Disagreeing Without Damage

00:00 | Introduction and Welcome

Dr. Rachel Floyd: Welcome, everyone. We have a tight schedule today, so I am going to jump in and get started. I have been attending Braver Angels events over the past year and have felt very inspired by their work. As a couples therapist, I have been thinking about how to incorporate some of these ideas into my own work, and this workshop is a first step in that direction.

Braver Angels was co-founded by couples therapist Bill Doherty, so some of the communication skills we will discuss today may feel familiar if you have been in couples therapy or have learned relational communication skills before. At the same time, even familiar skills can break down quickly when there is an attachment risk, especially when partners are discussing difference, conflict, or politics in the current climate.

Today is an ambitious project. We will move through the material efficiently, and there will be time for a 10- to 15-minute Q&A at the end. If questions come up during the presentation, please bring them to the end. I also welcome feedback. This is my first time presenting on this topic in this format, so in many ways this is a pilot and a learning opportunity.

02:02 | Braver Angels Framework

Braver Angels typically offers these skills in a two-part workshop. One part, Depolarizing Within, is more experiential and group-therapy inspired. It gives people space to notice where they get stuck, triggered, or reactive. If any examples today feel difficult to tolerate or imagine discussing, I highly recommend taking that workshop for deeper support.

The second part, Skills for Disagreeing Better, is more didactic. Braver Angels usually teaches it over 90 minutes to two hours. I have condensed and adapted the material for our time together, with particular attention to couples and attachment dynamics.

Our plan today is to briefly define polarization and how it can affect relationships; review some common values and concerns associated with liberals and conservatives; and then move into the LAPP framework: Listen, Acknowledge, Pivot, and Perspective. I will teach this framework in a way that is similar to Braver Angels, while weaving in attachment language and relationship-specific guidance throughout.

05:59 | What does polarization look like?

Polarization is not simply healthy disagreement. It happens when we turn friends, relatives, partners, or large groups of ordinary people on the other side of our politics into enemies. It is when we become so far apart that we can no longer hear each other.

Polarization can also happen when a topic feels so frightening or charged that we stop talking about it altogether. In silence, the ideas we have about the other person, what they believe, or what they must be like often become more extreme.

In a relationship, this can look subtle. It may look like changing the topic, nodding without really listening, or making broad generalizations such as, “We sure have problems in this country.” None of these behaviors may seem dramatic on their own, but they are often forms of avoidance.

Avoidance in a relationship always carries the risk of creating more distance. Over time, partners can begin to feel less known, less close, and more like strangers to one another. Anything that threatens closeness in a partnership is worth paying attention to.

I often hear couples say, “We just do not talk about politics,” as if that settles the matter. Not talking about politics has become very normalized in our country, even within couples. But as a holistic thinker, I find myself wondering: how could it not be connected to other parts of the relationship? How could it not be part of the emotional distance that sometimes develops?

My hope for couples is that couples therapy can become a safe place where partners can cultivate genuine connection, lay things out on the table, and co-create meaning together. That includes being transparent even about politics.

07:25 | Hopes, Basic Assumptions & Tips

Braver Angels has been teaching these skills since 2016, and the goals are clear. When the LAP skill is practiced well, the conversation begins with a constructive tone. Listening has an impact. Ideally, your partner eventually says something like, “Yes, that is exactly what I mean. I could not have said it better myself.”

From there, the hope is that you can shift from listening into sharing your own point of view and have that perspective fully heard as well. This is crucial because it brings the relationship into mutuality. If you often find yourself only in the listening position, unable to advocate for yourself, this can become a curative experience.

Being fully heard does not mean your partner agrees with you. It means your difference and individuality are honored alongside theirs. Other signs that the skill is working include finding some common ground, following logic consistently rather than becoming reactive, and seeing your partner match your openness over time.

The basic assumptions are these: most people in relationships have common values and concerns that can be unearthed, and respect, curiosity, and flexibility tend to invite those same qualities in others. There are always exceptions, but it is worth beginning with the benefit of the doubt.

Before beginning, it helps to have an exit strategy. If you do not know how to leave a conversation safely, it can be hard to start one. Timing is also key. Do not begin this process when your partner is already upset. When practicing for the first time, choose someone who you believe would genuinely care to know your point of view.

It is also useful to understand common values and concerns across the political spectrum. This is the one piece I kept from Braver Angels’ Depolarizing Within workshop because it humanizes both sides. You cannot be a good listener unless you have some spaciousness for the humanity of the person you are speaking with.

