The art of conversation

This weekend I have engaged in many conversations that have been.. well, let's say intense. I really enjoy conversations that are more than just chit-chat, that really have a purpose and where people are actually invested in them. When morals or ethics, for instance, come into the picture, the ingredients for an amazing conversation are there. However, they are exactly the same ingredients that can create a disaster. Anyway, I am not going to get into the conversations we've had, but they gave me a spark to wonder the magic behind a good conversation and my own conversation skills.

I do not always feel obligated to come forward with each thought I have during heated conversations, which sort of allows me to  take a step back and examine the situation from another angle. I sometimes struggle with expressing exactly what I am thinking, which is why I also see it as the best solution; misunderstandings due to flawed expression are the most annoying ones to deal with. However, I expect people to have opinions and I appreciate those who manage to back them up and truly stand for their own. Strong opinions don't always mean black and white thinking, though, which can sometimes be misinterpreted by people. Nevertheless, I feel like my trap and blessing is seeing quite much of that grey area. I have noticed that I sometimes set myself between opposing views as I lack knowledge or capability to stand for a side, but I consider it both an advantage and a flaw. When I do have a solid point of my own, though, I do stand behind it. Not in a way that I try to win, unless I see that the opponent is basing their arguments on empty words, stereotypes or just pointless explaining around the topic but never to the point.

The richest conversation is born in a situation where opinions differ from each other. I feel like a person does not necessarily have to understand the opposing arguments in the sense that they'd agree with them on any level, but it is essential to listen to them. Conforming to the opponent's opinions is to my mind required when you realize you're wrong, which I know is not easy to admit. However, I feel like one cannot be a good conversationalist without the ability of acknowledging one's weaknesses and admitting them in the moment. It is not losing to say "you're right, I have to reconsider my views", it is simply being a bigger man (or a woman, to be equal) and a mature thing to do. I am not contradicting myself here, although I say I appreciate strong opinions that are firmly held; I believe that good opposing arguments have the power to turn your opinion around no matter how strong it is. It depends on the seriousness of the issue, though, I do not expect deeply moral views to be turned around in a blink. 

"Issues argue, people don't" should be the red thread of a conversation. I am not saying it's wrong not to have a good chemistry with a person whose views are completely unacceptable to you, you do not have to like everyone. However, a conversation is not mature when it gets too personal with people who hardly know each other. What you think about one certain theme does not necessarily define you as a person, which is why people shouldn't be judged based on their opinions. Disliking and judging are different things to me, and even if I do not like someone, I do try my best not to judge them. This paragraph in all its confusion is trying to say that no matter how intense a conversation you have and it makes you emotionally invested, it is between you and the other person. The issue can be discussed with others, the person cannot.
 
To conclude, I could cite a poster for our university debating club that summarizes the main idea behind this post: "Don't argue with idiots. Debate." We're not kids anymore, we are capable of doing that.