Better Conversations - Good Faith Vs Honesty

In your conversations, understanding the difference between good-faith, and honesty, can go a long way to avoiding time-wasting, hurt feelings and misunderstandings. There are useful distinctions whether you’re trying to navigate the perilous world of online communication, or personal relationships.

A version of a good-faith interaction, between people of different views, is one where both parties have a genuine curiosity, open-mindedness and empathy for the experiences and thoughts of the other person. In this reading, empathy for their point of view, is more rooted in an understanding that they have come to that point of view as a result of their own experiences, knowledge, beliefs and motivations. It doesn’t mean that you must agree with them. It means that there is a patience and curiosity for how they came to that point of view, or feeling, and an interest in engaging with that point of view ready to listen to it, and meet it with your own.

A bad-faith interaction between people of opposing views, is one where pedantic obfuscation, ‘winning’, or ‘proving someone wrong’ are the main intentions. It’s an interaction where no party (or one party in particular) has no interest in actually hearing or understanding what the other person has to say. Where there is no curiosity, patience or attempt to meet the other person where they are, and find common ground, or common cause, from which to explore differences in opinion or understanding.

For people who are simply having an argument, amongst friends or partners, good-faith means always considering the long-term implications of what you say and what you do. It means putting your love and care for the other person, in front of being correct, and it means working towards a resolution, rather than a win. Bad-faith arguments (we’ve all heard them, and we’ve all had them), can be full of ‘honesty’ and still be brutally painful, and damaging. Good-faith arguments are those where the disagreement is the centre of the dialogue, not the person. In good-faith arguments both parties disagree, and yet are careful and considerate of the person they disagree with.

You can still be upset, hurt, disappointed by good-faith disagreements, but it is not the point of them. In a bad-faith disagreement, pain is part of the intention.

Knowing the difference between these approaches can save you a lot of time and emotional energy. I believe in having all the patience and time one can muster, when talking to individuals and communities that are engaging in good faith. Knowing fully well, that you won’t necessarily change anyone’s mind or point of view on the spot (it’s incredibly difficult to do that), but that you can be a part of a process of mutual understanding, and broadening of context, that will stand everyone in good stead for further dialogue. Encountering good-faith, also helps to prime people for future chats, while bad-faith conversations set people up for instant defensiveness in the future, when encountering similar points of view.

Some truths that are worth remembering:

? People can have intensely held feelings/opinions and still engage in good-faith debate.

? People can hold onto feelings/opinions very loosely and still enter dialogue in bad faith.

? Honesty and truth are important, and there are definitely people who engage in dialogue using demonstrably false information.

? Honesty is the best policy, except sometimes, when it isn’t. It can be used in bad-faith to upset, discombobulate, and derail dialogue.

? There can be topics that induce bad-faith conversations between people, who otherwise have good-faith conversations and relationships.

? If someone is just shit-stirring, know that this in a bad-faith discussion and not worth the energy.

? If someone disagrees with you, but is engaging in good-faith, they are unlikely to change their minds quickly, but an ongoing, good-faith dialogue is a great way for both of you to better understand one another, and whether you continue to disagree or not, learn something.

? Changing minds is really difficult, and it’s almost impossible when everyone is raging. Whom the god’s would destroy, they first make mad, is an old saying – one that understands the point of bad-faith, frustration and rage-baiting.

? Curiosity and patience are the bedrock of good-faith discussions. If you cannot agree, you may at least understand more of the context in which the other parties’ ideas/beliefs/feelings have come from. This is a win, even if it’s only an internal win for you.

? You, your ideas, your opinions, your feelings, are not for everyone. No matter what they are. There is nothing that absolutely everyone agrees with. Feel free to enlighten others as often as you would like to, with as much energy as you would like to invest – but know that investing your time in bad-faith dialogue is a poor investment, and saving your energy for good-faith conversations will result in better returns.

? Don’t demand good-faith from those with whom you are engaging in bad-faith. Demonstrate a posture of good-faith, before demanding it from others.

? You can disengage from bad-faith dialogue at any time. (You can disengage from good-faith dialogue at any time too, but it might be a missed opportunity).

Good luck, and happy conversations!

Just Be Nice

- Josh

This article was originally published on my blog - https://www.joshreidjones.com/blog/good-faith-vs-honesty