There is a human instinct to deplore undesired events rather than to understand them, creating room for error in judging future events. Understanding, in turn, requires mutual, deep analysis and relationship building that explores and analyses one another’s metacontext: society, culture, language, history, personal household circumstances, education, occupations, motivations and so on. Sincere understanding can elicit empathy which thereafter facilitates acceptance and adoption of changes in attitudes, behaviours and values. Be it bureaucratic disagreements, political imbroglios, development project multinational team disagreements or violent security circumstances, it has often been exceedingly difficult to attempt—let alone actually engage in—useful dialogues with adversaries, disputants or counterparts (what hereinafter I often refer to as “Others”). Yet dialogic efforts are indispensible in increasing understanding among conflicting or adversarial parties. To assist in overcoming such impasse in communication, this paper highlights a process integrating socio-anthropological and psychological techniques in abetting discernment and bridging disparate worlds.