1
00:00:08,390 --> 00:00:06,550
[Music]

2
00:00:11,190 --> 00:00:08,400
welcome to the skeptic zone

3
00:00:16,900 --> 00:00:11,200
the podcast from australia for science

4
00:00:23,670 --> 00:00:16,910
and reason

5
00:00:27,189 --> 00:00:25,269
welcome to this special episode of the

6
00:00:31,109 --> 00:00:27,199
skeptic zone for the

7
00:00:34,229 --> 00:00:31,119
3rd of june 2021 episode number 600

8
00:00:36,950 --> 00:00:34,239
and 60. in today's extra episode

9
00:00:39,190 --> 00:00:36,960
we present iran segev with his interview

10
00:00:41,350 --> 00:00:39,200
of julia galif who has written the book

11
00:00:43,350 --> 00:00:41,360
the scout mindset you'll find details of

12
00:00:45,670 --> 00:00:43,360
the book and other links

13
00:00:48,150 --> 00:00:45,680
in this week's show notes and also this

14
00:00:50,709 --> 00:00:48,160
interview includes many chapter markers

15
00:00:51,270 --> 00:00:50,719
so you can get to the section you want

16
00:00:53,910 --> 00:00:51,280
or

17
00:00:56,229 --> 00:00:53,920
re-listen again at your leisure so sit

18
00:01:17,190 --> 00:00:56,239
back and relax and enjoy this interview

19
00:01:27,749 --> 00:01:19,990
let's all take this with a grain of salt

20
00:01:29,830 --> 00:01:27,759
here's iran's again

21
00:01:32,390 --> 00:01:29,840
is a public intellectual whose ted talk

22
00:01:34,230 --> 00:01:32,400
has now attracted about 5 million views

23
00:01:36,310 --> 00:01:34,240
she is also the host of a popular

24
00:01:38,310 --> 00:01:36,320
podcast active in the skeptical

25
00:01:39,109 --> 00:01:38,320
community and in the effective altruism

26
00:01:40,789 --> 00:01:39,119
movement

27
00:01:42,950 --> 00:01:40,799
and now also the author of a wonderful

28
00:01:44,950 --> 00:01:42,960
new book the scout mindset

29
00:01:46,950 --> 00:01:44,960
i have recently spoken to julia in what

30
00:01:48,469 --> 00:01:46,960
was meant to be a half hour discussion

31
00:01:50,630 --> 00:01:48,479
but it was impossible to keep to the

32
00:01:52,230 --> 00:01:50,640
time given her fascinating insights and

33
00:01:53,749 --> 00:01:52,240
thoughtful analysis

34
00:01:55,270 --> 00:01:53,759
i hope you enjoyed this interview as

35
00:01:57,749 --> 00:01:55,280
much as i did

36
00:01:59,109 --> 00:01:57,759
welcome to the skeptic zone julia thank

37
00:02:02,069 --> 00:01:59,119
you great to be here

38
00:02:03,270 --> 00:02:02,079
i have a pile of questions but uh about

39
00:02:06,069 --> 00:02:03,280
all kinds of things

40
00:02:07,590 --> 00:02:06,079
uh yeah i have a pile of answers yeah uh

41
00:02:09,749 --> 00:02:07,600
you have a lot on

42
00:02:11,270 --> 00:02:09,759
in your uh history and in your

43
00:02:11,589 --> 00:02:11,280
experience that i would like to discuss

44
00:02:12,949 --> 00:02:11,599
but

45
00:02:15,910 --> 00:02:12,959
let's start with your book the scout

46
00:02:17,510 --> 00:02:15,920
mindset first of all congratulations

47
00:02:19,110 --> 00:02:17,520
it's your first book and it appears to

48
00:02:21,270 --> 00:02:19,120
be doing very well because

49
00:02:23,270 --> 00:02:21,280
when i was looking for it it was sold

50
00:02:24,949 --> 00:02:23,280
out on a couple of online stores oh

51
00:02:26,550 --> 00:02:24,959
oh wow well that's good news and bad

52
00:02:29,110 --> 00:02:26,560
news i guess

53
00:02:30,390 --> 00:02:29,120
but i ended up buying it both on amazon

54
00:02:32,550 --> 00:02:30,400
and on

55
00:02:34,229 --> 00:02:32,560
audible i read it and listened to it and

56
00:02:35,190 --> 00:02:34,239
it's great um it was good to have you in

57
00:02:37,350 --> 00:02:35,200
my ear for

58
00:02:39,589 --> 00:02:37,360
all these hours in the book you refer to

59
00:02:41,830 --> 00:02:39,599
the scout mindset of course but

60
00:02:43,589 --> 00:02:41,840
you contrast it with a soldier mindset

61
00:02:45,910 --> 00:02:43,599
what is the difference between the two

62
00:02:47,110 --> 00:02:45,920
both the scout and soldier mindset are

63
00:02:49,750 --> 00:02:47,120
metaphors for

64
00:02:50,550 --> 00:02:49,760
ways of thinking ways of deciding what

65
00:02:52,229 --> 00:02:50,560
to believe

66
00:02:54,229 --> 00:02:52,239
and this i'll start with a soldier

67
00:02:55,589 --> 00:02:54,239
mindset being in soldier mindset means

68
00:02:58,229 --> 00:02:55,599
being motivated to

69
00:02:59,350 --> 00:02:58,239
defend some pre-existing belief or to

70
00:03:01,750 --> 00:02:59,360
defend some belief you

71
00:03:02,470 --> 00:03:01,760
you want to hold against any evidence

72
00:03:05,030 --> 00:03:02,480
that might

73
00:03:06,710 --> 00:03:05,040
threaten it the reason i chose soldier

74
00:03:08,309 --> 00:03:06,720
as the metaphor is because

75
00:03:10,390 --> 00:03:08,319
this way of reasoning is really very

76
00:03:12,710 --> 00:03:10,400
militaristic we talk about

77
00:03:13,750 --> 00:03:12,720
supporting our beliefs or or buttressing

78
00:03:16,869 --> 00:03:13,760
our positions

79
00:03:18,710 --> 00:03:16,879
we talk about digging in our heels or

80
00:03:20,470 --> 00:03:18,720
bolstering our case these are all the

81
00:03:21,350 --> 00:03:20,480
metaphors as if we are defending a

82
00:03:23,509 --> 00:03:21,360
fortress in a

83
00:03:24,470 --> 00:03:23,519
war and we also of course talk about

84
00:03:26,309 --> 00:03:24,480
going on the offense

85
00:03:28,550 --> 00:03:26,319
about shooting down opposing arguments

86
00:03:30,229 --> 00:03:28,560
or poking holes in someone's logic

87
00:03:32,390 --> 00:03:30,239
so i call this soldier mindset the

88
00:03:33,990 --> 00:03:32,400
official term in the

89
00:03:35,990 --> 00:03:34,000
field of cognitive science is

90
00:03:36,630 --> 00:03:36,000
directionally motivated reasoning which

91
00:03:38,309 --> 00:03:36,640
was

92
00:03:40,309 --> 00:03:38,319
a little less catchy and colorful i

93
00:03:42,789 --> 00:03:40,319
thought so i call it soldier mindset

94
00:03:44,070 --> 00:03:42,799
but my favorite definition for

