Extremely Intense Ideology

intermediate3 min readpolitics · education · philosophy · psychology · business

A mental model warning that rigid ideological commitment impairs thinking, and that one should avoid holding strong opinions without first being able to articulate the opposing arguments better than their advocates.

THE IDEA

EXTREMELY INTENSE IDEOLOGY

Another thing I think should be avoided is extremely intense ideology, because it cabbages up one’s mind. You’ve seen that. You see a lot of it on TV, you know preachers for instance, they’ve all got different ideas about theology and a lot of them have minds that are made of cabbage.

But that can happen with political ideology. And if you’re young it’s easy to drift into loyalties and when you announce that you’re a loyal member and you start shouting the orthodox ideology out what you’re doing is pounding it in, pounding it in, and you’re gradually ruining your mind. So, you want to be very careful with this ideology. It’s a big danger.

In my mind, I have a little example I use whenever I think about ideology, and it’s these Scandinavian canoeists who succeeded in taming all the rapids of Scandinavia and they thought they would tackle the whirlpools in the Grand Rapids here in the United States. The death rate was 100%. A big whirlpool is not something you want to go into and I think the same is true about a really deep ideology.

I have what I call an iron prescription that helps me keep sane when I naturally drift toward preferring one ideology over another. And that is I say “I’m not entitled to have an opinion on this subject unless I can state the arguments against my position better than the people do who are supporting it. I think that only when I reach that stage am I qualified to speak.” Now you can say that’s too much of an iron discipline… it’s not too much of an iron discipline. It’s not even that hard to do.

—Charlie Munger

For it is impossible for anyone to begin to learn that which he thinks he already knows.

—Epictetus

The ability to destroy your ideas rapidly instead of slowly when the occasion is right is one of the most valuable things. You have to work hard on it. Ask yourself what are the arguments on the other side. It’s bad to have an opinion you’re proud of if you can’t state the arguments for the other side better than your opponents. This is a great mental discipline.

—Charlie Munger

When to use it

Before making a major business decision, rigorously investigate and present the case for the alternative strategy, ensuring you can argue it as convincingly as its proponents.
When engaging in political discussions, explicitly state your understanding of the opposing viewpoint to the satisfaction of someone who holds it, before offering your own.
In personal relationships, when you believe you are right about a conflict, first articulate your partner's perspective so accurately they say 'Yes, that's exactly how I feel.'
In academic or professional research, habitually seek out the most compelling contrary evidence and restate it in your own work before drawing conclusions.

FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE

In practice

The Scandinavian Canoeists

Skilled canoeists who conquered all rapids in Scandinavia assumed they could handle whirlpools in the U.S. Grand Rapids, resulting in a 100% death rate. Past success in one domain can lead to fatal overconfidence when entering a fundamentally different and more dangerous ideological whirlpool.

The Iron Prescription

Charlie Munger's rule: before holding an opinion, you must be able to articulate the opposing arguments better than the people who support them. Only then are you qualified to speak. This discipline prevents echo-chamber thinking and encourages genuine understanding.

✳

A MOMENT TO REFLECT

Put it to work.

What is a core belief you hold strongly? Can you write down the three strongest arguments against it, and would proponents of that view agree you've represented them fairly?
Think of a recent debate where you felt sure you were right. Did you fully understand the other side's reasoning, or were you just rehearsing your own points?
In which areas of your life might an 'intense ideology' be clouding your judgment? How can you apply the iron prescription to those areas?