There comes a point in many discussions where the easy way out is to simply say "let's agree to disagree." After someone says that, the conversation is marked over and both sides continue on their way.
I think we "agree to disagree too often." In other words, we throw in the towel before the conversation gets interesting.
I do think there is a place for agreeing to disagree - when you see that the other side is not interested in having a true discussion.
But I also think there are times where we end things too early because a) we think we know how they will play out or b) we are worried that our bias and intentions will be proven wrong.
The latter is interesting to me.
How much of what we see in conversations is actually just a product of us wanting to confirm our own biases?
What if we stopped "agreeing to disagree" and instead tried to learn more about the disagreement.
When we give up too early, we stop listening to what the other person is actually saying.
We tune out.
Rather, let's pay more attention when we start to disagree.
An interesting exercise is to ask the other person to tell you what information, if any, would change their minds. If that information does not exist, perhaps that argument is not worth having.
But if there is a scenario where the sides could be switched...find it.