95
00:03:44,949 --> 00:03:44,080
directionally motivated reasoning or

96
00:03:46,630 --> 00:03:44,959
soldier mindset

97
00:03:48,550 --> 00:03:46,640
comes from a cognitive psychologist

98
00:03:50,869 --> 00:03:48,560
named tom gilovich and the way

99
00:03:52,390 --> 00:03:50,879
he put it is when we're evaluating

100
00:03:55,589 --> 00:03:52,400
something we want to believe

101
00:03:57,670 --> 00:03:55,599
we ask ourselves can we believe this or

102
00:03:59,350 --> 00:03:57,680
can i believe this and we search for any

103
00:04:00,949 --> 00:03:59,360
justification to accept it

104
00:04:02,390 --> 00:04:00,959
whereas if we're evaluating something we

105
00:04:04,229 --> 00:04:02,400
don't want to believe we

106
00:04:05,509 --> 00:04:04,239
instead look at it through the lens of

107
00:04:07,670 --> 00:04:05,519
must i believe this

108
00:04:09,589 --> 00:04:07,680
and look for any excuse to reject it and

109
00:04:11,270 --> 00:04:09,599
so to sum up this is how soldier mindset

110
00:04:13,270 --> 00:04:11,280
works we apply different standards

111
00:04:14,630 --> 00:04:13,280
different standards of evidence or rigor

112
00:04:17,189 --> 00:04:14,640
or which sources we will

113
00:04:18,390 --> 00:04:17,199
accept uh testimony from depending on

114
00:04:20,629 --> 00:04:18,400
whether we want to believe

115
00:04:23,030 --> 00:04:20,639
the conclusion so that's soldier mindset

116
00:04:24,550 --> 00:04:23,040
and then scout mindset was my term for

117
00:04:25,990 --> 00:04:24,560
an alternative to soldier mindset a

118
00:04:26,950 --> 00:04:26,000
different way of thinking about evidence

119
00:04:29,749 --> 00:04:26,960
and what's true

120
00:04:31,189 --> 00:04:29,759
and the scout unlike the soldier is not

121
00:04:32,629 --> 00:04:31,199
trying to attack or defend things

122
00:04:34,230 --> 00:04:32,639
he's trying to go out and just see

123
00:04:36,390 --> 00:04:34,240
what's really there see what's really

124
00:04:38,790 --> 00:04:36,400
true to the best of his abilities and

125
00:04:41,350 --> 00:04:38,800
form as accurate a map as possible

126
00:04:42,230 --> 00:04:41,360
of a situation or an issue so being in

127
00:04:44,390 --> 00:04:42,240
scout mindset

128
00:04:45,830 --> 00:04:44,400
means being or trying to be

129
00:04:48,629 --> 00:04:45,840
intellectually honest

130
00:04:50,150 --> 00:04:48,639
and fair-minded and just curious about

131
00:04:51,670 --> 00:04:50,160
what's actually true

132
00:04:53,270 --> 00:04:51,680
obviously you can never know for sure

133
00:04:54,390 --> 00:04:53,280
what's actually true and and this is

134
00:04:56,870 --> 00:04:54,400
sort of part of the metaphor

135
00:04:58,390 --> 00:04:56,880
that you have this map of reality and

136
00:05:00,150 --> 00:04:58,400
you accept that like all maps it's going

137
00:05:01,430 --> 00:05:00,160
to be incomplete and imperfect and

138
00:05:03,590 --> 00:05:01,440
you're going to have to revise it over

139
00:05:06,550 --> 00:05:03,600
time as you learn new information

140
00:05:08,469 --> 00:05:06,560
that's scott mindset and soldier mindset

141
00:05:10,710 --> 00:05:08,479
does that mean that the scout mindset

142
00:05:12,390 --> 00:05:10,720
does not have motivated reasoning the

143
00:05:13,350 --> 00:05:12,400
technical term for scout mindset in

144
00:05:15,270 --> 00:05:13,360
cognitive science

145
00:05:16,790 --> 00:05:15,280
the non-metaphorical term is accuracy

146
00:05:19,029 --> 00:05:16,800
motivated reasoning so it's

147
00:05:19,990 --> 00:05:19,039
reasoning directed at trying to figure

148
00:05:21,990 --> 00:05:20,000
out what's true

149
00:05:23,430 --> 00:05:22,000
as opposed to soldier mindset which is

150
00:05:24,950 --> 00:05:23,440
reasoning directed at supporting a

151
00:05:26,950 --> 00:05:24,960
predetermined conclusion

152
00:05:28,550 --> 00:05:26,960
they're both motivated in the sense but

153
00:05:29,110 --> 00:05:28,560
um one's motivated towards the truth the

154
00:05:32,150 --> 00:05:29,120
other one

155
00:05:33,990 --> 00:05:32,160
isn't what we colloquially call

156
00:05:35,830 --> 00:05:34,000
motivated reasoning is really what in

157
00:05:37,430 --> 00:05:35,840
the book you refer to as directionally

158
00:05:40,390 --> 00:05:37,440
motivated reasons yeah

159
00:05:42,390 --> 00:05:40,400
it's a bit of a confusing jargon but

160
00:05:44,710 --> 00:05:42,400
yeah what we call motivated reasoning

161
00:05:46,790 --> 00:05:44,720
colloquially is uh is actually shorthand

162
00:05:49,670 --> 00:05:46,800
for directionally motivated reasoning

163
00:05:50,070 --> 00:05:49,680
okay how is the scout mindset different

164
00:05:51,590 --> 00:05:50,080
from

165
00:05:53,189 --> 00:05:51,600
critical thinking and scientific

166
00:05:55,510 --> 00:05:53,199
skepticism we're both

167
00:05:56,710 --> 00:05:55,520
skeptics and and i think that's

168
00:05:58,710 --> 00:05:56,720
definitely to me

169
00:06:00,629 --> 00:05:58,720
uh it sounds when i read the description

170
00:06:02,390 --> 00:06:00,639
of what scout mindset was in the book i

171
00:06:04,309 --> 00:06:02,400
thought that's very much what i try to

172
00:06:04,950 --> 00:06:04,319
apply as part of skepticism how is it

173
00:06:07,110 --> 00:06:04,960
different

174
00:06:08,150 --> 00:06:07,120
there is a lot of overlap i'd point to a

175
00:06:10,710 --> 00:06:08,160
couple important

176
00:06:12,070 --> 00:06:10,720
areas of non-overlap one is that

177
00:06:14,150 --> 00:06:12,080
critical thinking

178
00:06:15,909 --> 00:06:14,160
at least in practice the way it's done

179
00:06:17,909 --> 00:06:15,919
in practice if not in theory

180
00:06:19,110 --> 00:06:17,919
is often like you can apply your

181
00:06:21,270 --> 00:06:19,120
critical thinking

182
00:06:22,950 --> 00:06:21,280
to anything so you could apply your

183
00:06:23,670 --> 00:06:22,960
critical thinking to trying to find

184
00:06:26,870 --> 00:06:23,680
flaws

185
00:06:28,150 --> 00:06:26,880