Liberal values often include equality, fairness, social justice, care for vulnerable and marginalized people, attention to systemic causes of inequality, diversity, inclusion, multiculturalism, environmental protection, regulation to protect people and the planet, global cooperation, empathy, compassion, and lived experience in decision-making.

Conservative values often include individual responsibility, self-reliance, hard work, limited government, personal freedom, personal accountability, tradition, family, law and order, free markets, economic opportunity, national defense, national sovereignty, faith, community, moral clarity, local initiatives, merit, earned success, and initiative.

These values often fuel each side’s concerns. Liberals may worry about exploitation, inequality, ignored historical injustice, groups being left out of progress, and being dismissed as “woke” or “big government liberals.” Conservatives may worry about identity categories compromising individuality, government overreach, excessive taxation, skepticism about government managing complex problems, unintended consequences of social engineering, and being immediately labeled with an “ism” or “phobia.”

The point is not to reduce people to political categories. Most people are not on the extremes. The point is to listen for values beneath positions. When you listen for values rather than just content, you ask better questions.

16:57 | LAPP Communication Skill Framework: Listen, Acknowledge, Pivot and Perspective

The framework we are using is LAPP: Listen, Acknowledge, Pivot, and Perspective. In an actual dialogue, these pieces can feel woven together rather than neatly separated, but it is helpful to learn them in order.

Listening is about gathering the information you will need for an acknowledgement statement. Before you start, you set the tone, ask permission, and have a plan for what to do if your partner says no. As you listen, you are listening for underlying values, personal stories, and places where you need to ask questions of understanding.

Once you feel ready, and once your partner gives feedback that you are understanding them, you move into acknowledgement. Acknowledgement creates safety. It includes paraphrasing, asking questions of understanding, and, when genuine, naming something you respect in their perspective or a limitation on your own side.

Identifying shared values is especially important. You may not always be able to do it, but when you can, it becomes a bridge. Because this is a couples-focused adaptation, I also add affirmation. Braver Angels does not emphasize this piece in the same way, but in intimate relationships it is essential. Sensitive topics require consistent protection of the bond.

The pivot is the moment when you ask permission to share your perspective. It’s best to also ready your nervous system for the possibility that the answer may be no.

If your partner is open, share your perspective using “I” statements or statements of concern, not predictions of the future, like you’re the authority of what’s to come to life in the world. It may be hard when you feel so much conviction around a particular issue to perfect the framing of your perspective, but you’re going to get your point across much better if you’re speaking from a place of concern. Similarly, if there’s an exchange of personal stories in a dialogue, you greatly increase the potential for empathy and shared understanding.

20:55 | Setting the Tone and asking Permission

Setting the tone and asking for permission are almost the same thing. For couples, asking permission is not just about whether the topic is allowed. It is also a way of asking for emotional availability and demonstrating care for your partner’s well-being.

Permission can sound like, “Is this a good time to talk about something a little charged?” or “I would like to understand your perspective on something. Are you open to that?” Asking first can prevent late-night blowups and ambush conversations where one partner feels cornered.

You can also use a soft start-up or one-down position. This lowers threat and reminds both partners that they are on the same team. You might say, “I want us to stay close while we talk about this,” or “You matter more to me than this issue.” In other words, “attachify” your language as much as possible.

22:31 | How to Handle a Rejection

If your partner says no, respect the boundary. You might respond, “Got it. You are not up for it right now. I will not push you.” You can add relational reassurance: “Your boundaries are important to me. If you need space around this topic, I respect that. I am open and interested in what you have to say whenever you are ready.”

If humor fits the relationship, you might say, “Okay, I hear you. I promise I will not sneak the topic back in wearing a disguise.” Humor can help when your partner may be expecting the topic to return in a disguised form later.

If appropriate, you can remain curious about the no without pressuring them. You might ask, “Is it the topic, the timing, or how we have talked about this in the past?” This shows that you can tolerate and respect the no while still staying relationally engaged.

23:44 | Listen & Acknowledge

When you are given permission to talk about a hot-button issue, begin by listening. Do not interrupt. Stay focused on your partner’s perspective. Listen for personal stories, underlying values, and the experiences that shaped the opinion. Ask questions of understanding, not bait or gotcha questions.

