A good conversion requires open-mindedness and empathy. The more the better. I just came across a concept for what I would call a good conversation and that offers more guardrails. It's called socratic dialogue.

Socratic dialogue‍

- Starts with questions that expose assumptions (e.g. "Why would you do that?")
- Neither party claims to know the final answer - you're genuinely searching together
- Uses specific examples to test general principles
- When contradictions emerge, you follow them rather than defending your position
- The goal is discovery/understanding, not winning or convincing
- Often reveals that what seemed obvious is actually complex or unclear

Normal dialogue

- Often starts with positions people already hold
- People try to explain or convince rather than discover
- When challenged, there's tendency to defend rather than explore
- The goal is often to communicate your viewpoint or reach agreement
- Contradictions are problems to be resolved quickly rather than explored

You could say that the socratic dialogue is kind of a joint quest to understand something better. The normal dialogue is in the best case about trying to understand the other person and in the worst case about merely trying to convince the other person of your more or less fixed opinion.

The difference is the attitude: Are you trying to figure something out together, or are you trying to communicate something you already think you know?

The international bestseller The Courage To Be Disliked by Ichiro Kishimi and Fumitake Koga is written as a socratic dialogue and it's how I found out about it.