in claims that you encounter so if you

186
00:06:30,230 --> 00:06:28,160
spend your time

187
00:06:32,309 --> 00:06:30,240
reading claims from people who say they

188
00:06:34,390 --> 00:06:32,319
saw ufos or ghosts or

189
00:06:35,590 --> 00:06:34,400
that astrology works or whatever you

190
00:06:36,309 --> 00:06:35,600
could be really good at critical

191
00:06:37,990 --> 00:06:36,319
thinking

192
00:06:40,070 --> 00:06:38,000
and what that means is you're really

193
00:06:42,110 --> 00:06:40,080
good at pointing out flaws in the logic

194
00:06:43,990 --> 00:06:42,120
or you know potential alternate

195
00:06:44,870 --> 00:06:44,000
explanations for the phenomena that

196
00:06:47,029 --> 00:06:44,880
people are claiming

197
00:06:47,990 --> 00:06:47,039
exist that's not necessarily scout

198
00:06:49,350 --> 00:06:48,000
mindset if you're not

199
00:06:51,110 --> 00:06:49,360
also applying that critical thinking

200
00:06:52,390 --> 00:06:51,120
towards things that you believe so

201
00:06:54,230 --> 00:06:52,400
maybe a shorter way to say that is that

202
00:06:57,510 --> 00:06:54,240
critical thinking is um

203
00:06:59,430 --> 00:06:57,520
is like a method but you still choose

204
00:07:00,710 --> 00:06:59,440
what to use that method on and if you

205
00:07:02,230 --> 00:07:00,720
choose to use that method

206
00:07:03,909 --> 00:07:02,240
on claims that you don't want to believe

207
00:07:06,309 --> 00:07:03,919
then you still end up

208
00:07:08,070 --> 00:07:06,319
in soldier mindset so a method versus

209
00:07:09,189 --> 00:07:08,080
the direction in which you point that

210
00:07:11,029 --> 00:07:09,199
method or something

211
00:07:12,629 --> 00:07:11,039
you might want to reply that you know

212
00:07:14,550 --> 00:07:12,639
critical thinking is supposed to be

213
00:07:15,670 --> 00:07:14,560
applied to everything including things

214
00:07:16,309 --> 00:07:15,680
that you know beliefs that you hold

215
00:07:17,909 --> 00:07:16,319
dearly

216
00:07:19,749 --> 00:07:17,919
and so that's why i kind of said well

217
00:07:21,350 --> 00:07:19,759
you know in theory that might be true

218
00:07:22,950 --> 00:07:21,360
but in practice the way i see a lot of

219
00:07:24,550 --> 00:07:22,960
people applying critical thinking is is

220
00:07:25,430 --> 00:07:24,560
in this kind of one-sided way towards

221
00:07:27,510 --> 00:07:25,440
claims that

222
00:07:29,110 --> 00:07:27,520
they were hoping to debunk anyway it

223
00:07:29,749 --> 00:07:29,120
sounds to me like basically what you're

224
00:07:32,550 --> 00:07:29,759
talking about

225
00:07:34,550 --> 00:07:32,560
or the way you see it is that skepticism

226
00:07:36,870 --> 00:07:34,560
or critical thinking is more about

227
00:07:38,710 --> 00:07:36,880
debunking claims rather than assessing

228
00:07:41,670 --> 00:07:38,720
evidence more holistically

229
00:07:42,390 --> 00:07:41,680
is that a fair uh i think that's not

230
00:07:44,629 --> 00:07:42,400
wrong

231
00:07:46,469 --> 00:07:44,639
well it's it's more about what claims

232
00:07:47,110 --> 00:07:46,479
you're focusing your critical thinking

233
00:07:50,390 --> 00:07:47,120
on

234
00:07:53,350 --> 00:07:50,400
of time debunking

235
00:07:54,469 --> 00:07:53,360
pseudoscientific claims and suppose he's

236
00:07:56,869 --> 00:07:54,479
actually

237
00:07:58,469 --> 00:07:56,879
pretty good about saying well this claim

238
00:07:59,270 --> 00:07:58,479
i can thoroughly debunk this other claim

239
00:08:01,110 --> 00:07:59,280
i'm not so sure

240
00:08:02,869 --> 00:08:01,120
maybe it's false i'm i'm not positive

241
00:08:04,390 --> 00:08:02,879
he's not just blindly rejecting every

242
00:08:06,710 --> 00:08:04,400
single claim and that's good

243
00:08:07,749 --> 00:08:06,720
but he never actually turns that

244
00:08:10,469 --> 00:08:07,759
critical lens on

245
00:08:11,990 --> 00:08:10,479
say his political beliefs or his belief

246
00:08:14,070 --> 00:08:12,000
that he's right in arguments about his

247
00:08:15,670 --> 00:08:14,080
relationship or something like that

248
00:08:17,749 --> 00:08:15,680
because he just doesn't want to he'd

249
00:08:19,270 --> 00:08:17,759
much rather just stay secure in his

250
00:08:20,390 --> 00:08:19,280
conviction that he's always right about

251
00:08:21,909 --> 00:08:20,400
politics or

252
00:08:23,430 --> 00:08:21,919
relationships or whatever i would call

253
00:08:23,909 --> 00:08:23,440
that a failure of scout mindset even

254
00:08:25,990 --> 00:08:23,919
though he

255
00:08:27,029 --> 00:08:26,000
clearly has the ability to be a really

256
00:08:28,710 --> 00:08:27,039
good critical thinker

257
00:08:30,629 --> 00:08:28,720
when he wants to be is it more about

258
00:08:34,230 --> 00:08:30,639
than the way the movement has

259
00:08:35,750 --> 00:08:34,240
evolved suppose i suppose

260
00:08:37,269 --> 00:08:35,760
it sounds to me like the way i think

261
00:08:39,029 --> 00:08:37,279
about skepticism i'm not saying i

262
00:08:41,190 --> 00:08:39,039
necessarily apply it but the way i think

263
00:08:43,909 --> 00:08:41,200
about skepticism it read very much like

264
00:08:45,590 --> 00:08:43,919
what scout mind said um is how you

265
00:08:48,630 --> 00:08:45,600
define my scout mindset so

266
00:08:49,750 --> 00:08:48,640
to me it felt at least significant

267
00:08:51,509 --> 00:08:49,760
overlap if not

268
00:08:53,190 --> 00:08:51,519
complete definitely significantly

269
00:08:55,269 --> 00:08:53,200
identical so i'm just wondering

270
00:08:56,550 --> 00:08:55,279
whether the difference is more to do

271
00:08:58,710 --> 00:08:56,560
with just the way

272
00:08:59,829 --> 00:08:58,720
skepticism has evolved as a movement and

273
00:09:02,630 --> 00:08:59,839
as a as a

274
00:09:04,310 --> 00:09:02,640
community i guess i don't know for sure

275
00:09:07,030 --> 00:09:04,320
because i haven't really been

276
00:09:09,030 --> 00:09:07,040
fully immersed since the beginning but i

277
