 |
John Corvino: "when debating, I focus
on the message, not the messenger" |
With power comes responsibility. When an artist gains visibility, the audience often wants to know more about his or her political positions. Whenever I connect to my audience, in live shows or via social media, I take the chance to raise awareness to the causes I stand for: freedom of belief and animal welfare. In order not to be accused of being a “fake-activist”, the artist needs to really understand the causes he or she stands for, as well as to master the science of negotiation. This is why I spend a considerable time watching debates on YouTube. By doing that, I learn more about the world that surrounds me, and about persuasion. My favorite channel is
that of Intelligence Squared, UK based organization that promotes
Oxford-Style debates.
In the channel, you can watch full-length discussions between specialists in controversial subjects, such as religion, sexuality and politics. They talk mostly about things we would prefer not to talk about, but should. Or, at least, could. In the end of each debate, it is requested that the audience chooses a side. You have to be for or against something. I have a lot of fun watching Intelligence Squared debates, but there is something in this idea of taking sides that I find hard to agree with. Making choices is something we have to do each and every day, but rigidly sticking to a side can, sometimes, lead to an unhealthy division.
While searching for debates on YouTube, I met a very interesting person named John Corvino. I heard him speaking at
a debate over marriage equality. This debate caught my attention because it was promoted by the
Kansas City Atheist Coalition, in conjunction with the
School of Faith. Two diametrically opposed institutions talking to each other: what a fantastic example of an effort for mutual benefit. The debate also caught my attention because of Corvino's lighthearted approach. John dares to speak of agreement, and I love the fact that he makes it clear that agreeing is his true underlying interest. Positional bargaining is not a part of his world. Right after I watched the debate, I wrote him an e-mail with questions about this powerful approach to negotiation.
As a Chair of the Philosophy Department at Wayne State University in Detroit, Michigan, Corvino deals constantly with different positions, coming from different people. In debates, he makes a genuine effort to separate the people from the problem and focus on objective criteria. "I think this is a function of my training as a philosopher,” says Corvino. “In philosophy, the soundness of an argument is a function of whether the premises are true and whether the conclusion follows from the premises, not of who's giving the argument. Of course, arguments are also tools of negotiation and persuasion, and personal factors may be relevant to that. Yet I try to stay focused on the message, not the messenger."
In the debate organized by Atheists and Christians mentioned before, Corvino is seen speaking about positive aspects of marriage equality. He is aware of the fact that his opponent, a catholic teacher, is very unlikely to change his mind after the conversation. This is common in debates over marriage equality. On one side, we have a person who acknowledges the idea of being gay as something real, natural, and undisputable. On the other side, we have someone who doesn't. Imagine an anaerobic creature debating with an aerobic creature over the importance of air. How do you produce an agreement in a situation like that? Most of the times, you just don't. In Corvino's career, the idea of BATNA (Best Alternative To Negotiated Agreement) is taken to another level: it is almost a constant. Debates about marriage equality often tend to fall into loops, because the people involved simply live in different worlds. "Sometimes opponents are simply unapproachable, and then you have to cut your losses, learn from the experience, and move on." If someone uses a dirty trick during a debate, such as changing the subject, John doesn't get railroaded. "What I try to do is to approach things calmly, and most of the time people rise to the occasion."
Discovering John Corvino's work was an enriching experience. It contributed to understand, with real life examples, several topics presented in my Negotiation and Deal-Making class, part of the Entertainment Business Master's Program at Full Sail University. Learn more about John by visiting www.johncorvino.com.
Personal interview conducted by César Munhoz with John Corvino by e-mail in April 27th, 2012.
