Food fights in the classroom: a case study exploring the connections between economic reasoning, critical thinking, engagement, and dialogue in polarized contexts

Abstract Motivated by rising polarization in academic and public discourse, this article presents a pedagogical case study of ‘‘The Economics of Food Systems,’’ an undergraduate course designed to foster critical thinking and a roadmap to productive discussion. Structurally, the course combines lectures on microeconomic theory with a series of controversial ‘‘food fight’’ case studies, utilizing guest speakers to represent opposing viewpoints on issues of production, technology, and ethics. We argue that this pedagogical design helps depersonalize conflict by framing disagreement through the lens of economic constraints, incentives, and trade-offs rather than moral absolutes. This framework offers a valuable strategy for navigating polarized environments across different types of issues and bridging cultural divides in higher education.