How can we un-break politics? (with Magnus Vinding)

Dec 21, 2022 Episode Page ↗
Overview

Guest Magnus Vending discusses how to improve politics by applying a two-step ideal of reasoned politics, separating normative and empirical discussions. He emphasizes being skeptical of immediate intuitions, understanding psychological biases like tribalism and reactance, and advocating for strong free speech to combat disinformation and foster better societal outcomes.

At a Glance
16 Insights
54m 26s Duration
13 Topics
7 Concepts

Deep Dive Analysis

The Broken State of Modern Politics

Introducing the Two-Step Ideal of Reasoned Politics

Debating Intrinsic vs. Instrumental Values in Politics

Applying Reasoned Politics to the Issue of Free Speech

The Backfiring Effect of Limiting Free Speech: Psychological Reactance

Combating Disinformation and the Allure of Forbidden Ideas

Recommendations for Improving Political Norms and Reducing Bias

The Dangers of Relying on Immediate Intuitions in Policy Decisions

Understanding Group Identity and Its Influence on Political Biases

Strategies for Individuals to De-Bias Their Political Thinking

The Problem of Political Overconfidence and Its Causes

Challenges of Generalizing Policies Across Different Cultures

Addressing the Zero-Sum Nature of Political Discourse

Two-Step Ideal of Reasoned Politics

A framework for political thinking that separates discussion into a normative step (clarifying and refining values and moral aims) and an empirical step (exploring data to best achieve those values). This helps to distinguish between what society wants to accomplish and how to effectively accomplish it.

Intrinsic Values

Things that an individual values for their own sake, rather than as a means to achieve other ends. These are considered fundamental psychological facts that are often resistant to change through rational argument alone, though they can evolve over time due to various influences.

Psychological Reactance

A phenomenon where attempts to forbid or suppress certain ideas or actions can paradoxically make those ideas or actions more appealing and increase support for them. This can lead to unintended consequences, such as people adopting views they might not otherwise hold.

Social Intuitionist Model of Moral Judgment

A model proposing that moral judgments primarily arise from immediate, automatic intuitions, with subsequent reasoning often serving to rationalize or justify these initial gut feelings. This suggests that our moral conclusions are frequently driven by emotion rather than pure logic.

Hot Cognition

The tendency to process political leaders, groups, and issues in a strongly emotionally charged way, often unconsciously and reflexively. This leads to a positive bias towards one's own group and a negative bias towards out-groups, influencing perceptions before conscious thought.

Political Overconfidence

The tendency for individuals to be excessively confident in their political beliefs and predictions, which is often more pronounced in political contexts than in other areas. This can be due to the inherent complexity of political issues and the social signaling aspects of expressing strong political opinions.

Identity Expressive Nature of Political Convictions

The idea that people often use their political beliefs and opinions as a means to signal their allegiance to a particular political group or 'team.' This can exacerbate perceived disagreements and lead to political discourse becoming an arena for demonstrating opposition rather than substantive problem-solving.

?
What is the two-step ideal of reasoned politics?

It's a framework that divides political thinking into a normative step (clarifying values and moral aims) and an empirical step (using data to best realize those values). This helps separate what we want to achieve from how to achieve it.

?
Can people reach agreement on political issues rooted in intrinsic values?

While direct convergence on intrinsic values is challenging, there's potential for progress by seeking consistency within one's own values and exploring how instrumental values can serve broader, shared goals, as secular ethics is still a young field of study.

?
Why should societies strongly protect free speech, even for controversial viewpoints?

Strong free speech protection is supported by empirical data suggesting that limiting it can backfire due to psychological reactance, making forbidden ideas more appealing, and that free expression allows for the criticism and combat of false information more effectively than censorship.

?
How can individuals reduce their political biases?

A key recommendation is to not trust immediate intuitions, viewing them as data points rather than final conclusions, and to become aware of how tribalism and 'hot cognition' can systematically distort one's processing of information, especially regarding in-groups and out-groups.

?
How can we overcome the zero-sum nature of politics?

It's important to recognize that zero-sum thinking is an intuitive but often outdated human tendency. Becoming aware of the deep-seated inclination to care about relative group differences and the 'identity expressive' nature of political convictions can help foster more cooperative approaches.

?
Do policies that work in one country reliably transfer to another?

Not necessarily, as the effectiveness of policies often depends on the local culture and 'cultural psychology' of a population. Factors like interpersonal trust or individualism versus collectivism can significantly alter policy outcomes, making direct generalization difficult without understanding the underlying causality.

1. Skeptic Immediate Political Intuitions

Do not immediately trust your intuitions when considering political decisions or policies, as they are often ill-equipped for complex global issues and can be driven by unconscious biases rather than reasoned analysis.

