It's Harder Than You Think (Learning from Disagreements)
People often underestimate the difficulty of resolving disagreements, expecting that logic and evidence will easily change minds. This leads to frustration when others don't change, but even under ideal conditions, learning from disagreements is inherently hard.
THE IDEA
IT’S HARDER THAN YOU THINK
One of the biggest reasons we fail to learn from disagreements is that we expect it to be easier than it actually is. We assume that if both people are basically reasonable and arguing in good faith, then getting to the bottom of a disagreement should be straightforward: Each person explains what they believe, and if one person can support their position with logic and evidence, then the other says, “Oh, you’re right,” and changes their mind. Simple!
When things don’t play out that way—when one side refuses to change their mind, even after hearing what the other side considers to be a knock-down argument—everyone gets frustrated and concludes the others must be irrational.
We need to lower our expectations, by a lot. Even under ideal conditions in which everyone is well-informed, reasonable, and making a good-faith effort to explain their views and understand the other side, learning from disagreements is still hard (and conditions are almost never ideal). The three reasons that follow are not included in this excerpt.
When to use it
When debating a controversial topic with a friend or colleague to avoid frustration and promote understanding.
When trying to convince a team to adopt a new process, acknowledging that resistance is not necessarily irrational.
When evaluating competing scientific theories or policy proposals, preparing for the difficulty of reaching consensus.
When engaging in online discussions, reminding yourself that changing minds is rarely straightforward.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Scientific Debate
Two scientists debate a theory, each presenting evidence and logical arguments. Despite good faith, they fail to reach consensus because of different interpretations of data or underlying assumptions.
Political Discussion
In a political debate, both sides have well-reasoned positions supported by facts, but each dismisses the other's points as flawed or irrelevant, leading to frustration rather than mutual learning.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
Why do people often expect disagreements to be easy to resolve? What assumptions underlie this expectation?
When you find yourself frustrated that someone hasn't changed their mind after your argument, what might be going on beneath the surface?
How can lowering your expectations about disagreements actually improve your ability to learn from them?
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- The Scout Mindset (Julia Galef)