Questions of understanding might sound like, “How did you come to see it this way?” “What feels most important to you about this?” or “What experiences shaped your view?” Gotcha questions sound more like, “If illegal immigration is not a big deal, why have borders?” or “Why are you against people having basic healthcare?” Those questions escalate rather than deepen understanding.

Personal stories are especially important because they move the conversation out of abstraction. Instead of talking only about policy or ideology, partners begin talking about lived experience. Lived experience is harder to dismiss and easier to empathize with.

Once you sense that you are listening well, begin paraphrasing. A good paraphrase can reduce stress and signal that the person is being held in mind. In a relationship, it tells your partner, “This is a conversation, not a debate. I am with you.”

When paraphrasing, stay with what your partner actually said. Do not go beyond it. If genuine, name something you respect in their view or acknowledge a limitation in your own. Look for shared values whenever possible. This shifts the conversation from content that categorizes people into personal meaning.

Affirmation matters throughout. You might say, “I appreciate how much thought you have given this,” “I care more about you than being right,” or “Even when we disagree, I respect you.” These statements help regulate both nervous systems and protect the relationship bond.

27:50 | Practice Exercise & Examples

At this point in the original Skills for Disagreeing Better workshop, participants have more time to practice. They read a perspective that is different from their own, work in small groups, and practice paraphrasing. For today, we are doing a much shorter version of that exercise.

The task is to choose the perspective that is furthest from your own and try to paraphrase it. The goal is not to agree. The goal is to reflect the person’s concern, values, and humanity accurately enough that they would feel understood.

For example, a paraphrase of a conservative concern about defunding the police might sound like: “You’re feeling concerned about rising crime and how it’s affecting safety. It sounds like ‘defund the police’ messaging feels dismissive to you, especially given how difficult the job is. you respect law enforcement and feel they deserve more support, even while recognizing there are real problems in the system. I think we both care about people feeling safe and want solutions that actually make a difference. I appreciate that you’re acknowledging problems in the system while still supporting the people in it.”

Questions of understanding might include: “What feels most concerning to you about the rise in crime?” “Are there particular experiences or stories that have shaped how you see this?” “What kind of support for law enforcement feels most important to you?” or “Where do you see the biggest gaps in how things are being handled?”

A paraphrase of a liberal concern about policing might sound like: “It sounds like you see crime as rooted in deeper issues like poverty and discrimination, and that focusing only on policing can miss the bigger picture. You value really trust—especially between communities of color and law enforcement—and you see that trust as essential to real safety. I can relate to wanting solutions that actually address root causes, and I appreciate how thoughtfully you are looking at the full picture.”

Questions of understanding might include: “When you say root causes, what feels most important to address first?” “Can you say more about what builds or breaks trust in your view?” “What would a more balanced approach to safety look like?” or “Are there examples you have seen where this kind of approach worked well?”

These questions create richness and invite more detail. You are still in the listening role. When someone is passionate or has felt unheard for a long time, they may need more time than you expect before they feel ready to hear your perspective.

34:58 | Pivoting to share your perspective

When you are considering a pivot, look for a heartfelt yes, not a pressured yes. Ask yourself: Have I laid the groundwork for my partner to hear my point of view? Do I feel that I understand them? Have I asked the questions I need to clarify my understanding? Are they letting me know they feel understood?

If the answer is yes, you can ask permission to share. Creativity is welcome. Any statement that signals you would like to say something and are checking whether it is possible can work. For example: “I have thought a lot about these issues and have read from different perspectives. Can I offer my thoughts?” or “I have a personal experience with this issue that makes me see it differently. Would you be open to hearing it?”

One caution: citing an article, news source, interview, or media outlet can sometimes become a landmine. Whether the source is The New York Times, Fox News, The Free Press, The Atlantic, or something else, naming the source may immediately shut down the conversation. It can sometimes help to say, “I read something that resonated with me,” or “I heard something that stayed with me,” and focus on why it mattered to you.

If the pivot is rejected, continuing to talk is likely to create conflict. In Emotionally Focused Therapy language, the conversation is likely to move into the negative cycle. Because you have already been engaged in the dialogue and have worked hard to listen, you need a smooth exit. Acknowledge the boundary, reiterate any shared values, affirm the relationship, and change the topic or go do something else. You might say, “I care more about us feeling okay than I do about getting my point across.”

