What is an ethical instructional goal for students who position themselves in opposition to the key tenets of a discipline they are required to learn? Is it fair to judge students unfavorably in a circumstance where their ideological disagreements with course materials bump up against their abilities to take seriously these materials, let alone advance to states of knowledge where they can think progressively and deeply with others about them? Is it fair that less resistant students--less resistant because of their preexisting ideological alignments with instructors and course content--should benefit in ways others do not? And, if an instructor's interests lie in helping students achieve their highest expressions of learning in relation to the subject matter, does this mean that the unconscious goal for resistant students is to bring them into a discipline's various ways of thinking as preferred avenues for achieving these expressions? In this article, the author contemplates the tensions evoked by these questions before providing "pedagogies of common ground" that have been effective in his own practice.