Kit Yates

then I think there's the potential that we might find a more harmonious solution.

It might not come down on one side or the other that you prefer, but it maybe allows us to make a consensus decision more quickly.

Exactly that.

And I agree with you.

We're always trying to recruit people to one side of the argument and the other to choose, be passionate about something.

But sometimes I think this study is suggesting that there's something to be said for people who are being neutral, who are thoughtful, are taking their time about making a decision, who are appearing not to actively take part in the decision-making process.

I think that there's absolutely a role for those people.

And actually, maybe if more of us were like that and perhaps less polarized,

then, yeah, we might find more harmony in the world.

Absolutely.

Yes, but it's more arguing that instead of having someone to have to just spontaneously cool down, what we should be focusing on is saying, you know what, the people from the other side focusing on saying, why don't you cool down?

Why don't we both cool down?

Why don't we become neutral?

Yeah.

Instead of someone, it's not relying on someone spontaneously just giving up their hard-held beliefs, but it's when those clashes, those head-to-head clashes, you know, option A meets option B and tries to convert one way or the other, instead of trying to do that full conversion, it's about saying, let's meet in the middle somewhere and let's talk and let's reopen our views and then let's see where we go from there.

I think that's the message.

I think it would be something like consider neutrality as a bonus in order to try to make better and smoother decisions.

So thinking about adopting those neutral statuses.

Thanks so much for having me on, David.

Thanks for having me on.