We can usually learn much more from people whose views we share than from people whose views contradict our own disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning

Do we learn much more from people whose ideas we share than from those whose ideas contradict ours? The speaker claims so, for disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning. I concede that undue discord can impede learning. Otherwise, in my view, we can learn much more from those whose ideas we oppose than from those whose ideas are in accord with our own.

Admittedly, under some circumstances disagreement can be counterproductive to learning. For example, a political debate between two opposing political factions often degrade into rhetorical bouts or shouting matches, during which opponents vie for their voices heard, but have little interest in evaluating the appropriateness of the opponent’s claim and in acknowledging the merits of the opponent’s point of view. In this circumstance, neither politicians nor viewers learn anything meaningful from the disagreement. Rather, the discord only serves to reinforce the acrimony between the two parties and biases in their view points. The end result is that learning is impeded. Another supporting example entails debate between people whose views are based on dichotomous assumptions. Consider, for example, a discussion about evolutionary process between an evolutionary biology student and theology students. However cogent the hypothesis put forth by the biology student would be, theology student will not admit a slight possibility of the evolutionary process because the process is not compatible with fundamental assumption in theology. Again, in this case discordance in perspectives does not render any meaningful contribution to learning.

Otherwise, mutually accommodating debate, during which individuals with opposing viewpoints not only seek to find the common grounds in opponent’s point of view, but also acknowledge the merits of the opponent’s perspective, will be conducive to learning. For example, during a debate about best economic policy, an economist may learn the importance of listening to the voices of majority of population for the sake of political stability. On the other hand, a political scientist may realize the potential hazard that overly populist political stance could potentially pose towards the long run economic growth of a country. If this was the case, then each participant in the debate would learn important aspects about a particular issue, such as the best economic policy, to which they previously were negligent—that is, the substantial contribution of disagreement to learning.

In conclusion, discord in point of view has an indispensable potential to advance learning process. However, the latent for advancement of learning process can be restrained by unwillingness between two opposing parties to carefully assess the validity of opponent’s point of view. Therefore, I agree with the speaker’s claim on a qualified basis.