Not every disagreement requires convincing the other side to achieve value

Evidence

The goal cannot and does not always have to be to convince the other side. Accepting this can save you a lot of frustration. — Holm Gero Hümmler, Ulrike Schiesser, Fact and Prejudice, 39

Categorization

• SEED: Potential angle: reframing persuasion goals away from winning toward understanding, dialing back frustration.
• XREF: connects to: Relations with the Other form a closed circle, never a progressing dialectic. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 936; Deliberative democracy is agonal dissent atop constitutional consensus, not consensus-seeking talk. — Jürgen Habermas, A New Structural Transformation of the…, 19; The act of public deliberation outweighs its actual argumentative content in easing conflict — Jürgen Habermas, A New Structural Transformation of the…, 78

Related

• Deliberative democracy is agonal dissent atop constitutional consensus, not consensus-seeking talk. (similarity 0.82)
• The act of public deliberation outweighs its actual argumentative content in easing conflict (similarity 0.80)
• Deliberative democrats reject modus vivendi compromise as mere agreement lacking rational grounding. (similarity 0.79)
• Standard argumentation guides fail because opponents are often unwilling to engage factually (similarity 0.78)