The Joy of Being Wrong | Adam Grant

Feb 3, 2021 Episode Page ↗
Overview

Adam Grant, an organizational psychologist and Wharton professor, discusses rethinking intelligence as the ability to unlearn. He argues this skill is crucial for excellence and wisdom in a fast-changing world, and explores how to build mental flexibility and the upsides of imposter syndrome.

At a Glance
24 Insights
1h 4m Duration
16 Topics
11 Concepts

Deep Dive Analysis

Rethinking Intelligence: The Core Thesis

Pain of Dogmatism vs. Mental Flexibility

Communication Styles: Provisional Language and Powerless Communication

Mental Modes: Preacher, Prosecutor, Politician, and Scientist

Adam and Dan's Personal Struggles with Mental Modes

Approaching Disagreement Like a Scientist

Accurate Disagreement and Task vs. Relationship Conflict

Reflective Listening and Motivational Interviewing

The Upsides of Imposter Thoughts and Confident Humility

Understanding the Dunning-Kruger Effect

Overcoming Overconfidence: The Illusion of Explanatory Depth

Defining Identity by Values, Not Opinions

Building a Challenge Network

Rethinking Without Changing Your Mind

Adam Grant's Meditation Experiment

Navigating Political Divides with Nuance

Rethinking Intelligence

In a rapidly changing world, intelligence is redefined not just as the ability to think and learn, but equally as the ability to rethink and unlearn. This involves proactively questioning long-held assumptions and opinions that may no longer be relevant or accurate.

Provisional Language

A communication style that signals one is not absolutely certain or dug in on their beliefs, aligning with the impermanence of change. It fosters psychological safety in conversations and reduces the internal pain of dogmatism by acknowledging uncertainty.

Mental Modes (Preacher, Prosecutor, Politician, Scientist)

These are four distinct ways people approach their beliefs and interactions. Preacher mode proselytizes one's truth, prosecutor mode focuses on proving others wrong, and politician mode seeks approval. Scientist mode, however, treats opinions as hypotheses to be tested, fostering curiosity and learning.

Accurate Disagreement

An approach to conflict, inspired by marriage counseling, where the goal is to precisely understand the points of difference rather than trying to change minds. It reframes conflict as an intellectual 'task conflict' focused on ideas, reducing emotional heat and promoting truth-seeking.

Task Conflict vs. Relationship Conflict

Task conflict is an intellectual debate about ideas, focused on achieving the right answer without personal judgment or emotional animosity. Relationship conflict, conversely, is personal and emotional, often involving animosity and proving counterproductive for all parties involved.

Motivational Interviewing

A counseling psychology approach focused on helping individuals find their *own* motivation to change, rather than trying to persuade them. It involves asking open-ended questions, engaging in reflective listening, and affirming their capacity for change, without imposing external goals.

Imposter Thoughts

Fleeting moments of self-doubt where one questions their belonging or competence, distinct from chronic imposter syndrome. These thoughts can be beneficial, leading to humility, self-questioning, curiosity, and smarter decisions by encouraging data gathering over intuition.

Confident Humility

A state of believing in one's ability to learn and figure things out, rather than being constantly confident in one's existing knowledge. It involves doubting one's ideas or current strategies while trusting in one's capacity to solve problems.

Dunning-Kruger Effect

The phenomenon where people with intermediate knowledge or skills in an area are often the most overconfident in their abilities. This occurs because they lack the expertise to accurately judge their own competence, whereas true novices and genuine experts are less susceptible.

Illusion of Explanatory Depth

The tendency for people to assume they know more about how something works than they actually do, until they are asked to explain the mechanisms in detail. This process often reveals significant gaps in their knowledge, leading to greater humility and curiosity.

Challenge Network

A group of trusted individuals who hold one accountable for being open-minded and inform them when their beliefs might not be correct. This network provides thoughtful criticism and alternative perspectives, helping to counteract confirmation and desirability bias.

?
What is the new definition of intelligence in a rapidly changing world?

In a turbulent world, intelligence is increasingly defined as the ability to rethink and unlearn, rather than just the ability to think and learn, allowing individuals to adapt assumptions and opinions to new realities.

