Phil Fernbach

I have a colleague who was recently telling me a story about one of his classes where he was just imploring students, if you are using artificial intelligence to try to help you with the class. Make sure that you understand this and not just are using the artificial intelligence. And yet, when the test came around and they'd all been using ChatGPT, they learned that they

did not understand the material as well as they thought that they did because they had been relying on the artificial intelligence. And they got very upset with him. And he sort of explained to them, look, I tried to tell you, but this is such a natural human thing to overestimate our understanding. that it's very hard to actually appreciate the gaps in our knowledge.

did not understand the material as well as they thought that they did because they had been relying on the artificial intelligence. And they got very upset with him. And he sort of explained to them, look, I tried to tell you, but this is such a natural human thing to overestimate our understanding. that it's very hard to actually appreciate the gaps in our knowledge.

did not understand the material as well as they thought that they did because they had been relying on the artificial intelligence. And they got very upset with him. And he sort of explained to them, look, I tried to tell you, but this is such a natural human thing to overestimate our understanding. that it's very hard to actually appreciate the gaps in our knowledge.

It's so natural for us to go through life just not really questioning and assuming we know more than we do that we don't really see it. And that's why getting into this habit of questioning yourself and questioning your understanding is a very powerful tool for dispelling the illusion.

It's so natural for us to go through life just not really questioning and assuming we know more than we do that we don't really see it. And that's why getting into this habit of questioning yourself and questioning your understanding is a very powerful tool for dispelling the illusion.

It's so natural for us to go through life just not really questioning and assuming we know more than we do that we don't really see it. And that's why getting into this habit of questioning yourself and questioning your understanding is a very powerful tool for dispelling the illusion.

So in our studies, we've often compared two different types of explanations. One is this mechanistic explanation. How does it work? And the other is more about why you believe what you do. So reasons. And you can think about those two modes of thinking as being more explanatory or mechanistic on the one hand, and then more argumentative on Or advocacy-based, on the other hand.

So in our studies, we've often compared two different types of explanations. One is this mechanistic explanation. How does it work? And the other is more about why you believe what you do. So reasons. And you can think about those two modes of thinking as being more explanatory or mechanistic on the one hand, and then more argumentative on Or advocacy-based, on the other hand.

So in our studies, we've often compared two different types of explanations. One is this mechanistic explanation. How does it work? And the other is more about why you believe what you do. So reasons. And you can think about those two modes of thinking as being more explanatory or mechanistic on the one hand, and then more argumentative on Or advocacy-based, on the other hand.

I think we are much more commonly engaged in this argumentation or advocacy when we're talking about things like political issues. We very rarely engage in this kind of mechanistic or explanatory kind of discussion. But it turns out that the mechanistic or explanatory mode leads to a little more open-mindedness.

I think we are much more commonly engaged in this argumentation or advocacy when we're talking about things like political issues. We very rarely engage in this kind of mechanistic or explanatory kind of discussion. But it turns out that the mechanistic or explanatory mode leads to a little more open-mindedness.

I think we are much more commonly engaged in this argumentation or advocacy when we're talking about things like political issues. We very rarely engage in this kind of mechanistic or explanatory kind of discussion. But it turns out that the mechanistic or explanatory mode leads to a little more open-mindedness.

It gets people to be a little less certain about their positions because it reveals the complexity of issues. And this has been demonstrated to some extent in our work where we simply ask people, how do you feel about these issues afterwards? But I think even more interestingly and meaningfully, there's a great paper by El-Nakori Hun and Grossman a few years ago

It gets people to be a little less certain about their positions because it reveals the complexity of issues. And this has been demonstrated to some extent in our work where we simply ask people, how do you feel about these issues afterwards? But I think even more interestingly and meaningfully, there's a great paper by El-Nakori Hun and Grossman a few years ago

It gets people to be a little less certain about their positions because it reveals the complexity of issues. And this has been demonstrated to some extent in our work where we simply ask people, how do you feel about these issues afterwards? But I think even more interestingly and meaningfully, there's a great paper by El-Nakori Hun and Grossman a few years ago

And they asked people on different sides of the political divide to have political discussions. And then they measured different things about the discussion, like how well it went and how open-minded people seemed to be and how much they were listening to the other side and those kinds of things.

And they asked people on different sides of the political divide to have political discussions. And then they measured different things about the discussion, like how well it went and how open-minded people seemed to be and how much they were listening to the other side and those kinds of things.

And they asked people on different sides of the political divide to have political discussions. And then they measured different things about the discussion, like how well it went and how open-minded people seemed to be and how much they were listening to the other side and those kinds of things.

And what they found is that the discussions were more productive when people engaged in this more explanatory kind of discussion.