| This is a total thought experiment and I have not thought deeply about it. I wonder if you could encourage healthy debates by grouping people based on cluster, such that: - Eveybody agrees with each other person in the group on the majority of topics. - Everybody disagrees with the majority opinion on some topic(s). - Every topic has two people who disagree with the majority. - No two people share the exact same views. I'm imagining probably 6-7 people per group. Make sure they know the matching rules. Basically, I wonder if you could cut through tribalism and encourage nuanced discussion by making it clear from the beginning that everyone mostly agrees on everything, but everyone also has some points of disagreement. Then it becomes more of a "figure out where we disagree and why" type discussion. Maybe seed it with one topic in the center of the cluster that everyone agrees on, to give a "safe" starting talking point. I could also see it devolving to a conformist atmostphere where nobody wants to voice their minority view, but I'm hoping that would be mitigated by everyone knowing that they all have a minority view, and that one other person shares their particular minority views. |