00:09:10,790 --> 00:09:09,040
guess would be that

278
00:09:12,630 --> 00:09:10,800
there have always been lots of people

279
00:09:15,269 --> 00:09:12,640
who are more

280
00:09:17,350 --> 00:09:15,279
enticed to the skeptic movement by the

281
00:09:18,470 --> 00:09:17,360
enjoyment of debunking

282
00:09:20,710 --> 00:09:18,480
of kind of pointing out the ways in

283
00:09:22,150 --> 00:09:20,720
which other people are wrong and less so

284
00:09:22,949 --> 00:09:22,160
on turning that on themselves and asking

285
00:09:25,509 --> 00:09:22,959
themselves the hard

286
00:09:26,790 --> 00:09:25,519
questions uh i mean i've definitely met

287
00:09:27,990 --> 00:09:26,800
people like that i guess i don't have a

288
00:09:29,430 --> 00:09:28,000
strong intuition about whether they've

289
00:09:30,070 --> 00:09:29,440
gotten more or less numerous over the

290
00:09:31,670 --> 00:09:30,080
years

291
00:09:32,870 --> 00:09:31,680
and i want to emphasize that i've met a

292
00:09:33,750 --> 00:09:32,880
bunch of people in the skeptic movement

293
00:09:37,110 --> 00:09:33,760
who i think are

294
00:09:37,509 --> 00:09:37,120
wonderful scouts uh as well but yeah i

295
00:09:39,509 --> 00:09:37,519
think

296
00:09:41,829 --> 00:09:39,519
just inevitably there's something really

297
00:09:43,350 --> 00:09:41,839
fun about debunking other people's wrong

298
00:09:44,949 --> 00:09:43,360
arguments and so of course that's going

299
00:09:46,790 --> 00:09:44,959
to attract a lot of people who

300
00:09:48,870 --> 00:09:46,800
find that appealing one other thing i

301
00:09:50,550 --> 00:09:48,880
wanted to point out area of non-overlap

302
00:09:52,630 --> 00:09:50,560
between scout mindset and

303
00:09:54,070 --> 00:09:52,640
critical thinking is that a lot of the

304
00:09:55,030 --> 00:09:54,080
examples of scout mindset that i talk

305
00:09:58,630 --> 00:09:55,040
about in the book

306
00:10:00,550 --> 00:09:58,640
have to do with kind of being willing to

307
00:10:02,310 --> 00:10:00,560
acknowledge unpleasant or inconvenient

308
00:10:04,550 --> 00:10:02,320
truths to yourself or being willing to

309
00:10:06,389 --> 00:10:04,560
consider unpleasant possibilities like

310
00:10:07,509 --> 00:10:06,399
you know well you know maybe i did

311
00:10:09,590 --> 00:10:07,519
actually screw up maybe i was

312
00:10:12,630 --> 00:10:09,600
responsible at least in part for that

313
00:10:13,509 --> 00:10:12,640
failure at work or maybe i actually did

314
00:10:15,509 --> 00:10:13,519
make a mistake

315
00:10:17,190 --> 00:10:15,519
in quitting my job or getting into this

316
00:10:18,710 --> 00:10:17,200
relationship or whatnot

317
00:10:20,949 --> 00:10:18,720
i guess you could call that critical

318
00:10:22,550 --> 00:10:20,959
thinking but it's more about

319
00:10:24,470 --> 00:10:22,560
sort of emotional strength and

320
00:10:25,590 --> 00:10:24,480
self-awareness or something like that

321
00:10:27,430 --> 00:10:25,600
it's not the kind of thing that usually

322
00:10:27,990 --> 00:10:27,440
comes up in critical thinking classes

323
00:10:29,190 --> 00:10:28,000
but it is

324
00:10:30,949 --> 00:10:29,200
it falls under scott mindset because

325
00:10:32,230 --> 00:10:30,959
it's about actually wanting to know

326
00:10:34,630 --> 00:10:32,240
what's true about

327
00:10:35,990 --> 00:10:34,640
your choices and your life as opposed to

328
00:10:37,030 --> 00:10:36,000
just believing things that are

329
00:10:39,110 --> 00:10:37,040
comforting

330
00:10:41,590 --> 00:10:39,120
i think that i could probably uh

331
00:10:43,350 --> 00:10:41,600
strengthen your position a little bit by

332
00:10:44,550 --> 00:10:43,360
thinking about my own attitude so one of

333
00:10:45,910 --> 00:10:44,560
the things that i always

334
00:10:47,590 --> 00:10:45,920
you know when i talk to people who are

335
00:10:49,269 --> 00:10:47,600
not within the skeptical movement and

336
00:10:50,790 --> 00:10:49,279
you know i tell them about skepticism

337
00:10:52,790 --> 00:10:50,800
and all that because i've been

338
00:10:54,550 --> 00:10:52,800
in it it's part of my part of my

339
00:10:56,069 --> 00:10:54,560
identity in a sense and we'll talk about

340
00:10:57,829 --> 00:10:56,079
identities later on

341
00:10:59,269 --> 00:10:57,839
one of the things i always say is that

342
00:11:01,509 --> 00:10:59,279
it's made me a better person

343
00:11:03,590 --> 00:11:01,519
and one of the ways in which it's made

344
00:11:06,230 --> 00:11:03,600
me a better person is by

345
00:11:06,710 --> 00:11:06,240
making saying i don't know very very

346
00:11:08,949 --> 00:11:06,720
easy

347
00:11:09,829 --> 00:11:08,959
but it's very rare for me to say

348
00:11:11,509 --> 00:11:09,839
something that is

349
00:11:13,190 --> 00:11:11,519
equally true but i just don't say it as

350
00:11:16,710 --> 00:11:13,200
much is that it made

351
00:11:19,990 --> 00:11:16,720
saying i was wrong easier

352
00:11:23,590 --> 00:11:20,000
so the the fact that i emphasize the

353
00:11:26,230 --> 00:11:23,600
being not knowing over being wrong

354
00:11:26,630 --> 00:11:26,240
i suppose it kind of says something

355
00:11:29,350 --> 00:11:26,640
about

356
00:11:31,269 --> 00:11:29,360
my attitude to skepticism it's an

357
00:11:32,230 --> 00:11:31,279
interesting point and uh and i admire

358
00:11:33,990 --> 00:11:32,240
you for making it

359
00:11:35,990 --> 00:11:34,000
but i can think of other explanations

360
00:11:37,829 --> 00:11:36,000
like maybe if you rarely take

361
00:11:39,269 --> 00:11:37,839
confident positions one way or the other

362
00:11:40,870 --> 00:11:39,279
because you recognize that everything is

363
00:11:43,350 --> 00:11:40,880
complicated and it's hard to

364
00:11:44,790 --> 00:11:43,360
know anything with certainty then the

365
00:11:46,150 --> 00:11:44,800
frequency with which you find yourself

366
00:11:47,430 --> 00:11:46,160
saying i was wrong is going to be much

367
00:11:48,630 --> 00:11:47,440
