Building Bridges with Dignity: Lessons from Tami Pyfer

What if the real danger in our public discourse isn’t disagreement, but something else?

In a thought-provoking exchange at our September Community Meeting, Tami Pyfer invited us to reconsider how we talk to and about one another.

Utilizing the Dignity Index, a tool that maps language on a spectrum from contempt to respect, Pyfer illuminated how small shifts in words can either deepen divides or build bridges. Rather than avoiding hard conversations, she urged us to practice engaging them with dignity, modeling the kind of dialogue our classrooms, campuses, and communities urgently need.

Here are five key takeaways.

Polarization deepens when we frame those we disagree with as less than human, rather than engaging with their ideas or actions.

So we believe that the problem that we have, this division we have, is not caused by the fact that we disagree with each other on policy issues, or that we have a different way that we would solve immigration or the tax policy. It’s caused by the contempt that we hold with people who don’t think the way we do. Arthur Brooks calls this the “cultural addiction to contempt.” Think of the system that surrounds us, whether it’s media or social media or entertainment, information, or politics. It’s designed to get us angry and outraged, and it’s tearing us apart. Dr. Brooks says if we want to solve the polarization problem, we have to solve the contempt problem.

Contempt shows up in dismissive, mocking, or demeaning words, while dignity language makes space for respect, curiosity, and shared humanity— even in sharp disagreement.

So what is contempt? It’s this feeling of disdain or disgust. We treat others as vile or worthless. They’re just not worth talking to. We dismiss them. We look down on them. We call people names. We question their motives…We attack people’s character, or we mock their background, or we lump people together in large groups under negative labels. Unfortunately, in education, educators have experienced this, right? We know what that’s like to be lumped together in a large group and labeled. It’s like …”Those educators are doing it. Those people.” But sometimes we do that to other people without recognizing it within ourselves.

Using the Dignity Index scale helps us spot contempt in speech (our own and others) and choose to respond at “5 and above,” where dialogue and problem-solving are possible.

This is aspirational, but we believe that this is the way that we solve problems, is to treat people with dignity. So if that’s the way we solve problems, then let’s just all get really good at that. Let’s treat people with dignity. The problem as we know in the education field is, how do you maximize something you can’t measure? How do I teach kids to improve, or parents? How do I get better if I’m not measuring where I’m at? I don’t know what that looks like. I don’t know what it sounds like, and I don’t know where I’m going.

This quote is from representative Emmanuel Cleaver from Missouri…He said, “There are agencies and organizations that score us on everything we do, except there’s not a single organization that monitors and scores us on how we treat each other.”

Note: The Dignity Index does this, and we practiced using it, along with this scoring guide, during this meeting.

Leading with dignity can deescalate high-conflict situations and function as a form of healing.

When contempt begins to overwhelm your relationship, you tend to forget entirely [someone else’s] positive qualities, and that contempt is poisonous to a relationship. It makes it virtually impossible to solve a problem…so our solution to contempt is dignity. Dr. Donna Hicks, who is an international conflict resolution specialist, writes that if indignity tears us apart, or in our language, if contempt tears us apart, dignity can put us back together.

Donna says that, along with our survival instincts, the yearning to be treated with dignity is the single most powerful force motivating our behavior. It transcends race, religion, gender, and every social distinction. And she goes on to say that it’s the one universal truth about the human experience. We all want to be treated with dignity, and that if you violate someone’s dignity repeatedly… If you treat people with contempt repeatedly, you will get a war, or a divorce, or a revolution, because a desire for revenge is an instant response to a dignity violation.

The Dignity Index is not about labeling or judging people, but about reflecting on language and cultivating habits that reduce division and build trust.

The Dignity Index is meant to measure or focus on language that we use when we’re in conflict, when we’re afraid, when we’re angry. How do we respond when we’re hurt? And it’s not that we disagree, it’s how we disagree in these moments. It goes from the bottom, which is a one on the contempt side of the scale, to the top of the scale, which is the dignity side of the scale… We don’t score people, we score language that people use.