Argue for the Sake of Heaven

From Hebrew College, Jewish Learning, "For the Sake of Heaven", Rabbi Monica Gomery: We have our work cut out for us, to learn how not to swallow each other whole, and instead to become curious about what חלק, portion, of a greater truth each member of our community holds in their lived experience. May we continue learning together to become “excellent at conflict,” integrating the lessons of both righteousness and imperfection that Korach and God embody in this story. May we continue to find discernment on the path toward generative conflict, conflict for the sake of life, justice and divinity, l’shem shamayim.

A medieval rabbinic commentator, the Sefat Emet, takes this Mishna one step further: Voicing one’s own opinion, even when it may be at odds with others,causes people to rethink what they believe is correct. As such, it may disturb peace. It is however a particularly effective means of achieving one’s potential…each of us was created for the purpose of accomplishing something distinctive and special…

From https://torah.org/learning/pirkei-avos-chapter1-16: ....one should adopt a single rabbi rather than choosing from an assortment. Many people are in the bad habit today of “shopping around” for opinions, searching until they find a leniency — or a stringency (takes all kinds, you know). The ideal, however, is to select a single and proper mentor for yourself — and to submit yourself to his decisions. Who it is may depend upon your geographical location, schooling, synagogue membership, religious affiliation, or family ties (note I didn’t mention favorite website) . Regardless, each of us must find his or her own rabbi, and faithfully stick with him. And in so doing he will “remove himself from doubt:” his religious practices will be uniform and consistent.

From AJC.org, Nuance Is A Jewish Value (Or, If Hillel And Shammai Could Do It, Why Can’t We?), by Alan Ronkin: Our history has much to teach us about how we save our community from the pit of polarization.​​​​​​​
The rabbis of the Talmud fought bitterly over matters of Jewish law. Most famously, Hillel and Shammai differed in almost all cases brought before them. Their halachic opinions had great significance in how Jews lived their lives. But the tradition teaches that the children of their disciples married one another; despite their differences, they figured out a way to work it out. Why? Because according to the Talmud (Eruvin 13b), when their disputes were adjudicated, a voice came from the heavens and declared “Eilu v’Eilu divrei Elokim Chayim” — both ideas are expressions of the will of God.
Despite the need to reach a final legal decision, rabbinic deliberations were based on mutual respect and a desire to bring people closer. This requires nuance, attention to subtle distinctions or variations. Effective Jewish decisions cannot be summarized on bumper stickers. We would do well to remember that as we engage in communal and public discourse.
As advocates for Jewish causes, we often try to win the “debate.” Many believe that if we just tell people our “truth,” provide the “facts,” and disprove their claims, we will persuade others to accept our point of view. They will walk away defeated but enlightened, chastened but thankful for the privilege of being educated.
While this might be true in college debate or in a courtroom, the court of public opinion requires a different approach.
Whereas debate is designed to have a winner and a loser, persuasion in the Jewish tradition requires diplomacy and civility. It requires an honest commitment to listening to people, respecting their concerns and bringing us closer through relationship building and ongoing connection. It rejects “othering” — devaluing someone so much that their humanity is diminished.

From Heterodox Academy, "Jewish Wisdom About Viewpoint Diversity": Rabbi Buchdahl put the argument all together in one sermon titled “Why Jews Value Dissent.” Like most people leading anything these days, she has had to manage a community often strained by political disagreement. Her sermon offers guidance to anyone who is in a leadership role or would simply prefer to get smarter rather than angrier.
The only way in which a human being can make some approach to knowing the whole of a subject, is by hearing what can be said about it by persons of every variety of opinion, and studying all modes in which it can be looked at by every character of mind. No wise man ever acquired his wisdom in any mode but this; nor is it in the nature of human intellect to become wise in any other manner. The steady habit of correcting and completing his own opinion by collating it with those of others, so far from causing doubt and hesitation in carrying it into practice, is the only stable foundation for a just reliance on it.

From Covenant and Conversation, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, Argument for the Sake of Heaven, Korach : The Korach rebellion was not just the worst of the revolts from the wilderness years. It was also different in kind because it was a direct assault on Moses and Aaron. Korach and his fellow rebels in essence accused Moses of nepotism, of failure, and above all of being a fraud – of attributing to God decisions and laws that Moses had devised himself for his own ends. So grave was the attack that it became, for the Sages, a paradigm of the worst kind of disagreement....The Sages were drawing a fundamental distinction between two kinds of conflict: argument for the sake of truth and argument for the sake of victory....It was not that they wanted a community without leaders. It is, rather, that they wanted to be the leaders. The rebels’ rhetoric had nothing to do with the pursuit of truth and everything to do with the pursuit of honour, status, and (as they saw it) power. They wanted not to learn but to win. They sought not verity but victory....The opposite is the case when the argument is for the sake of truth. If I win, I win. But if I lose I also win – because being defeated by the truth is the only form of defeat that is also a victory.....
The story of Korach remains the classic example of how argument can be dishonoured. The Schools of Hillel and Shammai remind us that there is another way. “Argument for the sake of Heaven” is one of Judaism’s noblest ideals – conflict resolution by honouring both sides and employing humility in the pursuit of truth.