ENGAGING THE OTHER SIDE

Clearly perceiving views of the opposing side in a moral conflict involves the capacity to see beyond one’s own viewpoint and to correctly represent as well as to respectfully engage with those of the other.

Holding seemingly disparate perspectives may be difficult under any cir­cumstances. When we are engaged in moral conflict, we are likely to become more rigid and fixed in our own belief systems, thus making it even more chal­lenging to hold seemingly contradictory perspectives. From a communication perspective, groups in moral conflict maintain undesirable patterns of interac­tions through their respective commitments to their own moral orders (Pearce and Littlejohn, 1997). These moral orders are an expression of a set of complex obligations, prohibitions, duties, rights, and aspirations that are triggered when responding to the question what ought I do? This relates to earlier work by Morton Deutsch (1985) that describes moral orders from a psychological orien­tation with cognitive, motivational, and moral components. From Deutsch’s per­spective, how one answers this question depends on the type of relationship one is in with another. As both groups stay entrenched in their own moral orders or sets of moral values, they do not allow for the existence of multiple and sometimes competing stories or narratives. When they are fixed in their own stories, which describe, illustrate, explain, and justify their moral perspec­tives, they do not recognize that they really may not be as different or as polar­ized as they initially thought (Fisher-Yoshida, 2005). By not acknowledging the existence of other ways of seeing the world as portrayed by the other’s stories, they miss opportunities to discover common ground.

Transcending moral conflict requires a shift in the pattern of logic, commit­ment, and obligations. Oliver (1996) describes the capacity of being able to take the perspective of the other party as systemic eloquence (p. 3). She identifies five qualities that help us break loose from destructive patterns to promote better relational and ethical commitments. These are humility, which includes being sensitive to our impact on others; discernment, an ability to detect the differences in the way we think and say we are conducting ourselves from the actions we actually take; responsibility, which implies a commitment to reflect before mak­ing judgments and taking actions, so that these foster mutual respect and open­ness to others; courage to use incoherence to facilitate connection and connection to facilitate contrast; and generosity toward ourselves and others to do the best with what we have readily available. Each of these qualities nurtures a reflective process that can transcend moral conflict.

Resolving moral conflicts, minimizing moral conflicts, or at least trying to bring polarized parties to the same table to communicate with one another can be difficult. There are so many levels of complexity to consider and the struggle against the negative influences that may want to perpetuate the conflict can be very difficult. In the next section, we propose CMM as one approach that may help bridge differences with those engaged in moral conflict, as well as promote systemic eloquence.