Phil Fernbach

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

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

It does. They move to the middle a little bit. The challenge with that is that people get defensive as well. So if you challenge people with their understanding, they might actually double down and say, no, I know what I'm talking about. Because people naturally tend to be a little bit defensive. So the way to actually implement such an intervention can be

It does. They move to the middle a little bit. The challenge with that is that people get defensive as well. So if you challenge people with their understanding, they might actually double down and say, no, I know what I'm talking about. Because people naturally tend to be a little bit defensive. So the way to actually implement such an intervention can be

It does. They move to the middle a little bit. The challenge with that is that people get defensive as well. So if you challenge people with their understanding, they might actually double down and say, no, I know what I'm talking about. Because people naturally tend to be a little bit defensive. So the way to actually implement such an intervention can be

a little bit challenging in its details because, again, human beings are not simple. They're complex. So if you reveal people's lack of understanding to them, it may have the effect of making them a little bit more humble or more moderate, but it could also make them double down on their position a little bit.

a little bit challenging in its details because, again, human beings are not simple. They're complex. So if you reveal people's lack of understanding to them, it may have the effect of making them a little bit more humble or more moderate, but it could also make them double down on their position a little bit.

a little bit challenging in its details because, again, human beings are not simple. They're complex. So if you reveal people's lack of understanding to them, it may have the effect of making them a little bit more humble or more moderate, but it could also make them double down on their position a little bit.

The key is to be curious. about the other side's position. So if you start from a perspective of the other side is not as smart as me, is not as ethical or moral as me, they're bad, they're stupid, then you're not going to be likely to have a very productive discussion. If you start instead with the perspective of the person that I'm talking to is as smart as me,

The key is to be curious. about the other side's position. So if you start from a perspective of the other side is not as smart as me, is not as ethical or moral as me, they're bad, they're stupid, then you're not going to be likely to have a very productive discussion. If you start instead with the perspective of the person that I'm talking to is as smart as me,

The key is to be curious. about the other side's position. So if you start from a perspective of the other side is not as smart as me, is not as ethical or moral as me, they're bad, they're stupid, then you're not going to be likely to have a very productive discussion. If you start instead with the perspective of the person that I'm talking to is as smart as me,

and as moral as me, then you become curious. Why is it that they maintain a strong position that's so different from yours when it seems like the right answer is just so obvious to you? And then when you become curious, and if both sides are mutually curious, and they want to understand what is behind the other side's position, then you can have a more productive discussion.

and as moral as me, then you become curious. Why is it that they maintain a strong position that's so different from yours when it seems like the right answer is just so obvious to you? And then when you become curious, and if both sides are mutually curious, and they want to understand what is behind the other side's position, then you can have a more productive discussion.

and as moral as me, then you become curious. Why is it that they maintain a strong position that's so different from yours when it seems like the right answer is just so obvious to you? And then when you become curious, and if both sides are mutually curious, and they want to understand what is behind the other side's position, then you can have a more productive discussion.

And I think what you will find is that when you engage jointly in this explanatory kind of discussion, it's more of a collaboration than it is an argument. And that collaboration is going to reveal, likely, that both sides don't know as much as they thought they did at the beginning. That's going to be the most common outcome.

And I think what you will find is that when you engage jointly in this explanatory kind of discussion, it's more of a collaboration than it is an argument. And that collaboration is going to reveal, likely, that both sides don't know as much as they thought they did at the beginning. That's going to be the most common outcome.

And I think what you will find is that when you engage jointly in this explanatory kind of discussion, it's more of a collaboration than it is an argument. And that collaboration is going to reveal, likely, that both sides don't know as much as they thought they did at the beginning. That's going to be the most common outcome.

I agree with that 100% because we all have beliefs that are incorrect, and we all have beliefs that we have much more strength and conviction in than we should. And conspiracies are a bizarre sort of extreme example of this, but they're part and parcel of the same kind of mechanisms that lead to all of our beliefs.

I agree with that 100% because we all have beliefs that are incorrect, and we all have beliefs that we have much more strength and conviction in than we should. And conspiracies are a bizarre sort of extreme example of this, but they're part and parcel of the same kind of mechanisms that lead to all of our beliefs.

I agree with that 100% because we all have beliefs that are incorrect, and we all have beliefs that we have much more strength and conviction in than we should. And conspiracies are a bizarre sort of extreme example of this, but they're part and parcel of the same kind of mechanisms that lead to all of our beliefs.