If your pivot is accepted, this is your chance to share carefully. Use “I” statements, not truth statements. Speak from concern rather than prediction. For example, “I am worried that climate change is already affecting people and animals in serious ways, and that is why I lean toward stronger regulations,” is more invitational than, “Climate change is an emergency and we need strict regulations now.”

If possible, share a personal story. Your partner may have heard the story before, but in this context they may hear it differently. Personal stories make it easier for the conversation to stay human.

38:47 | Tips for Offering Your Perspective

When the pivot is accepted, there are a few additional tools that help preserve connection.

• Name your angle. This reduces hidden agendas and prevents mind reading. It keeps your tone reflective rather than declarative.

• If genuine, recognize flaws on your side and strengths on the other side. This is powerful because it signals fairness, reduces polarization, and builds admiration rather than mere tolerance. For example, “I can see how people on my side sometimes overlook this, and I can genuinely see something valuable in your perspective.” Do not attempt this if it is not genuine. People can tell when you are faking it.

• Name agreement when you see it. For example, “I think we can agree that social media is dividing people more than uniting them right now,” or “It sounds like we both agree that the healthcare system needs a lot of fixing.”

• Use “yes, and” rather than “yes, but.” The word “but” often activates the nervous system because it can feel like everything before it is being negated. Instead, try: “I hear you about the Dreamers, and I worry about people abusing the system.”

• If you are tender about an issue, say so. This helps you check in with yourself and gives your partner a better chance of communicating with care. You might say, “I have very strong feelings about this because I have a Dreamer in my family. Please be gentle with me,” or “Please notice how hard I am working to hear you.”

So you've asked permission to talk. You've listened for underlying values and personal stories. You've demonstrated you here, your partner, and then with permission you have been able to offer your perspective. You're using eye statements to express your views. You mention common ground if genuine. You're not pretending to know the future. You're naming your angle. Recognizing flaws on your side and positives on the other. If you can share a personal story, mention agreement when you see it. Ask questions of understanding. Use “yes and” instead of “yes but” and you affirm the bond throughout. You are not just lecturing once you get to sharing your perspective, you're doing the dance.

So to wrap up, once you are talking, it can continue as listen - acknowledge - perspective, listen - acknowledge - perspective. There's a whole flow, or you could stay in the listen-and-acknowledge zone for a while. It's an art for you and your partner, or whoever you're in conversation with to figure out together.

And then last two reminders this is not about being nice. The goal is not to agree or to change your partner's mind. These skills are so you feel like you're taking care of yourself in your perspective that you don't have to agree to still be kind and open, in dialogue, or to keep your partner to be seen as respectful by your partner.

43:47 | Skills for Difficult moments

When difficult moments arise, keep the conversation grounded. If your partner quickly changes the subject, you can ask, “Can we stay on this topic?” If they ask a gotcha question, restate your position without taking the bait. If the conversation devolves into trading provocations, that may be the signal to exit.

Another sign that it is time to leave the conversation is when it becomes harder to say anything affirming about the relationship. At that point, acknowledge the difficulty, agree to disagree if needed, name shared values, affirm the relationship, and take a break.

Another way you can get started with these skills, you could say, I went to a workshop the other day and realized I'm not very good at political conversation.There's the one-down style, again, our approach, again, I'm trying to do better. Are you game to help me practice?

We all have some level of all the skills that I've talked about today, but it's a whole other ballgame applying them to politics. So take heart.

45:57 | Resources and Q&A

If you would like to continue learning these skills, Braver Angels offers Skills for Disagreeing Better and Depolarizing Within workshops. If you have feedback for me, you can email me at DrFloyd@heightscouplestherapy.com. I would love to hear what was useful and what could be improved.

During Q&A, one participant asked for an example of a statement of concern. A statement of concern might begin with “I am worried about...” or “I am concerned that...” The point is to speak from your own worry or concern rather than positioning yourself as an oracle about the future or the sole authority on truth.

Another participant reflected that practicing paraphrasing was a helpful reminder to slow down. When the nervous system becomes activated, fight-or-flight responses can make a conversation feel urgent. Slowing down helps partners take turns, listen more carefully, and stay connected long enough for the conversation to become productive.

Dr. Floyd affirmed that slowing down is central to the whole process. Many conversations would improve if partners were able to pause, regulate, and move at a pace that allowed both people to remain engaged.

Participants also shared appreciation for the topic, noting how often political conversations have come up in friendships, families, and relationships over the past several years. Dr. Floyd closed by thanking those who attended and acknowledging the importance of continuing this conversation.