Mónica Guzmán

Now, on these more sort of high stakes moral issues, you might think, well, no, there's going to be very little to say, but check it out.

How might we be assuming agreement?

And could we invite nuance into that presumed agreement, right?

So something happens in the headlines, it sort of comes up in conversation, and you can ask about that.

Yeah, what about this issue of having folks in schools with guns?

What do y'all think about that?

And you might discover that your friends have more nuanced ideas than you thought.

There's some interesting kind of values put into tension there for a lot of people, and it may not fall on the red-blue divide.

And in fact, again, I think that's one of the harmful things about our climate is that we assume that everything does really neatly.

So the people close to you may actually be a good starting point if you bring it up and actually ask the question instead of walk through under the presumption that you all mostly agree.

The other thing is that while the internet is, in a lot of ways, in its design, great for dividing us,

It's also fantastic how easily you can find conversations within groups that are generous and that share a certain perspective.

There's all kinds of beautiful communities of libertarians and conservatives and liberals where people are not trying to troll the other side or anything like that, but they're really just connecting with each other.

And there's ways to kind of listen in on that and every now and then kind of pipe up if it's appropriate.

But I find that really interesting that that we're actually expressing ourselves so much that a generous, curious mind can treat the Internet very differently from how we tend to treat it.

Not chasing dopamine lollipops, like chasing moments where we're just activated and sort of engaged in this sort of tribal way.

But but chasing I never thought of it that way moments.

Yeah.

So the first one is time.

A lot of times we start conversations when there just isn't any time.