?
Why is it painful to be dogmatic, even when changing your mind is also painful?

While changing one's mind can cause cognitive dissonance and discomfort, sticking to false or ineffective convictions in the long run causes more pain, often manifesting as hostility when one suspects their beliefs are wrong but refuses to admit it.

?
How does provisional language help with communication and self-compassion?

Speaking provisionally, by signaling that one is not absolutely certain, aligns with the impermanence of the universe and reduces the pressure to be dogmatic. This fosters psychological safety for others and alleviates the internal pain of pretending to know when one doesn't.

?
What are the four mental modes people operate in, and which is most effective for rethinking?

People often operate in preacher mode (proselytizing one's truth), prosecutor mode (proving others wrong), or politician mode (seeking approval). The most effective for rethinking is scientist mode, which treats opinions as hypotheses to be tested and revised.

?
How can one effectively communicate with someone who holds strong, differing opinions?

Instead of preaching or prosecuting, one should approach the conversation like a scientist: be curious, ask questions to understand their worldview, look for common ground, and express respect for their engagement with the issue.

?
What is 'accurate disagreement' and how does it help resolve conflict?

Accurate disagreement is an approach where the goal is to precisely understand the points of difference, rather than trying to change minds. It reframes conflict as an intellectual task (task conflict) rather than a personal one (relationship conflict), reducing emotional heat and promoting truth-seeking.

?
How can reflective listening improve difficult conversations?

By repeating the core ideas of what someone has said in one's own words, reflective listening signals that the speaker has been heard and understood, which can deactivate the amygdala for both parties and act as a circuit breaker for immediate debate.

?
What are the surprising upsides of imposter thoughts?

Fleeting imposter thoughts, where one questions their belonging or competence, can lead to humility, self-questioning, and curiosity. This can result in better task performance, more compassionate interactions, and smarter decision-making by encouraging data gathering over intuition.

?
What is the Dunning-Kruger effect and who is most susceptible to it?

The Dunning-Kruger effect describes how people with intermediate knowledge or skills in an area are most likely to be overconfident, as they lack the expertise to accurately judge their own competence. True novices and genuine experts are less prone to this overconfidence.

?
How can one counteract the illusion of explanatory depth and foster intellectual humility?

To counteract this illusion, one should ask 'how' questions, prompting people to explain the mechanisms or practical implementation of their beliefs. This process often reveals gaps in their knowledge, leading to greater humility and openness to learning.

?
How can individuals avoid becoming dogmatic in their beliefs?

By defining one's identity in terms of core values (e.g., generosity, integrity) rather than specific opinions, individuals can remain open to rethinking the best ways to live those values, even if it means changing previously held beliefs.

?
How can one ensure they are exposed to diverse perspectives and avoid echo chambers?

One should actively build a 'challenge network' of trusted critics who hold them accountable for open-mindedness and point out flaws in their thinking. Additionally, curating social media feeds to follow people who provoke hard thinking rather than just agreement can help.

?
Is it possible to be too open-minded and lose sight of important truths?

Rethinking does not necessarily mean changing one's mind; it means being receptive to different points of view while maintaining standards for what constitutes rigorous logic or convincing data. One can make a list of conditions (evidence) under which they would change their mind to avoid flip-flopping.

1. Rethink Intelligence Definition

View intelligence not just as the ability to think and learn, but as the ability to rethink and unlearn, which is crucial for excellence at work and wisdom in life in a turbulent world.

2. Proactively Rethink Assumptions

Regularly question long-held assumptions and opinions before external forces compel you to, as beliefs that once fit may no longer be relevant in a changing world.

3. Define Identity by Values

Define your personal identity based on core values (e.g., generosity, excellence, integrity, freedom) rather than specific opinions or beliefs, allowing for flexibility in how those values are lived and expressed.

4. Think Like a Scientist

Approach your opinions as hypotheses to be tested through experiments in life, taking joy in discovering when cherished beliefs are wrong or incomplete, as it’s a valuable learning opportunity.

5. Cultivate Confident Humility

Be confident in your ability to learn and solve problems, but maintain humility about your current knowledge, recognizing what you don’t know and fostering curiosity to discover new information.

