If you care enough about anything--politics, art, coffee--you're likely to encounter people who disagree with you. Maybe they don't like the way you look at the world. Maybe they agree with your end goal but dislike your methods of reaching it. Others simply want to argue for the sole purpose of making you mad. Regardless of the reason, I am here to tell you that you can listen to what the opposing side has to say in a respectful manner without forsaking your own personal stance on an issue.

Ever since the days of old, people have commonly viewed those with conflicting interests as villains who are beyond saving. To further alienate them, we tend to group proponents of the other side into a single entity by assigning them a label, such as millennial, SJW, or as DJ Khaled likes to call them, "they." The problem is that lately whenever we identify someone as part of these outside groups, we start to assume the worst out of them. In our mind, this gives us the justification to fire back with vitriol because hey, it's not like they deserve our sympathy. While this way of thinking helps us reinforce our beliefs, it also dehumanizes people who may have legitimate reasons for thinking the way they do.

Fortunately, as we move further into the future, more people are starting to realize how complex a conflict can be and are approaching these disagreements differently. Right before I joined Odyssey, I checked out the homepage and came across an extremely controversial article by Brianna Lyman that blasted drug addicts for labeling their affliction as a disease, claiming that they brought their "illness" on themselves. Naturally, such extreme statements garnered multiple responses.

As I read through most of them, there was one certain response that stood out as firm, level-headed and respectful all at once. Unlike many of the other articles refuting the original post, Melissa Svec's response shows that she understands why Lyman feels such anger toward addicts, going so far as to concede certain points and acknowledge how hard it is to sympathize with them. At the same time, she uses scientific evidence to support her stance and rightfully criticizes the more irrational parts of Lyman's article. Instead of bashing Lyman, Svec actually makes an effort to change her beliefs.

In times of uncertainty, it's natural to vent our frustrations at something we don't understand and move on. However, as college students, we're smart enough to overcome our instincts and bridge the gap between our conflicting opinions. That person on the other side is just as human as you are; they share your insecurities and crave the same happiness you do. I'm not asking you to make friends with your local neo-Nazi or country music lover; just try to understand their point of view and potentially help lead them toward a better path.