Opinion: Disagreement can be a bridge to understanding

Commentary by Jeff Worrell 

Somewhere along the way, we started treating disagreement like a high-stakes competition — a battle to be won rather than an opportunity to engage. The goal became scoring points, proving someone wrong and emerging victorious. But in that race to win, something important was lost: the conversation itself.

Real progress doesn’t come from shouting down opposing views. It comes from listening, questioning and learning. Disagreement isn’t a roadblock; it’s a bridge to understanding. When we approach it with curiosity instead of combativeness, we unlock perspectives we might never have considered.

Take, for example, the debate recently around setting a speed limit in our roundabouts. Some argued that reducing speed would improve pedestrian safety, while others worried it would create congestion for motorists. Instead of letting the discussion spiral into polarization, community leaders listened to all sides, considered data and landed on another solution – raised crosswalks resulting in slower speed.

Civility doesn’t mean avoiding tough discussions — it means engaging in them with respect and purpose. It means recognizing that an opposing viewpoint is not an enemy stance but an invitation to exchange ideas. In the end, the most valuable conversations aren’t about who’s right but about what we can learn from each other.

So let’s rethink how we disagree. Let’s treat it not as a fight to win but as an opportunity to grow. Because when disagreement becomes a conversation, it moves us forward — not apart.