The concepts of right and wrong are too general to be useful within an effective dialogue. Due to the generality of the argument no agreement can come between people who argue one or the other. If people do not understand each other's point-of-view then how can they agree or disagree with it? The only real effective response is, "I don't understand your point-of-view in regard to ___ (fill in the blank with the misunderstanding)." Then, the other person has the opportunity to hear what needs to be explained either in greater detail or explained differently.

David Bohm would say that all sides of a dialogue have a right to an opinion of what is right and/or wrong. Spiral Dynamics integral would say that all concepts of right and wrong come from a particular color and tier level and/or quadrant. Within a PiALOGUE there is ONLY the blue dot (THE TRUTH) with an on-going (perhaps ever-going) convergence upon the blue dot. There is only the ever-increasing clarity of expression on ALL sides of ALL opinions.