Depolarize Heated Conversations: Complexify Issues Instead of Picking Sides

You’re sitting across from a relative as the evening news hums in the background, both of you feeling the familiar tension in the air. Someone brings up a controversial issue—maybe gun laws or climate change. In the past, the conversation always flipped quickly into two camps, voices rising. But tonight, you listen a little longer and quietly name three perspectives, rather than choosing for or against immediately.

You surprise yourself by saying, 'I actually see some things differently from both you and what the headlines portray,' then pause and confess, 'Honestly, part of me feels anxious, but I’m also genuinely interested in how others think about it.' The other person softens, offering a side of the topic they hadn’t mentioned before. You both end up sharing uncertainties—places where the facts feel slippery, where emotion and logic blur. It doesn’t solve the whole problem, but it turns a shouting match into an actual conversation.

Researchers call this 'complexifying.' Studies at conflict labs show that simply presenting the issue’s full spectrum—alongside caveats and emotional complexity—dramatically increases openness, empathy, and creativity on both sides of a debate.

For your next tough conversation, start by writing out not just two, but at least three distinct viewpoints and see if you can add caveats to each. When you talk, be honest about what you’re sure of, what still frustrates you, and where you feel uncertain—invite others to share the same. As the dialogue unfolds, orient your body and tone toward curiosity, rather than certainty. With practice, you'll notice more listening and less shouting, and find it's possible to disagree without building walls.