This is an example that I've encountered at my college.
First, it seems that supporters on both sides tend to offer a one-sided perspective. SOme on the Palestinian side point out that Israel needs to stop doing this and that - stop bombing children, stop causing a humanitarian disaster, etc. Some on the Israeli side only bring up what Hamas did, and don't point out some of the problems that Israel is causing.
A second problem it seems is that both sides tend to be strong in their opinion. They offer it with strong convictions, as if they are just telling me and not wanting my input. I get the feeling that I they'd get up in arms. For instance, can you imagine someone vehemently claiming that Israelis are a bunch of killers. With such a strong declaration in terms of attitude and the conclusion, do you think that person would want to have an open discussion? I've seen that offering a differing view on a hot button issue can tear apart friends on Facebook, perhaps even families.
So the partisan behaviors I see here is each side is being biased by giving a one-sided perspective. Some on each side are not open to different perspectives but are instead looking for agreement to reinforcing their side.
A non-partisan way to handle all of this is to be willing to listen to the other side. That is very hard to do but one thing that helps me stay focused on that is knowing that the alternative is bad because it would lead to divisions, fighting, and it restricts progress (sort of like how the partisanship in Washington leads to gridlock). Another thing that can be done is to factor in both perspectives before reaching a conclusion. And yet perhaps the most important point, learn how to accept different viewpoints or don't look at the person as an enemy simply for having a differing view. That type of thinking is what leads people to want to tear apart even longstanding relationships because disagreement is being taken as a threat.
These are all just my suggestions but anyone in the agnostic usergroup can offer their own input.
First, it seems that supporters on both sides tend to offer a one-sided perspective. SOme on the Palestinian side point out that Israel needs to stop doing this and that - stop bombing children, stop causing a humanitarian disaster, etc. Some on the Israeli side only bring up what Hamas did, and don't point out some of the problems that Israel is causing.
A second problem it seems is that both sides tend to be strong in their opinion. They offer it with strong convictions, as if they are just telling me and not wanting my input. I get the feeling that I they'd get up in arms. For instance, can you imagine someone vehemently claiming that Israelis are a bunch of killers. With such a strong declaration in terms of attitude and the conclusion, do you think that person would want to have an open discussion? I've seen that offering a differing view on a hot button issue can tear apart friends on Facebook, perhaps even families.
So the partisan behaviors I see here is each side is being biased by giving a one-sided perspective. Some on each side are not open to different perspectives but are instead looking for agreement to reinforcing their side.
A non-partisan way to handle all of this is to be willing to listen to the other side. That is very hard to do but one thing that helps me stay focused on that is knowing that the alternative is bad because it would lead to divisions, fighting, and it restricts progress (sort of like how the partisanship in Washington leads to gridlock). Another thing that can be done is to factor in both perspectives before reaching a conclusion. And yet perhaps the most important point, learn how to accept different viewpoints or don't look at the person as an enemy simply for having a differing view. That type of thinking is what leads people to want to tear apart even longstanding relationships because disagreement is being taken as a threat.
These are all just my suggestions but anyone in the agnostic usergroup can offer their own input.