lower than the frequency with which you

368
00:11:51,030 --> 00:11:48,640
say i don't know

369
00:11:52,550 --> 00:11:51,040
does that make sense like yeah yeah yeah

370
00:11:54,949 --> 00:11:52,560
so that could be another reason why you

371
00:11:57,750 --> 00:11:54,959
find yourself focusing on the

372
00:11:59,750 --> 00:11:57,760
don't latter yeah okay and uh another

373
00:12:00,550 --> 00:11:59,760
thing is that the subtitle of the book

374
00:12:02,389 --> 00:12:00,560
is why people

375
00:12:03,990 --> 00:12:02,399
why some people see things clearly and

376
00:12:05,350 --> 00:12:04,000
others don't yeah

377
00:12:07,430 --> 00:12:05,360
that would put the book firmly in the

378
00:12:09,430 --> 00:12:07,440
reference section but i found it to be

379
00:12:11,670 --> 00:12:09,440
very much a self-help book

380
00:12:12,470 --> 00:12:11,680
albeit a much more nuanced and careful

381
00:12:14,870 --> 00:12:12,480
one

382
00:12:15,590 --> 00:12:14,880
than what's common in that field how do

383
00:12:16,710 --> 00:12:15,600
you see it

384
00:12:18,790 --> 00:12:16,720
well you could look at it either way

385
00:12:19,910 --> 00:12:18,800
really because throughout the book i'm

386
00:12:22,230 --> 00:12:19,920
pointing out

387
00:12:23,590 --> 00:12:22,240
the things that make it make it easier

388
00:12:24,069 --> 00:12:23,600
to be in scout mindset versus soldier

389
00:12:25,750 --> 00:12:24,079
mindset

390
00:12:27,190 --> 00:12:25,760
or the things about your environment

391
00:12:29,509 --> 00:12:27,200
that push you more towards scout mindset

392
00:12:31,350 --> 00:12:29,519
are more towards soldier mindset so

393
00:12:33,509 --> 00:12:31,360
you know i talk about identity which you

394
00:12:36,069 --> 00:12:33,519
brought up earlier um and how

395
00:12:38,150 --> 00:12:36,079
more strongly you hold your identity as

396
00:12:39,910 --> 00:12:38,160
a you know democrat or as a effective

397
00:12:40,710 --> 00:12:39,920
altruist or a skeptic the harder it is

398
00:12:42,389 --> 00:12:40,720
for you to think

399
00:12:44,389 --> 00:12:42,399
clearly and objectively about beliefs

400
00:12:46,389 --> 00:12:44,399
that are related to that identity

401
00:12:48,550 --> 00:12:46,399
that's one criteria that kind of

402
00:12:50,069 --> 00:12:48,560
determines how much of a scout versus a

403
00:12:51,430 --> 00:12:50,079
soldier someone's going to be

404
00:12:53,269 --> 00:12:51,440
at least on a particular topic or a

405
00:12:54,710 --> 00:12:53,279
particular domain is you know how much

406
00:12:57,750 --> 00:12:54,720
is that part of their identity

407
00:12:59,350 --> 00:12:57,760
and then i also talk about things like i

408
00:13:00,710 --> 00:12:59,360
have a whole chapter about

409
00:13:03,269 --> 00:13:00,720
coping with reality without

410
00:13:06,150 --> 00:13:03,279
self-deceiving and i point out that

411
00:13:07,829 --> 00:13:06,160
one important thing that people do that

412
00:13:08,629 --> 00:13:07,839
makes it easier for them to be scouts

413
00:13:10,710 --> 00:13:08,639
about

414
00:13:12,150 --> 00:13:10,720
kind of unpleasant personal truths like

415
00:13:13,829 --> 00:13:12,160
i might have screwed up my

416
00:13:15,110 --> 00:13:13,839
marriage one thing that makes that

417
00:13:16,230 --> 00:13:15,120
easier for some people is that they have

418
00:13:18,150 --> 00:13:16,240
ways of coping

419
00:13:19,910 --> 00:13:18,160
that don't require self-deception so

420
00:13:21,430 --> 00:13:19,920
they have kind of strategies for

421
00:13:23,190 --> 00:13:21,440
comforting themselves like looking at

422
00:13:24,550 --> 00:13:23,200
silver linings or

423
00:13:26,230 --> 00:13:24,560
reminding themselves that things could

424
00:13:27,670 --> 00:13:26,240
be worse than they are those are

425
00:13:29,110 --> 00:13:27,680
strategies for coping with difficult

426
00:13:31,269 --> 00:13:29,120
truths that don't require

427
00:13:32,949 --> 00:13:31,279
you to self-deceive and i point out some

428
00:13:34,629 --> 00:13:32,959
examples of people who

429
00:13:36,150 --> 00:13:34,639
have those strategies and are able to

430
00:13:38,230 --> 00:13:36,160
face unpleasant truths

431
00:13:39,269 --> 00:13:38,240
uh and some examples of people who don't

432
00:13:40,790 --> 00:13:39,279
have those strategies and have to

433
00:13:41,430 --> 00:13:40,800
deceive themselves in order to feel

434
00:13:43,189 --> 00:13:41,440
better

435
00:13:44,389 --> 00:13:43,199
i'm answering the why question in a lot

436
00:13:46,629 --> 00:13:44,399
of different ways throughout the book

437
00:13:48,069 --> 00:13:46,639
but it's also a self-help book in that

438
00:13:50,230 --> 00:13:48,079
i'm pointing out kind of actionable

439
00:13:51,829 --> 00:13:50,240
differences like you can try to reduce

440
00:13:52,949 --> 00:13:51,839
the strength of your identity in these

441
00:13:53,829 --> 00:13:52,959
different ways and that'll help you be

442
00:13:56,949 --> 00:13:53,839
more of a scout

443
00:13:58,550 --> 00:13:56,959
or you can try to develop this toolkit

444
00:13:59,829 --> 00:13:58,560
of coping strategies that don't require

445
00:14:00,870 --> 00:13:59,839
self-deception

446
00:14:02,389 --> 00:14:00,880
and that'll help you become more of a

447
00:14:03,990 --> 00:14:02,399
scout to me it seems like two sides of

448
00:14:07,269 --> 00:14:04,000
the same coin does that not

449
00:14:10,550 --> 00:14:07,279
seem true to you yeah it does

450
00:14:11,030 --> 00:14:10,560
okay yeah i was just wondering uh what

451
00:14:14,949 --> 00:14:11,040
your

452
00:14:18,629 --> 00:14:14,959
i found the book

453
00:14:21,910 --> 00:14:18,639
extremely usable to the point of

454
00:14:24,949 --> 00:14:21,920
being transformative and i think i think

455
00:14:26,550 --> 00:14:24,959
what i will find is that i will

456
00:14:27,269 --> 00:14:26,560
absolutely be recommending it to people

457
00:14:29,430 --> 00:14:27,279
and i

458
00:14:31,269 --> 00:14:29,440
