Have you ever attempted to discuss a property rights issue with someone who disagrees with your position? Did you have a constructive conversation in which ideas were calmly discussed? Or did it turn into an angry argument?
Often, when we discuss political issues with those who disagree with us, we take on an attitude of “I am right, and you are wrong.” When the other person has a similar attitude, the result is not an effective exchange, but an angry argument. In the end, everyone is upset, and nobody has changed their mind. Indeed, everyone is likely to be more convinced that they are right.
This is not an effective way to change minds. If we want to persuade others, then we must engage in a conversation rather than an argument. If we want to convince others to embrace better ideas regarding property rights (or any issue), then we must abandon the “I am right, and you are wrong” approach.
Those who disagree with us often have legitimate concerns. But we focus on the solution that they propose or support, rather than the problem they want to solve or the goal they want to achieve. And because we disagree with their means, the means, rather than the ends, becomes the focus of the discussion (or more often, the argument). The primary cause is because the issue is not framed properly.
A framework is the basic structure. Just as the frame of a building ultimately shapes the appearance and functionality of that building, the framework for thinking ultimately shapes the conclusions that we will reach. Because the framework establishes a method for thinking, the framework determines how we process information.
You can take our mini-course “Framing and Property Rights” for FREE by signing up below.