Bismillahirrahmanirrahim,

The tag line of this blog is ‘agreeing to disagree’, and I chose it for a reason. The term seem simple enough to be understood and yet so hard to apply, especially when emotions are running high. Let us try to motivate this discussion more.

I’ll first quote Wikipedia since it’s the easiest way to explain things:

Agree to disagree or “agreeing to disagree” is a phrase in English referring to the resolution of a conflict (usually a debate or quarrel) whereby all parties tolerate but do not accept the opposing position(s). It generally occurs when all sides recognise that further conflict is unnecessary, ineffective or otherwise undesirable. They may also remain on amicable terms while continuing to disagree.

Wikipedia also points out that the alternative phrase of ‘agreeing to differ’ has the advantage of not posing a logical contradiction, but that phrase is not as memorable. Therefore, I will use the original phrase with the above explanation for ease of use.

Agreeing to disagree, then, has a large component of tolerance, as one would expect. The main point that it stresses is that though the parties that are in conflict can lay down their differences in order to cease further conflict. That is, of course, admirable, but it needs the cooperation of all the parties involved in order for it to happen. It also requires, in my view, good will among the various parties in order to make the proposition feasible. If there is no effort between all the parties involved or there is a serious lack of good will among them, then it is doubtful that such a method of conflict resolution can be achieved.

One might pause here and ask, is agreeing to disagree desirable? After all, it requires so much effort from everyone involved that it might be a waste of time to even try. I must profess that I do not know the answer to that question, but I do think that it is desirable in most circumstances. After all, Islam preaches peace and harmony, so conflict resolution must be good for at least some circumstances. In fact, one of the roots for the word ‘Islam’ is ’salaam’, of which one of the meaning is ‘peace’. I believe that any unnecessary conflict should be resolved as soon as possible in a manner that is satisfactory and just to everyone, and ‘agreeing to disagree’ seem to be one of the methods in which conflicts can be resolved. This can, however, be debated upon, but I will not go through the details here as it is not the purpose of this entry.

If it is desirable, then how should one create the conditions favourable for people to agree to disagree? It will be context specific, of course. But I think that one of the best ways to reach some sort of agreement is to have a meeting between all the parties involved and discuss the conflict in the open. There will need to be an understanding between the parties that emotions must be put in the back seat as often as possible, as mixing emotions and conflict usually result in undesirable consequences. It should also be understood that whatever grievances that any party has against another either be put on the table or be put to rest. This way, all the misunderstandings can be laid to rest. The parties involved must also remember that the discussion does not have the purpose of winning one particular point of view, rather, that all points of view are valid in the discussion and that the outcome of the discussion is to tolerate another point of view.

Toleration is not an easy thing, however. To tolerate means to put up with something or somebody unpleasant or to recognise and respect rights and beliefs of others. One should not, for example, shy away from admitting one’s mistake but rather rant about how one’s feelings was hurt by a comment. Nor should one run away from discussing the issue under the guise of ‘wanting to avoid further conflict’. If there is already a conflict, not discussing it might simply increase the misunderstanding and mistrust between all parties, becoming the catalyst for further conflict. One should, however, be civilised and not confuse between fact and personal preference, and just because one does not agree to one point of view, one should not simply trash it (provided that it has sufficient justification). Being civil is the hardest part in the process and I think the corresponding concept in Islamic teaching would be ‘adab’. I myself had had a few problems because of the lack of it myself, and I am still learning, but we should try to be courteous as best we can.

In the end, then, it is a simple issue of common sense. It would seem most natural to most people, agreeing to disagree, if some thought have been put into it. But then, there is always the difficulty of making it happen in reality. And that is a challenge to us all, I suppose.

Wallahua’lam