already i'm doing it through this

459
00:14:32,230 --> 00:14:31,279
recording there's no question in my mind

460
00:14:35,430 --> 00:14:32,240
that if you really

461
00:14:37,189 --> 00:14:35,440
commit yourself to some of the

462
00:14:38,790 --> 00:14:37,199
attitudes and behaviors that you

463
00:14:42,230 --> 00:14:38,800
recommend in the book

464
00:14:44,150 --> 00:14:42,240
you will change your behavior

465
00:14:46,389 --> 00:14:44,160
for the better you will be better for it

466
00:14:46,790 --> 00:14:46,399
so so i absolutely see it as both and

467
00:14:48,629 --> 00:14:46,800
but

468
00:14:50,629 --> 00:14:48,639
on the other hand obviously it clearly

469
00:14:53,509 --> 00:14:50,639
explains the reasons

470
00:14:55,030 --> 00:14:53,519
and the the background for all of these

471
00:14:57,189 --> 00:14:55,040
attitudes behaviors and

472
00:14:58,790 --> 00:14:57,199
modes of thinking which of course for

473
00:15:01,110 --> 00:14:58,800
anybody who's interested

474
00:15:02,790 --> 00:15:01,120
is first of all much much more

475
00:15:04,150 --> 00:15:02,800
persuasive but also simply

476
00:15:06,230 --> 00:15:04,160
much more interesting and makes the book

477
00:15:07,590 --> 00:15:06,240
more readable as an example of how

478
00:15:09,829 --> 00:15:07,600
usable this book is

479
00:15:10,790 --> 00:15:09,839
um in improving one's thinking my

480
00:15:13,990 --> 00:15:10,800
thinking

481
00:15:14,629 --> 00:15:14,000
i'd like to discuss chapter 5 noticing

482
00:15:16,550 --> 00:15:14,639
bias

483
00:15:18,069 --> 00:15:16,560
this is obviously something that also is

484
00:15:18,710 --> 00:15:18,079
you know skeptics focus on a lot of

485
00:15:20,629 --> 00:15:18,720
biases

486
00:15:22,470 --> 00:15:20,639
at the end of the of the chapter you

487
00:15:23,509 --> 00:15:22,480
have a table summarizing the thought

488
00:15:25,990 --> 00:15:23,519
experiments

489
00:15:27,750 --> 00:15:26,000
described in the chapter and which are

490
00:15:28,310 --> 00:15:27,760
designed to help us avoid several common

491
00:15:31,030 --> 00:15:28,320
biases

492
00:15:33,110 --> 00:15:31,040
i actually photocopied that table what

493
00:15:34,949 --> 00:15:33,120
can you tell us about biases

494
00:15:36,949 --> 00:15:34,959
generally and how they affect our

495
00:15:38,870 --> 00:15:36,959
decision making so the word bias can

496
00:15:40,389 --> 00:15:38,880
refer to a lot of different things

497
00:15:42,389 --> 00:15:40,399
like in this chapter i was specifically

498
00:15:45,430 --> 00:15:42,399
talking about bias in the sense of

499
00:15:47,110 --> 00:15:45,440
using a different standard for

500
00:15:48,550 --> 00:15:47,120
claims that you want to reject versus

501
00:15:49,509 --> 00:15:48,560
claims that you want to accept sort of

502
00:15:50,949 --> 00:15:49,519
what i was talking about

503
00:15:52,150 --> 00:15:50,959
earlier with the direction of soldier

504
00:15:53,030 --> 00:15:52,160
minds that are directly motivated

505
00:15:54,790 --> 00:15:53,040
reasoning where

506
00:15:56,550 --> 00:15:54,800
you ask yourself can i accept this for

507
00:15:57,269 --> 00:15:56,560
some claims and must i accept this for

508
00:15:59,670 --> 00:15:57,279
other claims

509
00:16:00,310 --> 00:15:59,680
the point of the noticing bias chapter

510
00:16:02,069 --> 00:16:00,320
was

511
00:16:04,310 --> 00:16:02,079
to practice some thought experiments

512
00:16:06,550 --> 00:16:04,320
that help you kind of compare

513
00:16:07,590 --> 00:16:06,560
these two different worlds try to detect

514
00:16:09,110 --> 00:16:07,600
whether your

515
00:16:10,550 --> 00:16:09,120
standard of evidence or your reaction is

516
00:16:11,430 --> 00:16:10,560
different in those two different worlds

517
00:16:12,629 --> 00:16:11,440
depending on

518
00:16:14,870 --> 00:16:12,639
your motivation in those two different

519
00:16:16,949 --> 00:16:14,880
worlds so just to take an example

520
00:16:19,350 --> 00:16:16,959
one thought experiment i talked about is

521
00:16:22,389 --> 00:16:19,360
the i call it the selective skeptic

522
00:16:23,189 --> 00:16:22,399
test it i'll just start with with an

523
00:16:25,749 --> 00:16:23,199
example of me

524
00:16:26,310 --> 00:16:25,759
using it so when i was writing the book

525
00:16:28,389 --> 00:16:26,320
i would

526
00:16:29,990 --> 00:16:28,399
bookmark a bunch of studies that kind of

527
00:16:30,550 --> 00:16:30,000
supported my point that i wanted to put

528
00:16:31,910 --> 00:16:30,560
in the book

529
00:16:33,509 --> 00:16:31,920
and then i came across a study that

530
00:16:35,030 --> 00:16:33,519
didn't support my point the study

531
00:16:36,629 --> 00:16:35,040
claimed to have found that

532
00:16:38,069 --> 00:16:36,639
soldier mindset makes you successful and

533
00:16:40,230 --> 00:16:38,079
happy in life and

534
00:16:41,749 --> 00:16:40,240
so i read that abstract and my eyes

535
00:16:43,910 --> 00:16:41,759
narrowed and i was like well let's see

536
00:16:45,829 --> 00:16:43,920
how well this methodology section holds

537
00:16:47,670 --> 00:16:45,839
up and i read through it and

538
00:16:48,870 --> 00:16:47,680
and it was in fact a very poorly done

539
00:16:50,389 --> 00:16:48,880
study i found some glaring

540
00:16:52,230 --> 00:16:50,399
methodological flaws

541
00:16:53,670 --> 00:16:52,240
and so i was like great i can dismiss

542
00:16:55,430 --> 00:16:53,680
this and then

543
00:16:56,389 --> 00:16:55,440
i asked myself well suppose it was the

544
00:16:58,069 --> 00:16:56,399
exact same study with the same

545
00:16:59,829 --> 00:16:58,079
methodology but the conclusion was the

546
00:17:01,509 --> 00:16:59,839
opposite and it had found that instead

547
00:17:03,110 --> 00:17:01,519
scout mindset makes you successful and

548
00:17:03,670 --> 00:17:03,120
happy in life what would my reaction

549
00:17:06,069 --> 00:17:03,680
have been

550
00:17:07,110 --> 00:17:06,079
i imagined that world and i realized oh

551
