The difference between a healthy disagreement and a destructive conflict lies in your assumptions. Conflict begins when you conclude that no rational or moral person could hold the opposing view, regardless of the topic's importance, such as how to store cauliflower.
Attempting to definitively 'win' an argument with clever zingers and reams of data is a losing strategy. As you make longer and louder speeches, you are merely providing your counterpart with more material to refute, which reinforces their position and prevents any real influence.
Humans have an innate tendency to oversimplify complex problems, a weakness exploited by divisive leaders. To counteract this, you must intentionally complicate your life by seeking out diverse groups and consuming media from informed people you disagree with, building resilience against vilification.
To be seen as receptive, your internal state of empathy is less important than the specific words you use. Other people cannot read your mind, so using a specific set of words and phrases—called 'conversational receptiveness'—is the key to signaling that you're engaging with their perspective.
Neuroscience finds that our opinions can become rigidly embodied in our brains. Synchronized physical movement, like walking side-by-side, can break these ingrained neural patterns. This fosters empathy and flexibility, making it easier to discuss difficult topics without them escalating into a fight.