Why do arguments change people’s minds in some cases and backfire in others? Hugo Mercier explains how arguments are more convincing when they rest on a good knowledge of the audience, taking into account what the audience believes, who they trust, and what they value.
Three people are at a dinner party. Paul, who’s married, is looking at Linda. Meanwhile, Linda is looking at John, who’s not married. Is someone who’s married looking at someone who’s not married? Take a moment to think about it. Most people answer that there’s not enough information to tell. And most people are wrong. Linda must be either married or not married—there are no other options. So in either scenario, someone married is looking at someone who’s not married. When presented with the explanation, most people change their minds and accept the correct answer, despite being very confident in their first responses.
Now let’s look at another case. A 2005 study by Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler examined American attitudes regarding the justifications for the Iraq War. Researchers presented participants with a news article that showed no weapons of mass destruction had been found. Yet many participants not only continued to believe that WMDs had been found, but they even became more convinced of their original views. So why do arguments change people’s minds in some cases and backfire in others?
Arguments are more convincing when they rest on a good knowledge of the audience, taking into account what the audience believes, who they trust, and what they value. Mathematical and logical arguments like the dinner party brainteaser work because even when people reach different conclusions, they’re starting from the same set of shared beliefs. In 1931, a young, unknown mathematician named Kurt Gödel presented a proof that a logically complete system of mathematics was impossible. Despite upending decades of work by brilliant mathematicians like Bertrand Russell and David Hilbert, the proof was accepted because it relied on axioms that everyone in the field already agreed on.
Of course, many disagreements involve different beliefs that can’t simply be reconciled through logic. When these beliefs involve outside information, the issue often comes down to what sources and authorities people trust. One study asked people to estimate several statistics related to the scope of climate change. Participants were asked questions, such as “how many of the years between 1995 and 2006 were one of the hottest 12 years since 1850?” After providing their answers, they were presented with data from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in this case showing that the answer was 11 of the 12 years. Being provided with these reliable statistics from a trusted official source made people more likely to accept the reality that the earth is warming.
Finally, for disagreements that can’t be definitively settled with statistics or evidence, making a convincing argument may depend on engaging the audience’s values. For example, researchers have conducted a number of studies where they’ve asked people of different political backgrounds to rank their values. Liberals in these studies, on average, rank fairness— here meaning whether everyone is treated in the same way—above loyalty. In later studies, researchers attempted to convince liberals to support military spending with a variety of arguments. Arguments based on fairness— like that the military provides employment and education to people from disadvantaged backgrounds— were more convincing than arguments based on loyalty— such as that the military unifies a nation.
These three elements— beliefs, trusted sources, and values— may seem like a simple formula for finding agreement and consensus. The problem is that our initial inclination is to think of arguments that rely on our own beliefs, trusted sources, and values. And even when we don’t, it can be challenging to correctly identify what’s held dear by people who don’t already agree with us. The best way to find out is simply to talk to them. In the course of discussion, you’ll be exposed to counter-arguments and rebuttals. These can help you make your own arguments and reasoning more convincing and sometimes, you may even end up being the one changing your mind.
It can be hard sometimes, when speaking, to remember all of the grammatical rules that guide us when we’re writing. When is it right to say “the dog and me” and when should it be “the dog and I”? Does it even matter? Andreea S. Calude dives into the age-old argument between linguistic prescriptivists and descriptivists — who have two very different opinions on the matter.
Over our lifetimes, our bodies undergo a series of extraordinary metamorphoses: we grow, experience puberty, and many of us reproduce. Behind the scenes, the endocrine system works constantly to orchestrate these changes. Emma Bryce explains how this system regulates everything from your sleep to the rhythm of your beating heart, exerting its influence over each and every one of your cells. Lesson by Emma Bryce, animation by Daniel Gray.
Get informed on the causes and risks of human papillomavirus, HPV, and how to protect yourself from the infection. -- At some point, most sexually active people will be infected with human papillomavirus, or HPV. There are over 100 types of HPV, and most of the time the body eliminates infections without symptoms— but some strains can pose serious health risks down the line. How can you protect yourself from HPV? Emma Bryce explains how the virus causes harm, who’s at risk and how to minimize those risks. Lesson by Emma Bryce, directed by Sharon Colman.
Explore what happens in the body during miscarriage, and learn about three common treatment options for pregnancy loss. -- Globally, around 23 million pregnancies end in miscarriage each year. Despite how common it is, miscarriage can still feel isolating, and for some, emotionally traumatizing. And myths about miscarriage add to the stigma, leading many to blame themselves for the loss. So what happens in the body during miscarriage? Nassim Assefi & Emily M. Godfrey take a closer look at pregnancy loss and treatment. Lesson by Nassim Assefi and Emily M. Godfrey, directed by Lené van Heerden, We Are Batch TV.
Dig into how African clawed frogs can help detect human pregnancy, and how their use in experiments had unintended consequences. -- In the early 20th century, pregnancy testing required a slippery piece of equipment: a female African clawed frog. For decades, hospitals and research labs had a trusted supply of these handy creatures, employing their help in testing for pregnancy and in numerous other scientific endeavors. So what makes these frogs so special? Carly Anne York shares the secrets of these remarkable amphibians. Lesson by Carly Anne York, directed by Yajun Shi.
Trace the history and evolution of the Spanish language, from its origins in the 3rd century BCE to modern day. -- Beginning in the third century BCE, the Romans conquered the Iberian peninsula. This period gave rise to several regional languages in the area that’s now Spain, including Castilian, Catalan, and Galician. One of these would become Spanish— but not for another 1,500 years. Those years tell the origin story of what’s become a global modern language. Ilan Stavans traces the evolution of Spanish.
