Talmudic wisdom: the art of constructive disagreement

How should we approach disagreement? Two common attitudes often prevail: fight or flight. Either we relish the chance to win—perhaps even to crush—our opponents’ arguments, or, in the interest of social harmony, we avoid disagreement altogether. According to Daniel Taub (former Israeli Ambassador to the UK, international lawyer and expert in conflict resolution), neither approach is adequate. In his new book Beyond Dispute: Rediscovering the Jewish Art of Constructive Disagreement (Hodder & Stoughton, £25), he argues that instead we should engage in constructive disagreement. This may sound like a familiar ideal, but as Taub demonstrates—drawing from his own experience in tense negotiations with Palestinians following the 1993 Oslo Accords—it is far harder to practise than to preach.

Taub has pioneered the use of “difficult conversation” laboratories to teach the art of mediation, offering many practical recommendations in this wise and timely book. For instance, he urges us to make a genuine effort to empathise with the other person’s perspective, recognising that identity is shaped by the stories we tell ourselves and each other.

One powerful technique used in Taub’s classes is to begin any argument by articulating the strongest version of your opponent’s position—eschewing the temptation to build a straw man. He emphasises separating the argument from the arguer, avoiding ad hominem attacks that derail productive exchange. He advises anchoring arguments in concrete cases, noting that emotional appeals often persuade more effectively than abstract logic.

Above all, he encourages cultivating curiosity, which can yield surprising insights and pathways to resolution. Perhaps most paradoxically, Taub urges us to strengthen our own sense of identity by acknowledging the roots of our thinking—the biases, histories, and lived experiences that inevitably shape our views. His ideal is a posture of confident humility.

Some of these suggestions may sound like reminders of basic civility. Yet the true strength of Beyond Dispute lies in how Taub roots these norms within the Jewish intellectual tradition, demonstrating that the art of constructive disagreement is not merely modern etiquette, but an ancient and enduring practice. Jews, as Taub reminds us, are famously disputatious, and their foundational post-Biblical text—the Talmud—is a testament to this.

Compiled in the wake of the destruction of the Second Temple by the Romans in 70 CE, the Talmud is a singular work: part legal code derived from biblical exegesis, part allegory, part spiritual meditation. At its heart, it is a rich, often contradictory, record of rabbinic argument—a tapestry of competing interpretations arising from the complexities of human life.

According to Taub, the philosophical vitality of Talmudic thinking unfolds along both vertical and horizontal axes. Vertically, it acknowledges that no one person or group possesses the truth. He recounts the Talmudic legend in which, at the dawn of creation, the Angel of Truth pleads with God not to create humanity, warning that flawed human beings cannot bear pristine, absolute truth. God agrees—but creates humanity nonetheless, shattering Truth into countless shards cast upon the earth. Truth, God promises, quoting Psalm 85:11, will “spring up from the earth”—emerging organically, piecemeal, through human striving, rather than descending fully formed from on high. As Taub notes, this idea prefigures Isaiah Berlin’s famous warning: “Few things have done more harm than the belief on the part of individuals or groups that they are in sole possession of the truth.”

This fragmentary, hard-won understanding of truth underpins the horizontal dimension of Talmudic philosophy: the recognition that peaceful coexistence depends on friction, not its avoidance. The clash of perspectives and the honest acknowledgment of difference are vital for human flourishing. Just as trees planted too closely cannot thrive, so societies need space, gaps, and even silences to prosper. Echoing his late mentor, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, whose many books include The Dignity of Difference, Taub argues that our differences do not diminish us—they enlarge us. We should, therefore, embrace vigorous argument, especially when conducted “for the sake of heaven”.

Yet, as Taub astutely observes, not all arguments are for the sake of heaven. Some individuals are impossible to engage with—not because of what they say, but because of how they say it. Taub quotes the contemporary writer Ian Leslie, who describes those “relentlessly closed-minded, aggressive, and mean-spirited” individuals who “always assume bad faith, always grandstand, and never listen”. These people may feign productive disagreement, but only to ensnare others in endless, destructive conflict.

Returning to the pressing question that has defined Taub’s career—the possibility of peaceful reconciliation between Israel and its adversaries—the task becomes clear. For diplomats like Taub, who yearn for peace, the main challenge is to find interlocutors on the other side who are courageous enough to abandon fantasies of Israel’s destruction and willing to engage in constructive disagreement. One looks forward to the day, more in aspiration than expectation, when some of them might be persuaded to read this thoughtful, hopeful, and urgently relevant book.

Alan Bekhor’s book Striving After Ashes: How The West Lost Its Way will be published by Bombardier Press later this year.

A Message from TheArticle

We are the only publication that’s committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout these hard economic times. So please, make a donation.