A few weeks back I came across some alarming data from a group called More in Common, a nonprofit whose core mission is identifying and overcoming “the underlying drivers of fracturing and polarization” in our communities.  In a 2019 study they call the “Perception Gap,” More in Common explored Americans’ distorted understanding of those on the other side of the political aisle.

The results were startling.  Democrats overestimate the percentage of Republicans who believe “properly controlled immigration can be good for America” by about 35%.  Republicans overestimate the percentage of Democrats who believe “most police are bad people” by about the same margin.  Meanwhile, Democrats underestimate the percentage of Republicans who believe “racism still exists in America” by about 30%, and Republicans underestimate the percentage of Democrats who believe “I am proud to be an American, though I acknowledge my country’s flaws” by about 25%.

How can we possibly find common ground when we so poorly understand each other’s political views?  Other than building actual relationships with folks who see the world differently than we do, the most important thing might be for us to better understand ourselves.

Consider someone who once participated in a vile crusade and came to understand a better path:  political activist Megan Phelps-Roper, who grew up and later served as spokesperson for the Westboro Baptist Church.  (Yes, that Westboro Baptist Church, the one that would shout unspeakable homophobic slurs at service members’ funerals in the 2000s.  Remember them?)

Phelps-Roper left Westboro Baptist and has since engaged in some very public and very vulnerable soul-searching, a windfall for the rest of us.  Phelps-Roper’s speaking and writing encourages us to maintain a healthy skepticism of views we might hold confidently, if mistakenly.

Here are six questions she now asks herself when considering difficult matters:

1. Am I capable of entertaining real doubt about my beliefs, or am I operating from a place of certainty?
2. Can I articulate the evidence I would need to see in order to change my position, or is my perspective unfalsifiable?
3. Can I articulate my opponent’s position in a way they’d recognize, or am I straw-manning?
4. Am I attacking ideas or attacking the people who hold them?
5. Am I willing to cut off close relationships with people who disagree with me, particularly over relatively small points of contention?
6. Am I willing to use extraordinary means against people who disagree with me (e.g., forcing people out of their jobs or homes, violence/threats of violence, celebrating misfortune and tragedy)?

To be sure, we may end up at the same place we started, but this kind of self-examination is vital to ensure we are not so blinded by our own self-righteousness that we fail to fully and charitably examine difficult or complex issues.

The subtitle of Phelps-Roper’s memoir, by the way, is called “Unfollow: A Journey from Hatred to Hope.”  Right now, that’s a journey we can all embrace.

This editorial was republished from the Nebraska Examiner, an editorially independent newsroom providing a hard-hitting, daily flow of news. It is part of the national nonprofit States Newsroom. Find more at nebraskaexaminer.com.