Think Again: The Power of Knowing What You Don't Know

by Adam M. Grant

Instead of beating ourselves up about our mistakes, we can turn some of our past misconceptions into sources of present amusement.

“Taking responsibility is taking your power back.”

“The absence of conflict is not harmony,14 it’s apathy.”

We learn more from people who challenge our thought process than those who affirm our conclusions.

In a war, our goal is to gain ground rather than lose it, so we’re often afraid to surrender a few battles. In a negotiation, agreeing with someone else’s argument is disarming. The experts recognized that in their dance they couldn’t stand still and expect the other person to make all the moves. To get in harmony, they needed to step back from time to time.

The experts, in contrast, mapped out a series of dance steps they might be able to take with the other side, devoting more than a third of their planning comments to finding common ground.

more it will tip the balance in our favor. Yet the experts did the exact opposite: They actually presented fewer reasons to support their case. They didn’t want to water down their best points.

“A weak argument generally dilutes a strong one.”

The skilled negotiators rarely went on offense or defense. Instead, they expressed curiosity with questions like “So you don’t see any merit in this proposal at all?”

Of every five comments the experts made, at least one ended in a question mark.

Convincing other people to think again isn’t just about making a good argument—it’s about establishing that we have the right motives in doing so.

“You should be willing to listen to what someone else is saying and give them a lot of credit for it.

he considers the strongest version of their case, which is known as the steel man.

“If you have too many arguments, you’ll dilute the power of each and every one,”

11 The more the topic matters to them, the more the quality of reasons matters.

Psychologists have long found that the person most likely to persuade you to change your mind is you.16 You get to pick the reasons you find most compelling, and you come away with a real sense of ownership over them.

When we point out that there are areas where we agree and acknowledge that they have some valid points, we model confident humility

And when we ask genuine questions, we leave them intrigued to learn more.

I’d ask them what would open their minds to my data.

When someone becomes hostile, if you respond by viewing the argument as a war, you can either attack or retreat.

If instead you treat it as a dance, you have another option—you can sidestep.

Having a conversation about the conversation shifts attention away from the substanc...

toward the process for having...

The more anger and hostility the other person expresses, the more curiosity...

When someone is losing control, your tranquility is a...

It takes the wind out of their emo...

“What evidence would change your mind?”

That’s what we’d do in scientist mode: take the long view and ask how we could have handled the debate more effectively.

expressing less conviction.

moderate confidence,

By asking questions rather than thinking for the audience, we invite them to join us as a partner and think for themselves.

If we see it more as a dance, we can begin to choreograph a way forward.

By considering the strongest version of an opponent’s perspective and limiting our responses to our few best steps, we have a...

our beliefs are like pairs of reality goggles.18

We use them to make sense of the world and navigate our surroundings.

we become especially hostile when trying to defend opinions that we know, deep down, are false.

peripheral members fit in and gain status by following the lead of the most prototypical member of the group, who often holds the most intense views.

Shared identity doesn’t stick in every circumstance.

thinking about the arbitrariness of their animosity

showed less hostility when they reflected on how silly the rivalry was.

A key step is getting them to do some counterfactual thinking: helping them consider what they’d believe if they were living in an alternative reality.

counterfactual thinking

they invite people to explore the origins of their own beliefs

People gain humility when they reflect on how different circumstances could have led them to different beliefs.

That doubt could leave them more curious about groups they’ve stereotyped, and they might end up discovering some unexpected commonalities.

the importance of ‘unlearning’ things to avoid being ignorant.”

Stereotypes don’t have the structural integrity of a carefully built ship. They’re more like a tower in the game of Jenga—teetering on a small number of blocks, with some key supports missing.

To knock it over, sometimes all we need to do is give it a poke.

The hope is that people will rise to the occasion and build new beliefs on...

We might question the underlying belief that it makes sense to hold opinions about groups at all.