2. De-Bias with Tribalism Awareness

Understand that human tribalism and “hot cognition” unconsciously bias how you process political information, viewing your in-group positively and out-groups negatively. This awareness is a crucial tool for identifying and mitigating your own biases.

3. Protect Free Speech Strongly

Advocate for strong protection of free speech for all viewpoints, as restricting it can lead to psychological reactance, make ideas more appealing, and carries a high risk of abuse by those in power. Free expression also allows for the criticism and combat of false information.

4. Combat Disinformation with Openness

To effectively combat false information, allow the free flow of information, as censorship can backfire by fueling conspiracy theories and making forbidden ideas more appealing. This approach ensures that false information can always be criticized and challenged.

5. Treat Intuitions as Data

Instead of accepting intuitions as definitive, view them as data points that require further investigation and empirical evidence to inform political decisions.

6. Recognize Policy Signaling

Be aware that expressing views on policies can be interpreted as a signal of loyalty or endorsement, potentially obscuring clear thinking by making individuals hesitant to support evidence-based changes that might contradict group identity.

7. Control for Loyalty Bias

When examining political issues, especially those tied to your in-group’s core beliefs, actively control for loyalty bias, which can lead to distorted processing of evidence and overemphasis on information that supports your group.

8. Skeptic Own Political Confidence

Cultivate uncertainty and skepticism regarding your own confidence in highly complex political issues, as these matters involve numerous uncertain factors and people are prone to overconfidence, often relying on superficial heuristics.

9. Recognize Zero-Sum Thinking

Cultivate awareness of the inherent human tendency towards zero-sum thinking, particularly in political contexts, as this mindset can impede the pursuit of mutually beneficial solutions by prioritizing relative gains over absolute improvements.

10. Identify Expressive Convictions

Recognize that political convictions often function as identity expressions, signaling group belonging rather than purely substantive agreement, which can amplify perceived disagreements and foster an “us or them” mentality.

11. Focus on Instrumental Values

When discussing values, prioritize finding agreement on what is instrumentally valuable (means to an end) rather than intrinsic values, as people are more likely to converge on these.

12. Value Consistency in Ethics

Cultivate consistency in your values and actions, as this can help derive ethical principles and reveal conflicts between your current behavior and deeply held intrinsic values like fairness.

13. Understand Policy Causality

When evaluating whether a policy from one country can be applied elsewhere, focus on understanding the causal mechanisms (X causes Y causes Z) rather than just observing outcomes, as this allows for more reliable generalization across different contexts.

14. Account for Cultural Psychology

When designing or evaluating policies, consider the local culture and “cultural psychology” of the population, as factors like trust, individualism, or collectivism can significantly influence a policy’s effectiveness.

15. Seek Intellectual Hubs

To connect with intellectual individuals who enjoy discussing ideas, consider living in or visiting cities known for their intellectual clusters, such as New York, San Francisco, London, or Oxford.

16. Leverage Super Connectors

To expand your network of intellectual contacts, ask existing connections for introductions and actively seek out “super connector” individuals who are well-connected and often host gatherings.

The field of secular ethics is still very young. At this point, it has been studied very little in the secular context. So it's perhaps worth being somewhat open-minded about how much potential there is there for progress or convergence.

Magnus Vinding

The importance of not trusting immediate intuitions is that it essentially, it's sort of like an opening, you could say, to not get stuck at our most immediate inclinations and to instead be able to have a conversation where we eventually get to more of a conversation and exploration of data at the empirical level.

Magnus Vinding

The best ways to combat false information, actually, I mean, it ultimately is that you want to have free expression such that false information can always be criticized. And you never really know in advance what kind of speech you will need, so to speak, in order to combat false information.

Magnus Vinding

This thing about caring a lot about relative difference between groups is somehow very, very deeply entrenched in us. And I think there's a lot of value in becoming more aware of this tendency, and trying to, to control for it.

Magnus Vinding

Our individual identities are often very strongly tied to the groups that we feel we belong to most strongly. And so, yeah, so often our, you could say our individual identities become sort of like a, almost even like a symbol of our group identities.

Magnus Vinding

Two-Step Ideal of Reasoned Politics

Magnus Vinding
  1. State, argue for, and refine your values, relating to your moral values or underlying moral aims that ultimately animate your politics.
  2. Explore empirical data broadly in order to clarify how you can best realize the values that you have identified or clarified at the first step.
less than 85%
Accuracy of 100% certainty in one 1970s study When people were 100% certain about a claim, it was true less than 85% of the time, indicating a general human tendency towards overconfidence, which is often worse in political contexts.