A Bible story was cited in a book, saying that after Jesus' ascension, the Disciples sat together to discuss what they should do next. Though what each of them said was simple, their words would become considered among the wise as the perfect example of negotiation. A said, "Let's go out and evangelize," to which B asked," Then what about our families?" C suggested, "We can gather our families together so that they can take care of each other", in response to which D asked, "Then what of our children? Their education too is important." E said, "One of us should stay to teach them." The others agreed, saying, "Good idea, while we need to proselytize, we must not forget to preach to our own kids." What they are talking about was just everyday family chitchat, and I could never understand why this was considered the perfect example of negotiation. As read the passage more closely, I realized that none of them had spoken out against the others. If B had answered, "No, let's sleep instead" after A had said "Let's go out to evangelize", the conversation would not have continued. Each question raised begat a new question, which in turn begat a solution. No quarrel. All questions were solved with just a few words, and that is why this is called the perfect negotiation.

Here is another example of perfect negotiation - "the best goal" in one year's football tournament. It was considered the best, not because it was a splendid shot, but because every single one of the 11 players on the team made a contribution to the goal. They moved forward in tandem, with each player getting the ball at least once and passing it toward a more proper position, before the ball ended in its most proper position - the back of the net. In other words, every player was involved in the "negotiation" using his own feet. This goal revealed the beauty of collaboration, and the spirit of negotiation was reflected utterly by the football team.

When a few people sit together to discuss something, the atmosphere is typically pleasant during the first five minutes, but as time goes on, it becomes more and more intense. As you bring forward your opinions, another person objects, and then you counter his objection. In the end, you both feel disrespected, and the conversation degrades into mutual criticism. The primary principle of negotiation is that once someone brings forward his opinion and puts it onto the table, that opinion no longer belongs to himself. It becomes a common resource necessary to the negotiation process. The more people are involved, the closer the negotiation can come to the truth. During discussion, we expose our shared opinions to skepticism and analysis, disregarding by whom it was raised, and rather addressing the opinion alone on its own merits. Only in this manner can negotiation take place. However, rarely do we do so. Generally, as the discussion nears its end, we start to criticize and question each other's intelligence, even asking how others could be so stupid. This betrays the spirit of negotiation and directly leads to the result that nobody dares share their opinions any longer lest he himself be criticised. When opinions are made personal, they are only conveyed to a minority of people through small channels. Under these circumstances, even though the opinion might be correct, the mode of transmission becomes shady.

In the example of Jesus' disciples, one thing is vital: none of the disciples opposed evangelism. With common purpose, they could engage in the perfect negotiation, solving all kinds of obstacles in becoming the finest missionary team. What would happen if this brigade were to meet others of different beliefs? 1,000 years ago, they would not have been able to resolve this problem, and it would have led to witch hunts, crusaders heading eastwards, and inquisition. From a modern perspective, we understand that equal rights take precedence over group interest. Only should they negotiate further will more fundamental human truths be discoverd, that all people are equal and enjoy the freedom to choose their own beliefs. Every bit of progress that comes with a new era makes truth more universally valuable and offers the group negotiation process a more advanced basis.