I think a great way to approach any discussion is with a GCSE Maths mindset.

If you have the answer - show the working out.

If the answer is wrong, and you show the working, you get points for the process.

If the answer is right, and the working is missing or wrong, you can't get full marks.

Or you can just 'Agree?' and not have to think about it at all.

Most people are right in their opinions because these are by nature subjective to the individual, but don't justify it with suitable working,

And these debates become arguments because the working out between parties conflict sometimes more than the argument.

For me, when I hear someone with an opposing view, I just ask questions. I'm always keen to understand why they've come to that conclusion, and it's always an opportunity to learn.

Even if they are fundamentally wrong, such as conspiracy theorists who invent facts to support absurd claims. When you find out why they are so inclined, there's often a catalyst that, when worked out, can improve that relationship.

Or they may actually be right, but their working out is wrong, rendering their position frustratingly non-viable. It must be quite a cognitive dissonance to Know you are right, but not why.

Disagreement is such a great opportunity, especially when you realise that nothing is known, it's only perceived.

While the more I think I know, the more I realise how little that is.

It's all in the working out and the answer. Not in the one or the other.

Agree?