00:17:08,630 --> 00:17:07,120
in that world

552
00:17:10,150 --> 00:17:08,640
i would have said great let's put this

553
00:17:11,829 --> 00:17:10,160
on the list of studies to talk about

554
00:17:13,429 --> 00:17:11,839
in my book and i would not have gone to

555
00:17:14,870 --> 00:17:13,439
the methodology section and scrutinized

556
00:17:16,390 --> 00:17:14,880
it carefully looking for flaws

557
00:17:17,590 --> 00:17:16,400
and so that thought experiment where i

558
00:17:17,990 --> 00:17:17,600
was comparing those two different

559
00:17:19,829 --> 00:17:18,000
possible

560
00:17:21,270 --> 00:17:19,839
worlds one in which the study supports

561
00:17:22,150 --> 00:17:21,280
my view and one which study doesn't

562
00:17:24,230 --> 00:17:22,160
support my view

563
00:17:25,350 --> 00:17:24,240
and noticing oh i'm my reaction would be

564
00:17:27,189 --> 00:17:25,360
very different in those two different

565
00:17:27,669 --> 00:17:27,199
worlds that was kind of an eye-opening

566
00:17:30,150 --> 00:17:27,679
moment

567
00:17:31,990 --> 00:17:30,160
for me to see that i was using this

568
00:17:33,830 --> 00:17:32,000
asymmetric standard of rigor

569
00:17:35,110 --> 00:17:33,840
uh depending on my motivations and so

570
00:17:37,190 --> 00:17:35,120
that caused me to go back and

571
00:17:38,870 --> 00:17:37,200
kind of force myself to go through all

572
00:17:39,669 --> 00:17:38,880
the studies i had bookmarked to include

573
00:17:41,430 --> 00:17:39,679
in the book and

574
00:17:42,870 --> 00:17:41,440
really comb their methodology section

575
00:17:44,390 --> 00:17:42,880
and ask myself you know can i really

576
00:17:45,830 --> 00:17:44,400
justify including this

577
00:17:47,270 --> 00:17:45,840
and for most of those studies

578
00:17:47,990 --> 00:17:47,280
unfortunately the answer was no i didn't

579
00:17:50,150 --> 00:17:48,000
feel like i could

580
00:17:51,430 --> 00:17:50,160
be confident in their conclusions that

581
00:17:53,350 --> 00:17:51,440
is an example of a

582
00:17:54,950 --> 00:17:53,360
type of thought experiment that i think

583
00:17:57,990 --> 00:17:54,960
can help highlight

584
00:18:00,230 --> 00:17:58,000
these really very invisible biases

585
00:18:01,750 --> 00:18:00,240
in or asymmetries in the way that we

586
00:18:02,870 --> 00:18:01,760
react to claims depending on whether we

587
00:18:03,750 --> 00:18:02,880
want to believe them or not

588
00:18:05,990 --> 00:18:03,760
and there are a bunch of other thought

589
00:18:08,470 --> 00:18:06,000
experiments that you can apply to

590
00:18:09,990 --> 00:18:08,480
claims in your personal life uh or claim

591
00:18:11,029 --> 00:18:10,000
political claims but they all have the

592
00:18:13,350 --> 00:18:11,039
same structure where you're

593
00:18:14,710 --> 00:18:13,360
changing one feature of the situation

594
00:18:16,789 --> 00:18:14,720
and noticing

595
00:18:18,630 --> 00:18:16,799
whether your reaction changes it sounds

596
00:18:21,669 --> 00:18:18,640
easy in principle

597
00:18:24,230 --> 00:18:21,679
but i think that that one in particular

598
00:18:25,029 --> 00:18:24,240
sounds to me like it felt to me while

599
00:18:29,110 --> 00:18:25,039
looking through it

600
00:18:31,669 --> 00:18:29,120
it felt particularly hard in the

601
00:18:33,750 --> 00:18:31,679
in the sense of putting yourself in that

602
00:18:36,549 --> 00:18:33,760
position

603
00:18:36,870 --> 00:18:36,559
it's very easy to deceive yourself as

604
00:18:40,710 --> 00:18:36,880
you

605
00:18:42,390 --> 00:18:40,720
through this thought experiment

606
00:18:44,950 --> 00:18:42,400
it's very easy to say oh yeah yeah i'd

607
00:18:46,710 --> 00:18:44,960
still believe it it's probably a

608
00:18:48,549 --> 00:18:46,720
i would say kind of thing that you need

609
00:18:50,230 --> 00:18:48,559
to train yourself into

610
00:18:52,789 --> 00:18:50,240
really putting yourself in in that

611
00:18:55,270 --> 00:18:52,799
mindset where you really believe

612
00:18:56,070 --> 00:18:55,280
that the conclusions are the opposite

613
00:18:58,070 --> 00:18:56,080
for example

614
00:19:00,390 --> 00:18:58,080
in you know when we talk about the two

615
00:19:02,950 --> 00:19:00,400
positions you really believe it

616
00:19:05,110 --> 00:19:02,960
emotionally so that you can probably

617
00:19:06,470 --> 00:19:05,120
judge how your reaction would be

618
00:19:08,789 --> 00:19:06,480
because it's very difficult to judge

619
00:19:10,549 --> 00:19:08,799
what your emotional reaction would be

620
00:19:11,990 --> 00:19:10,559
right yeah i mean and it doesn't have to

621
00:19:12,630 --> 00:19:12,000
be your emotional reaction it can just

622
00:19:16,789 --> 00:19:12,640
be

623
00:19:19,110 --> 00:19:16,799
yeah like would i accept or reject this

624
00:19:21,270 --> 00:19:19,120
and i think you bring up a great point

625
00:19:23,909 --> 00:19:21,280
and i i'm glad you appreciate that it's

626
00:19:24,549 --> 00:19:23,919
it's not so trivial to just introspect

627
00:19:26,230 --> 00:19:24,559
and notice

628
00:19:27,990 --> 00:19:26,240
what your reaction would be and just

629
00:19:31,029 --> 00:19:28,000
assume that that's correct because

630
00:19:32,310 --> 00:19:31,039
introspection is flawed and we can tell

631
00:19:33,750 --> 00:19:32,320
ourselves

632
00:19:35,190 --> 00:19:33,760
something about what our reaction would

633
00:19:36,470 --> 00:19:35,200
be and that's not necessarily the truth

634
00:19:38,950 --> 00:19:36,480
that's all true and excellent

635
00:19:40,230 --> 00:19:38,960
point and something to watch out for one

636
00:19:41,909 --> 00:19:40,240
piece of advice i would give

637
00:19:43,270 --> 00:19:41,919
that i kind of briefly touched on in the

638
00:19:45,590 --> 00:19:43,280
book is that it can help

639
00:19:46,310 --> 00:19:45,600
to make the thought experiment really

640
00:19:48,150 --> 00:19:46,320
concrete

641
00:19:50,150 --> 00:19:48,160
for example instead of instead of asking

642
00:19:51,029 --> 00:19:50,160
