Think Again, by Adam Grant
Now that I’m using Reading Refresh to keep myself up to date on books I’ve read in the past, I thought I’d share some of them as they came back up. Today is Adam Grant’s “Think Again”.
I love books that challenge my ideas, and Adam Grant’s “Think Again” certainly does! Throughout the book, he encourages us to find people that will challenge our ideas and not always simply agree with us. He says:
“We learn more from people who challenge our thought process than those who affirm our conclusions. Strong leaders engage their critics and make themselves stronger. Weak leaders silence their critics and make themselves weaker. This reaction isn’t limited to people in power. Although we might be on board with the principle, in practice we often miss out on the value of a challenge network.”
I’ve written a lot of blog posts as a result of reading this book, so here are some that you may find helpful.
Your opinions require logic when spoken aloud
“When we find out we might be wrong, a standard defense is “I’m entitled to my opinion.” I’d like to modify that: yes, we’re entitled to hold opinions inside our own heads. If we choose to express them out loud, though, I think it’s our responsibility to ground them in logic and facts, share our reasoning with others, and change our minds when better evidence emerges.”
Are you in an idea cult?
“If you find yourself saying xxxx is always good or xxxx is never bad, you may be a member of an idea cult.”
Arguing can be a sign of respect
“In fact, when I argue with someone, it’s not a display of disrespect—it’s a sign of respect. It means I value their views enough to contest them. If their opinions didn’t matter to me, I wouldn’t bother.”
Open-minded versus actively open-minded
“Thinking like a scientist involves more than just reacting with an open mind. It means being actively open-minded. It requires searching for reasons why we might be wrong—not for reasons why we must be right—and revising our views based on what we learn.”
It’s similar to the idea of a “Steel Man” argument.
Where I’m ignorant
“We should all be able to make a long list of areas where we’re ignorant. Mine include art, financial markets, fashion, chemistry, food, why British accents turn American in songs, and why it’s impossible to tickle yourself.”
Most disagreements aren’t binary
“An antidote to this proclivity is complexifying: showcasing the range of perspectives on a given topic. We might believe we’re making progress by discussing hot-button issues as two sides of a coin, but people are actually more inclined to think again if we present these topics through the many lenses of a prism. To borrow a phrase from Walt Whitman, it takes a multitude of views to help people realize that they too contain multitudes.”
This is similar to something that Shankar Vedantam has shared on his “Hidden Brain” podcast:
“If you think there should be, for example, zero immigration to the United States, you can call anyone who has even mildly pro-immigrant views a traitor. On the other hand if you think there should be open borders to the United States, you can call anyone who calls for any immigration restrictions a racist.”
You are what you value, not what you believe
“Who you are should be a question of what you value, not what you believe. Values are your core principles in life—they might be excellence and generosity, freedom and fairness, or security and integrity.”
It’s a fantastic book, and I strongly encourage you to give it a read. For a bit more, here is a 6-minute summary from Reading Refresh: