Why understanding people > winning an argument

How to challenge opinions

Today, it’s easy to form an opinion.

If I wanted to figure out my stance on literally any topic, I have more access to information than ever before in history to help me make my decision. Whether it’s reading online research papers for hours to get context from the best in the field, or going on Twitter for 5 minutes and regurgitating what news sources said from my phone.

It’s even easier to take that opinion you formed, and hold onto it stronger and stronger every day.

That same information source, influencer or group of people that introduced you to this stance can surround you constantly. Maybe you follow them on Instagram and see their regular posts, or read your favorite news site everyday. Anyone can get a continuous stream of info seeping into their brain, reinforcing whatever opinions they started out with.

This is exactly why we need more people challenging each others’ opinions

We treat these online devices that make + reinforce opinions for us like our better, second brains 🧠

But we forget that not everything there will always be true.

Side note: to clarify, opinions can be subjective (aka there’s no 1 right answer, since we often don’t know enough about the world to make one). But they should be backed up by facts, or reasons why this is the stance you take. And those facts should make logical sense. We want fax, no printer 🖨

Obviously, not all information comes from proper sources in the first place. But even the most trusted sources can and do get proven wrong (for example, we thought Earth was in the centre of the solar system until the 16th century).

It can be hard to avoid getting attached to an opinion. And getting that opinion reinforced in a feedback loop.

But the more we stick to our opinions so strongly, the less room we have for truth. And the more we get attached to our opinions, and veto anything that doesn’t fit the image in our heads. This is why we feel we need to “win” arguments with people who oppose us, and see them as “the other side” instead of people on the same side who we can learn from and teach.

The best we can do to fix this is to trust no one. Thanks for reading!

Just kidding- the best we can do is challenge other opinions, and be open to challengers of our own opinions, no matter how accurate we think they are.

“Strong opinions, loosely held.”

Based on this, I’ve been thinking about the most effective way to challenge an opinion.

Spoiler alert: contrary to what political debates or certain newsrooms might show, the goal isn’t to force counter-opinions onto people and win. It’s to understand different perspectives.

Here’s how to be a devil’s advocate, without being an actual devil 😈

1. Find the hole in the opinion 🕳

Sometimes, you know exactly where someone’s argument is faulty. Others, you’re trying to put it into words, or even just try to find a fault in the first place.

Here’s a life hack: most “holes” or faults in an opinion come in the form of a logical fallacy:

• Straw Man Fallacy: when someone takes your argument and paints an oversimplified or even ridiculous version of it.
• Slippery Slope Fallacy: Making the connection that one event will lead to another sequence of events, when this isn’t necessarily true.
• Appeal to Consequences: arguing for how true something is by appealing to the positive outcomes that would happen if it was.
• Affirming the Consequent: From an “if this, then that” statement, inferring the “if this” only because the “then that” happened.
• Appeal to Ignorance: assuming that some thing is true, because there is no evidence to prove it’s NOT true.
• Ad hominem: attacking the person giving the argument instead of the argument itself.
• See more here and here.

To pinpoint these, I like to:

1. Ask why a person has an opinion that they do.
2. See if I can spot these kinds of fallacies based on their reasons

I realized I’ve been in countless arguments with friends where these errors in reasoning are used, and it just flew right over my head. You’d be surprised how many you spot after reading this. By knowing logical fallacies, you can be a human 💩 detector.

2. Understand how that hole got there

The issue is, just pointing out logical fallacies likely won’t change everyone’s mind.

The more tightly people hold onto their worldviews, the more likely they are to experience cognitive dissonance when hearing opposing ones. This means they experience a mental conflict, and the brain reacts like they’re under attack (basically a fear of truth 🤯)

We need to understand why people have the belief that they do, which goes beyond identifying their reasons. It means finding why they convince themselves that their argument is right in the first place.

Maybe, the person just had a fault in their reasoning that they didn’t realize before. Or, they might be justifying an opinion rather than reasoning to it.

If you’re reasoning, you gather the facts first, and then make your stance based on those facts.

If you’re justifying, you’re reaching a stance based on a reason besides facts (like influence from other people, or an emotional pull from how the stance was delivered/how it makes you feel), and then you gather facts to try to back it up. Even if the opinion you regurgitate from online is logically sound, it’s always better to reason and verify, than to get the opinion first and then try to justify it.

Side note: Emotions are super important to make an opinion. They’re what help us choose a final stance to be on board with. Studies on people with damage to the centres of their brain that regulate emotion found that these people were unable to come to a conclusion when making a decision- they would just keep reasoning with themselves and ruminating forever.

However, for an opinion that’s closest to objective truth as possible, the facts should be considered first, and emotions can be decided afterwards, with a stronger basis from those facts.

Understanding people 101 (Opinions edition)

To understand how that hole got there, it’s important to understand

1. What prior experiences led to this opinion? Whether it’s the fact that the person has been reading a specific news source for many years and got the opinion from there, or that they’ve been raised with these values since birth. What do they care about based on these experiences?
2. What character traits led to the strength of this opinion? Do they have insecurity around being wrong? Do they have a mindset oriented towards learning from mistakes, or being defensive?

My hypothesis for finding #1 is to ask how. How did you first hear about this opinion or worldview, how does it make you feel, etc. Almost like figuring out the depth of the “hole”.

#2 can be more difficult to just ask about. Generally, being asked about your insecurities isn’t the most enjoyable experience. This is something you’d probably infer from behavior, and from the answers to #1.

3. Deliver the shovel to fill in the hole

Once you have the hole, why it’s there, and how deep it is, you need that shovel to try to fill it. Aka actually challenge the opinion instead of asking why and how, and give YOUR argument.

Convincing someone that an opinion they stick strongly to could be based on faulty premises, is something I’m still trying to figure out. It’s easy to disprove someone’s argument and talk the talk, but harder to actually convince them and allow them to internalize your argument.

Here’s my guess:

1. Point out the logical fallacy OR see if I can come up with an alternative scenario in which their argument wouldn’t make sense. If there was simply a flaw in reasoning that wasn’t considered before, this can help give the person new data points. Always provide the facts first.
2. If the opinion is rooted in the person’s background (like their prior experiences or character traits), show them how their root values and your opinion don’t have to be separate. For example, if they care about appealing to some sort of higher power, show them how your view can still fit with that, while aligning more with the facts.

Most importantly, the biggest key to challenging someone’s opinion is to not challenge it at all. Ask “do you agree” or “let me know where I’m wrong” instead. Provide alternative reasons, but always make sure understanding is the priority > winning the challenge.

The more people we have challenging each others’ beliefs through reason and understanding (rather than arguing), the closer we can get to uncovering truths, whether they’re social, political, or even scientific.

Or at the very least, we can train ourselves to not just take the easy route, and to actually think about where our own opinions come from, using our 💩 detectors. Strong opinions, loosely held applies to ourselves too.

To recap:

1. Opinions are easy to make and reinforce, but are not all factually based or make objective sense. The more this happens, the farther away from truth we get.
2. We can create a culture of challenging each others’ opinions by identifying logical fallacies in an argument, finding out why the person believes what they do, and using these 2 factors to present your argument and show how it aligns with their views
3. Above all, seek to understand > win the argument

It’s easier than ever to make an opinion, with the constant stream of info we have. That’s why if you’re reading this, I challenge you to start a discussion with a group and try this out for every strong opinion you hold. As helpful as your second brain is, try to use the first one 😉

Happy challenging,

-Anupra ✌

Thanks for reading, hope you learned something new! If you had fun reading this article or have some questions, feel free to connect with me on Linkedin and shoot me a message, follow my Medium, and stay tuned 🎸