Absolutely. That is what’s missing from our current state, I think — respect for divergent opinions. We all have different experiences and values that bring us to believe what we believe. And they all have value. But that’s pretty much why I think the yin and yang thing is a good description. I know that my approach (libertarianism), left unconstrained, would likely go a bit too far, as would pure progressivism. But if we can listen to each other and learn from one another, maybe we can find some improvements we can make.

Rob, thanks for the kind words. Frankly I think that all these issues are really hard to figure out and neither progressives nor conservatives have a corner on wisdom. We’re all trying to figure out complicated questions, and once we recognize that we’re all trying to figure things out and we don’t have the tools to get much beyond conjecture. We do what we can and hopefully we can get better at understanding one another. I’m glad that we can discuss this.

Oh, and while I still agree with what I said, I’ll admit, I’ve started reading more of your articles here, and it looks like you probably understand the conservative thought process more than many progressives, so kudos on that.

I’m not going to comment on everything we disagree on in each article, but suffice it to say, I still think your understanding of the opposition will improve with more interaction, but you’re doing a better job than most. I’m enjoying the reading.

1) You use gun control as an example, and state that it is NOT an equivalency. From a conservative perspective, government is inherently prone to overreaching and usurping the authority of the individual, which, over time, leads to tyranny. And conservatives, by definition, hold loyal to traditional ideas — such as the fact that this country was formed in OPPOSITION to tyranny.

So, regarding the gun debate, you’re missing an important element on the conservative side. We look at societies that were much more free and became tyrannies, and we notice that disarming the populace was one of the first moves in that process. Because we conservatives inherently don’t trust our government, we are constantly on guard against moves toward tyranny. You could say that could never happen in the U.S., but the same could be said of others.

So, from the conservative point of view, progressives are TOO trusting in government, and government can, in time, take advantage of that. In that sense, the fighting against additional gun control measures IS the yang to your yin. Progressives trust government too much, so conservatives have to be all the more vigilant to watch for any signs of a government taking too much control of its people.

2) I’m a bit troubled by a statement later in your article, as I think your current approach is bound to fail. If you want to understand how an artist’s creative process works, do you ask the teller at the bank, or do you ask the artist? How about if you want to understand the process your doctor uses to diagnose illness — should you ask a police officer, or should you ask your doctor?

These are obvious, extreme examples. But it is for this reason that this statement of yours troubles me:

“My current goal is to work with other progressives, not to berate Republicans or others with whom I disagree, but to improve my own knowledge of the psychology that defines our political differences.”

Why would you work with other progressives? If you want to understand conservative thought, talk to conservatives! In fact, feel free to respond here and I’ll send you my email address if you want. Get it straight from the horse’s mouth.