6. Embrace Imposter Thoughts

Recognize fleeting imposter thoughts (e.g., ‘maybe I don’t belong here’) as normal and potentially beneficial, as they can foster humility, self-questioning, and lead to more compassionate and smarter decisions.

7. Adopt Provisional Language

Use provisional language in communication (e.g., ‘I think,’ ‘it seems’) to signal that your beliefs are not carved in stone, which reduces personal pain, encourages psychological safety for others, and aligns with impermanence.

8. Avoid Expressing Absolute Certainty

Be cautious of communicating with absolute certainty, exuding overconfidence, or being overly authoritative, as this style can deter others from openness and trap you in cycles of overconfidence.

9. Approach Disagreements with Curiosity

When facing disagreement, adopt a stance of genuine curiosity to understand the other person’s worldview, asking questions to learn how they arrived at their beliefs, rather than immediately trying to prove them wrong.

10. Respect Opposing Views

Affirm respect for others who hold different views on important issues, even if you don’t agree with their conclusions, as this basic affirmation can lead to more nuanced and less polarized discussions.

11. Frame Disagreements as Learning Debates

Reframe disagreements as opportunities for ’task conflict’ (intellectual debate about ideas) rather than ‘relationship conflict’ (personal, emotional), by explicitly stating a goal to learn from the discussion.

12. Practice Reflective Listening

Engage in reflective listening by repeating the core ideas of what someone has said in your own words, which signals understanding, de-escalates conflict, and prevents debating with insufficient information.

13. Utilize Motivational Interviewing Principles

When trying to help others change, focus on helping them find their own motivation by asking open-ended questions about their goals and potential paths, rather than trying to impose your agenda.

14. Affirm Others’ Capacity for Change

In conversations about potential change, express belief in the other person’s will and skill to change if they choose to, without dictating the ‘how’ or ‘whether’ they should.

15. Combat Overconfidence by Explaining

To counter the Dunning-Kruger effect, ask overconfident individuals to explain the mechanisms or practical implementation of what they claim to know, which often reveals gaps in their understanding and fosters humility.

16. Build a Challenge Network

Actively cultivate a ‘challenge network’ of trusted critics who will hold you accountable for open-mindedness and point out flaws in your thinking, rather than just a support network that reinforces your views.

17. Curate Thought-Provoking Social Media

On social media, prioritize following individuals who make you think hard and challenge your perspectives, rather than those who simply make you feel good or affirm your existing beliefs.

18. Seek Information Against Your Views

Deliberately seek out information and perspectives that contradict your current views to counteract confirmation bias and desirability bias, especially on issues where you hold strong convictions.

19. Set Clear Evidence Standards for Change

When open to rethinking, establish clear standards for what specific evidence (facts and data) would genuinely change your mind, rather than being swayed by mere persuasive arguments.

20. List Conditions for Mind Change

When forming a tentative opinion, explicitly list the conditions or criteria under which you would be willing to change your mind, ensuring a rigorous and thoughtful evolution of beliefs.

21. Try Short, Accessible Meditation

If time commitment is a barrier to meditation, start with short, 5-10 minute daily introductory sessions, by reallocating time from less productive activities like social media.

22. Leverage External Motivation for New Habits

If personal motivation for a new habit is low, consider finding external motivation by engaging in the habit with or for others you care about, especially if they might benefit.

23. Complexify Opposing Ideologies

Instead of viewing opposing groups as monolithic or black-and-white, recognize the complex spectrum of beliefs within them, understanding that many individuals are not one-dimensional.

24. Focus on Nuance in Disagreements

Seek out and acknowledge the nuance within the middle of ideological or political spectrums, recognizing shared ground with those who hold different views to facilitate more reasonable conversations.

Sometimes the better you are at thinking, the worse you become at rethinking, because you can find so many compelling reasons to support your beliefs and essentially outsmart your own ability to question yourself.

Adam Grant

Hostility is the emotional reaction you have when you find out that one of your beliefs is wrong and you always suspected it was wrong, but you don't want to admit it.

George Kelly (quoted by Adam Grant)

I create as I speak.

Adam Grant (referring to the Hebrew origin of abracadabra)

My goal is to help you achieve whatever your goals are. And in order to do that, I've got to figure out what your goals are.

