see things from their perspective, we have a much better idea of what we are up against and can be more focused in our attempts to change their opinion. Our strategy should not be to launch a full-frontal assault to prove their opinion is wrong, but only to persuade them not to drink the seawater.

Instead of telling them they are wrong, you might say, "Look, I know you're thirsty, I'm thirsty too. If we were on a freshwater lake, I would be drinking as much water as I could. The reason I'm not drinking any seawater is that I believe drinking seawater will kill us faster than if we drank nothing at all."

Note that at no point did you tell them that their perspective was invalid or that their opinion was wrong, which leaves them more open to having their opinion changed.

If you are very lucky, they might say, "Why do you believe it will kill us?" at which point you can say, "I watched this interview once with someone who was lost at sea, and the people they were with drank seawater and died, but they survived because they didn't drink the seawater. They then explained that when we drink salt water, our kidneys try to flush out the salt, which causes us to lose more water than we would have if we didn't drink the salt water at all."

Hopefully, this would be enough to persuade them not to drink the saltwater, but if it didn't, the best course of action would be to continue discussing the situation while seeing things from their perspective, rather than telling them that their opinions and beliefs are wrong.

Generally, telling someone that their opinion is wrong and attempting to invalidate their beliefs will not help you persuade them of anything, much less be open to your opposing opinion. Instead, we should try to see things the way they do, and work within the bounds of their worldview to find ways to change their mind. This approach forms the core of persuasion, and persuasion is one of the most valuable techniques in all of communication.