Reality is very different, full of contrasts and nuances: a massive chiaroscuro, and there are no simple answers to complex issues. “The role of universities as a forum for open discourse in an increasingly polarized world” On 9 November, I attended an interactive event chaired by the Chief Executive of the British Academy, Hetan Shah,at the Darwin Lecture Theatre. The theme "Disagreeing Well in Higher Education" was discussed by a brilliant panel consisting of our Union Affairs Officer at the Students' Union, Mary McHarg, and our President and Provost, Michael Spence, along with Professor Sasha Roseneil, Vice-Chancellor and President of the University of Sussex, and Tomiwa Owolade, journalist, author and UCL alumni.

However, dissent can take different forms. There is a healthy disagreement, which recognises in the ‘other’ a person like us, and a depersonalising disagreement, which objectifies and belittles. While the first creates space for growth and personal development, the latter often results in hateful acts. All these abbreviations and oversimplifications tend to result in a jungle of jargon that can be a potential barrier for people to learn and educate themselves. The difference between disagreeing well and shouting at each other is, I believe, in maintaining mutual respect. In this hour and a quarter, there was a lot of talk about several issues, and yet, what emerged in the end were not answers but only questions. "The consequence of living in a free society" Spence explained that the alternative to disagreeing well is that either we start shouting at one another or that we self-centre and simply don't talk.

Accept the updated privacy & cookie policy

Disagreement, as stated by Owolade during the event, is the inevitable “consequence of living in a free society.” The clipart here has been invaluable for my special education class. The clear and relatable images aid in communication and understanding. It would be helpful to have a feature allowing teachers to request specific clipart tailored to special education needs." Epistemic humility: accepting that we can be wrong and asking ourselves why other reasonable human beings think what they think. Furthermore, why are we assuming that other people cannot relate to a certain set of feelings and experiences?

In his first intervention, Owolade pointed out how “we don’t speak about diversity with enough diversity.”

'Black And White' - 1000 News Result(s)

But Impartial Chairs will not be present in every moment of our lives. During any discussion, I believe it is crucial to bear in mind the three golden rules given by the UCL Provost:

Here at UCL, the Students' Union actively promotes freedom of speech, working towards fostering inclusive debates on a wide array of topics. As highlighted by our Union Affairs Officer, more than 1,500 guest speakers spanning the entire political spectrum visit campus each year invited by our student groups. Therefore, to support healthy disagreement, initiatives like the Impartial Chair Programme are in place to ensure that discussions are always welcoming to diverse perspectives. We love using acronyms, but we usually overlook how they only give us a very small idea of the people who fall under that definition. Acronyms are simplifications and, as such, they often fail to capture the nuanced richness of who or what they represent. A set of virtues around communication: using a language that is not reductive and that does not cut short the ‘other.’

This is a question we have all heard ourselves asked at least once in our lives, perhaps not very long ago. Given the recent events, many of us will have tried to confront our friends and classmates in search of firm truth– to find common ground on divisive topics. People in a minoritised community, and I would argue in any community, don’t necessarily share the same views on any given issue. There are “differences within differences”. We should not assume the views of a group of people on the basis of identity, if we want to encourage a culture of disagreeing well. VPEE Student Journalist, Giovanna Cantarin, shares her reflections of attending the first UCL Disagreeing Well event: Disagreeing Well in Higher Education. "But whose side are you on?" Listen, and actually do it. Listening to appreciate and understand another point of view, without thinking about what we are going to say next. This labelling and dividing are at the root of intolerance and disrespect in any sphere of life, not only in higher education. Probably, as Owolade suggests, the only way out this vicious circle is really to understand that we have a “shared fundamental humanity.”