Disagreements are not always a bad thing. They are not only inevitable but also normal and form a foundation of people to healthily relate with others. Conflict-free environments are just imaginary. When well-managed, disagreements yield positive outcomes, learning and growing opportunities, improved relationships, higher job satisfaction, and a more inclusive work environment; they also help in focusing on the bigger picture. Just as Alice Stewart disagreed with George Kneale, it was only after through the arguments that she was able to prove her right. Theirs was a constructive conflict, that of thinking partners. This kind of dispute can only be formed if one stops looking for people like ourselves and instead seek those with different backgrounds, disciplines, experiences, and divergent manner of thinking. It will call for a lot of patience and energy (Heffernan).
When I worked as daycare attendant I avoided disagreeing with my then boss at the time the children would latest be picked by parents. She said they should latest be picked by 6 PM. I found it too early bearing in mind the parents had tight work schedules and live in the traffic jam ridden city, but I chose not to disagree. The reason behind my decision was not to look unkind and not to hurt her feelings. While perhaps my chief could have been open to being offered a different perspective that I could have shared thoughtfully and respectively, I only excelled in projecting my discomfort. Given a chance, I would openly disagree and offer my ideas as well. Today's society is not ready to argue because they want to remain like on the ground that they are not opposers. Additionally, many people in authority do not take it kindly when disagreed with.
What I found interesting in the discussion is the fact that having siblings does not always guarantee you lifelong relationships. The speaker's idea of de-identification resonates a lot with me because my younger brother is an incredibly smart person, but I am labeled the "smart child." It has made him lose motivation towards academics and not work hard at school at all. Despite being a brilliant person, I feel I have ruined it for him by always being accorded attention and praise that I do not deserve. Relationships of circumstances are situational and are conceived because one life happens to overlap with another in a certain way. The liaisons that one has with members of the family, teachers, co-workers, and classmates are examples of relationships of circumstance. On the other hand, relationships of choice are pursued and developed with intention. They are the ones we have with lovers, friends, or even a spouse. Relationships of choice are more important than those of circumstances (Kluger).
Among the many reasons one may consider transforming a relationship of circumstance to the one of choice is to lessen the problems that come with conflict escalation. Relationships of choice are personal, and they humanize adversaries. On top of that, they improve communication between the concerned parties, boost trust, and generally increase the level of mutual understanding. Another reason for improving these relationships is because as people know each other better, they easily recognize and acknowledge the grievances either side may be having. It is through this that feelings of empathy and sympathy are developed. These senses can inhibit any hostile indulgent while opening up opportunities for de-escalation. I agree with the speaker that some relationship should be changed over; if the broken sibling's relationship is fixable, it should be fixed because it is worth it.
Works Cited
Kluger, Jeffrey. “The Sibling Bond.” TEDxAsheville, 2011, https://www.ted.com/talks/jeffrey_kluger_the_sibling_bond/discussion#t-97411. Accessed 30 Jun. 2018.
Heffernan, Margaret. “Dare to Disagree.” TEDGlobal, 2012, https://www.ted.com/talks/margaret_heffernan_dare_to_disagree. Accessed 30 Jun. 2018.