I think that relationships and the conversations that we have are all about identifying where we disagree/agree on a particular point. By identifying what, how and why we disagree helps us form new and more suitable thinking for that topic in our own time and space.

So instead of simply “agreeing to disagree” I say lets “agree how and why we disagree” and
compare our reasoning.

I was speaking to a young guy the other day and he was telling me that he trusts in the person where as I told him that I trust in the agreements that I make with the person. We could then agree that this is fundamentally where we disagree.

I think he prefers to assume that the other person will agree with his way of thinking rather than explicitly identifying where they may disagree on an issue such as “commitment”, for example.

But I guess that if they do not have an agreement to specifically identify where they disagree on the issue then I guess that is all he can do is assume that they agree. Otherwise he could be accused of interrogating her or hijacking the conversation.

Even if they did agree to identify where and why they disagreed they will also need to agree upon a process or way to go about identifying such disagreements. Presently I use Rethink Perfect as this process of identification.

Ultimately I believe that this process of identifying is the way we form our identity.