Skip to main content

How We Argue: Strategies for Disagreeing with Empathy and Evidence

Register
High-angle view of teenage boys and girls wearing backpacks sitting and talking together after class.

Help your students and colleagues manage complex disagreements in ways that promote collaboration, enhance empathy, and build community.
Online Asynchronous

Upcoming Sessions

Additional details

The call to teach and model effective ways to disagree has never been louder and more relevant. With the right tools and skills, disagreements can be productive–even illuminating–for all participants. In this course, you will learn how to lead your students and colleagues through complex disagreements using two techniques: Argument Mapping and Systematic Empathy. These methods help people clarify information, promote collaboration, and problem-solve.

How We Argue: Strategies for Disagreeing with Empathy and Evidence is designed to help you lead your students and colleagues through complex disagreements using two techniques: Argument Mapping and Systematic Empathy. 

  • Argument Maps visually communicate the logic of an argument, specifically how reasons and evidence work together to support a claim.
  • Systematic Empathy uses 4 simple steps to help people listen, accurately repeat, and thoughtfully interpret someone else’s position, especially when they disagree. 

With roots in Harvard’s Department of Philosophy, ThinkerAnalytix has trained hundreds of educators to strengthen people’s “reasoning muscles” using digital games, puzzles, and practice exercises. 

Cohort learning is at the core of HGSE ethos. This three-week online workshop builds a community of professionals who share reflections, feedback, and implementation strategies.

Each week you will:

  • Employ a variety of materials (videos, practice exercises, and games) that can be used off-the-shelf to develop reasoning skills and develop systematic empathy habits of mind.
  • Connect with others who share your interest in discussing current events and controversial issues with students and/or colleagues.
  • Reflect on how using argument mapping and systematic empathy can support your current practice.

All materials are provided at the start of the program and can be completed within the three-week program period at times that best fit your schedule. Participants should plan to devote approximately five hours of work per week. Participants who complete all individual activities and contribute to group discussions prior to the end of the course period will receive a certificate indicating the completion of fifteen clock hours of instruction.

By the end of the course, participants will:

  • Acquire a simple vocabulary for working on arguments across academic disciplines and social settings.
  • Analyze and plan arguments using visualization techniques, and help others do the same.
  • Teach the steps for listening to better understand the reasons behind different views.
  • Help others engage constructively in disagreements about professional, personal, and political topics.

Individual educators may participate in this course, but team enrollment is strongly encouraged. We strongly advise that teams include a cross-section of stakeholders, including:

  • Instructors and administrators in middle school, high school, and/or higher education
  • Faculty members at universities and community colleges who teach introductory expository writing, law, philosophy, and science writing courses
  • Advisors and coordinators of enrichment programs, such as debate teams, forensic teams, model UN, moot court, ethics bowl, social justice groups, and mock trial competitions
  • Administrators of associations and organizations, e.g., the National Council of Social Studies, National Council of Principals, and National Association of Social Studies Administrators

Related Programs

Explore All Programs

Additional Resources