Harvard professor Julia Minson joins Chrissy to break down why most “conflict” isn’t about bad people—it’s about missing skills. She explains how disagreement turns toxic when we slip into judgment, certainty, and a win/lose mindset, and why “good intentions” don’t count if the other person can’t hear them. Then she gives a practical toolkit—naive realism, “listen with your mouth,” and her HEAR framework—to help you say what you mean, lower the temperature, and preserve the relationship for the next conversation.
Key Takeaways
Disagreement ≠ conflict: conflict starts when you judge the person (you’re ignorant / selfish / bad) instead of wrestling with the idea.
Most fights are “missing skills,” not bad intentions: people aren’t trained to show curiosity, signal respect, or stay regulated when heat rises.
Naive realism is the trap: we believe we’re seeing “objective reality,” so if you disagree, something must be wrong with you—and that’s how contempt enters.
People don’t want to change their minds—so stop arguing like they do: we assume they’re threatened; really, they’re usually just annoyed you won’t accept their “obvious” truth.
A good disagreement builds a bridge to the next one: success = the other person still wants to talk to you after, not “I won.”
See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Canada - english