Seeing the Other - Even When We Disagree

A Living Room Becomes a Laboratory

Three days ago, 17 people sat in my living room for an experiment. A model called "Experimental Democracy Dialogue"- developed by a major figure in the American existential-humanistic psychology field, Prof. Kirk Schneider, aimed at helping people see and hear each other despite the differences. It was a continuation of the “case study” I created to be a “Certified Depth Healer” in the online certificate program. For me, I wanted to implement a pilot on this, not to suffice in just thinking about it and proposing it.

They were half religious Jews, half secular. For those who live or know Israel, there are wide differences between the two groups in many aspects of life, particularly in the education they receive, the way they mark and experience the Sabbath, and more often than not- the political views they hold.

Slowing Down the Noise

They were carefully chosen - not from the extremes, but people willing to try something different. I chose them mindfully to enable this conversation. Even though I have been facilitating groups and workshops of my own for over 20 years, this was a new model for me. I had never experienced it before, just read about and got the outline. I liked it from the get-go: 2 people talk, I facilitate, 6 parts, very short, lots of mirroring. Slowing things down allows for better listening, less reactivity. They were here as themselves, not representing anyone else, not to debate, not to convince. To reflect, respond, listen, mirror, express.

The Question Beneath the Question

The question we explored was simple - and not simple at all:

When you think about the future of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, what do you fear losing the most? And how should the state act to prevent that loss?

This question carries intellectual differences - but even more, it carries fear. Deep, visceral fear. These really are noisy, combative, fearful times.

For 45 minutes we followed a structured dialogue model.

No interruptions.

No cross-talk.

Short speaking times.

Reflective listening.

Then we opened the circle for a second round, keeping the same spirit.

What happened?

No shouting.

No attempts to convince.

But real differences.

When Tension Entered the Room

One participant said, “We didn’t see that much difference.”

Another said it felt “too sweet” - that maybe we’re too used to conflict to trust this kind of listening. It feels kind of “lovey dovey”, kind of “kumbaya”…

There was one moment of anger - when a religious participant said that if forced to choose between “Jewish” and “democratic,” he would choose “Jewish.” The reaction was strong. And yet - afterward, they spoke privately. They continued the conversation.

Several secular participants shared something that moved me deeply: they feel they lack knowledge of Jewish texts and regret that separation in our education system. Others spoke about fears for their children — religious and secular alike- that the appreciation of the other's humanity is being lost. A sharp 18-year-old shared how in a mixed youth movement he learned that once you truly know someone, most differences shrink.

Separate Bubbles

One sentence stayed with me:

“The biggest problem is that we don’t know each other. We live in separate bubbles.”

Was it perfect? No.

Was it enough to solve anything? Of course not. Obviously the really difficult people were not in that room, they are out there towards the extremes, very likely that they would never come to such an event. And true- they are the ones who make the most noise. They are the “powerhouses of polarization”, and their power is very tangible. But it is not they alone who harbor this tendency- we all do, perhaps from birth, consciously or unconsciously- to fear the unknown. At times even to dehumanize and delegitimize it, without really knowing her, him, they, it.

But you need to start somewhere.

There is a place to "make lots of noise"- I certainly agree with that.

But there are many places where that "noise" just does more damage than good. In the end we all need that human connection.

Something happened in that room.

For three hours, people practiced listening before reacting.

They practiced seeing the human being behind the position.

They created a small space where fear could soften into curiosity.

In a time when many feel exhausted, polarized, even despondent and wounded - that feels meaningful.

I got lots of compliments, smiles, hugs and thanks. Those always feel good...

Seeing the Other Is Disciplined Work

I don’t know yet where this will lead.

But I know this:

Seeing the other is not naïve.

It is disciplined work.

And it gives me hope.

To solve anything, create something, move somewhere and let creativity in you have to first learn to listen to really listen. This in itself is not easy. When do we really learn and practice how to listen?

I find myself remembering a similar - and yet different - gathering that I initiated and facilitated with a close friend during my graduate studies in the United States, about how Jews and Palestinians see one another.

It was a long time ago - 1989 - in a lecture hall, with “guest speakers,” and small bits of funding from various organizations here and there. Wow - 1989 - a long time ago. A different world.

And as I reflect I get the feeling that this kind of thing really resonates with me. Connecting with others, reflecting with others- I have done it on and off for years without ever really being full aware of it. Not easy stuff, and oftentimes you leave feeling that “nothing big really happened”. Does that mean it was not meaningful? Seeds are sown, ripples are created, idea are implanted, questions are posed that can go very deep.

If we cannot yet agree - perhaps we can at least learn to see. And perhaps that is where change begins. Slowly.

Feel proud to have done this- where to now?