Adam Grant

The first sign of someone being an expert is them saying, I actually don't know, or I don't understand.

Adam Grant

I had no idea how to do any of those things, but I was confident in my ability to learn and figure it out.

Sara Blakely (quoted by Adam Grant)

I follow people who make me think hard, not people who make me feel good.

Adam Grant

You can open your mind without changing your mind.

Adam Grant

What evidence would change your mind?

Adam Grant

Approaching Disagreements Like a Scientist

Adam Grant
  1. Get really curious and be fascinated by the other person's different worldview.
  2. Ask a bunch of questions to try to better understand their perspective.
  3. Look for common ground and areas of agreement, rather than starting with disagreements.
  4. Make it clear that you respect the other person for caring about the issue, even if you don't agree with their view.
  5. Try to understand what arguments they find more and less persuasive to frame the discussion on palatable terms.

Motivational Interviewing for Change

Bill Miller and Steve Rolnick (described by Adam Grant)
  1. Adopt a stance of humility and curiosity, recognizing you cannot motivate someone else to change, but can help them find their own motivation.
  2. Start with a series of open-ended questions about the possible path the person is considering (e.g., stopping drinking).
  3. Listen for both 'sustained talk' (reasons to stay the course) and 'change talk' (ideas about desire to change).
  4. Thoughtfully acknowledge the sustained talk, but summarize and ask follow-up questions about the change talk to help them think it through.
  5. Offer an affirmation, expressing belief in their will and skill to change if they decide to pursue their own goals.

Overcoming Overconfidence and the Illusion of Explanatory Depth

Cognitive Psychologists (described by Adam Grant)
  1. When encountering someone making claims to know things they clearly don't, instead of arguing, ask them to explain what they know.
  2. Prompt them to walk through the mechanisms of how something works (e.g., how a drum produces sound) or how a policy would be implemented in practice.
  3. Observe as they realize the many gaps in their knowledge, even before they speak it out loud.
  4. This process will lead them to become more humble, curious, nuanced in their thinking, and open to learning.

Defining Identity to Foster Rethinking

Adam Grant
  1. Identify your core values or principles (e.g., generosity, excellence, integrity, freedom).
  2. Define yourself in terms of these values, rather than specific opinions or beliefs.
  3. Remain open to changing your mind about the best ways to live out these values, recognizing that current practices might be wrong or incomplete.

Building a Challenge Network

Adam Grant
  1. Identify a group of people you trust who will hold you accountable for being open-minded and let you know when your beliefs might not be correct.
  2. When forming a hypothesis or strong opinion, reach out to someone in your challenge network who holds a different point of view or is more knowledgeable.
  3. Ask them where they see holes in your thinking.
  4. Curate your social media feeds to follow people who make you think hard, regardless of whether you agree with their conclusions, to stretch your thinking.

Setting Criteria for Changing Your Mind

Jean-Pierre Bougam (described by Adam Grant)
  1. When forming a tentative opinion, make a list of the specific conditions under which you would change your mind.
  2. Ensure these conditions are based on rigorous logic, facts, and truly convincing data, not just persuasive arguments.
  3. Use these criteria to evolve your thinking in a principled way, rather than simply flip-flopping.
almost 20 years ago
Time since Phil Tetlock's paper on social forces influencing judgment Reference to a brilliant paper by Adam Grant's colleague, Phil Tetlock.
over a thousand controlled trials
Number of controlled trials showing motivational interviewing's effectiveness People are more likely to change when motivational interviewing is used.
four
Dan Harris's son's age during a Father's Day anecdote Pre-pandemic, when his son emulated his office setup.
last year
Time since Adam Grant's daughter's Zoom performance His middle daughter gave a faux TED talk emulating him.
6%
Nate Silver's predicted percentage for Trump winning the Republican primary In November 2015, when most forecasters thought Trump was a joke.
70 million
Approximate number of people who voted for Donald Trump Used to illustrate the large number of people with potentially nuanced views.
10 days
Duration of introductory meditation course Recommended for Adam Grant on the 10% Happier app.
five to 10 minutes
Daily time commitment for introductory meditation Recommended for Adam Grant's meditation experiment.