yourself would i accept this anecdotal

643
00:19:52,630 --> 00:19:51,039
evidence

644
00:19:54,310 --> 00:19:52,640
if it opposed my side instead of

645
00:19:56,070 --> 00:19:54,320
supporting my side and if it's really

646
00:19:57,510 --> 00:19:56,080
abstract like that it's easy to just lie

647
00:19:59,669 --> 00:19:57,520
to yourself and say well of course i

648
00:20:01,110 --> 00:19:59,679
i wouldn't accept it if it supported i

649
00:20:02,390 --> 00:20:01,120
forget how i constructed that sentence a

650
00:20:03,669 --> 00:20:02,400
second ago but um

651
00:20:05,430 --> 00:20:03,679
but you know of course i would do the

652
00:20:06,950 --> 00:20:05,440
epistemically responsible thing

653
00:20:08,549 --> 00:20:06,960
it's easy to say that in the abstract

654
00:20:09,590 --> 00:20:08,559
but if you pick a concrete example like

655
00:20:12,870 --> 00:20:09,600
okay suppose

656
00:20:15,350 --> 00:20:12,880
i read this anecdotal evidence about

657
00:20:16,630 --> 00:20:15,360
how i don't know feminism was bad

658
00:20:17,510 --> 00:20:16,640
because whatever here's one or two

659
00:20:19,750 --> 00:20:17,520
anecdotes

660
00:20:20,789 --> 00:20:19,760
how would i feel in that like if i read

661
00:20:23,350 --> 00:20:20,799
that claim

662
00:20:24,710 --> 00:20:23,360
would i say like yes i that makes sense

663
00:20:26,950 --> 00:20:24,720
to me or would i say well that's just

664
00:20:28,710 --> 00:20:26,960
two anecdotes you can't trust anecdotes

665
00:20:29,830 --> 00:20:28,720
i think picking a concrete example is

666
00:20:31,190 --> 00:20:29,840
really important in these thought

667
00:20:33,350 --> 00:20:31,200
experiments rather than just

668
00:20:35,669 --> 00:20:33,360
um asking yourself an abstract question

669
00:20:37,990 --> 00:20:35,679
yeah i think it's important to

670
00:20:39,029 --> 00:20:38,000
not assume that it's going to be easy

671
00:20:40,950 --> 00:20:39,039
definitely

672
00:20:42,549 --> 00:20:40,960
yeah i found going through this and

673
00:20:43,590 --> 00:20:42,559
trying to think about situations that

674
00:20:45,110 --> 00:20:43,600
i've encountered

675
00:20:47,029 --> 00:20:45,120
i found that it's definitely it could be

676
00:20:48,070 --> 00:20:47,039
challenging i want to talk about the

677
00:20:50,870 --> 00:20:48,080
specific bias

678
00:20:51,510 --> 00:20:50,880
that you mentioned it's the status quo

679
00:20:53,430 --> 00:20:51,520
bias

680
00:20:54,710 --> 00:20:53,440
where we prefer things as they are

681
00:20:57,190 --> 00:20:54,720
basically

682
00:20:58,310 --> 00:20:57,200
you explain how we should say okay if

683
00:21:01,990 --> 00:20:58,320
the alternative

684
00:21:05,270 --> 00:21:02,000
position were the status

685
00:21:06,230 --> 00:21:05,280
quo would we then want to change to the

686
00:21:09,110 --> 00:21:06,240
current position

687
00:21:09,750 --> 00:21:09,120
do i present that correctly basically

688
00:21:11,590 --> 00:21:09,760
yeah

689
00:21:12,870 --> 00:21:11,600
i would just say it's not necessarily

690
00:21:15,270 --> 00:21:12,880
wrong to prefer things

691
00:21:17,430 --> 00:21:15,280
uh the way they are but but if that's

692
00:21:18,710 --> 00:21:17,440
the only reason why you prefer things

693
00:21:20,549 --> 00:21:18,720
that's that's very good because that

694
00:21:23,909 --> 00:21:20,559
that leads to my question which is

695
00:21:25,430 --> 00:21:23,919
change itself bears a cost i mean for

696
00:21:27,270 --> 00:21:25,440
example you know when we talk about for

697
00:21:27,590 --> 00:21:27,280
example organizations i'm a manager i

698
00:21:29,029 --> 00:21:27,600
work

699
00:21:31,590 --> 00:21:29,039
you know large organizations a lot of

700
00:21:34,470 --> 00:21:31,600
people i spend a lot of

701
00:21:35,750 --> 00:21:34,480
effort and money and people on managing

702
00:21:38,070 --> 00:21:35,760
change by itself

703
00:21:38,870 --> 00:21:38,080
the reason is that people don't like

704
00:21:40,390 --> 00:21:38,880
change and

705
00:21:42,310 --> 00:21:40,400
it takes time for people to get used to

706
00:21:45,510 --> 00:21:42,320
something new and i'm wondering whether

707
00:21:47,510 --> 00:21:45,520
that actually provides a certain bias in

708
00:21:49,510 --> 00:21:47,520
favor of status quo not in the

709
00:21:51,270 --> 00:21:49,520
from the emotional or rational sense but

710
00:21:52,310 --> 00:21:51,280
right from a practical perspective right

711
00:21:55,510 --> 00:21:52,320
that is a great point

712
00:21:58,789 --> 00:21:55,520
the status quo bias thought experiment

713
00:22:01,909 --> 00:21:58,799
is designed to highlight for you that

714
00:22:02,549 --> 00:22:01,919
the only reason you prefer the status

715
00:22:04,070 --> 00:22:02,559
quo

716
00:22:05,830 --> 00:22:04,080
is either that you just kind of

717
00:22:07,510 --> 00:22:05,840
irrationally prefer the status quo

718
00:22:08,950 --> 00:22:07,520
because it's the status quo or because

719
00:22:10,950 --> 00:22:08,960
you don't want the

720
00:22:12,549 --> 00:22:10,960
transaction costs if it's the latter

721
00:22:13,270 --> 00:22:12,559
that could be rational depending on how

722
00:22:15,510 --> 00:22:13,280
significant the

723
00:22:17,029 --> 00:22:15,520
transaction costs are yeah okay so one

724
00:22:17,750 --> 00:22:17,039
example i talk about in the book is

725
00:22:20,710 --> 00:22:17,760
someone

726
00:22:22,149 --> 00:22:20,720
who i actually know a friend of mine who

727
00:22:25,110 --> 00:22:22,159
did this thought experiment

728
00:22:26,549 --> 00:22:25,120
when he was hesitant about moving to the

729
00:22:28,390 --> 00:22:26,559
bay area to

730
00:22:30,630 --> 00:22:28,400
start a well-paying and exciting job

731
00:22:31,830 --> 00:22:30,640
there and he was hesitant because

732
00:22:33,430 --> 00:22:31,840
it would mean moving away from his

733
00:22:34,870 --> 00:22:33,440
friends who had grown up with and so he

734
00:22:36,549 --> 00:22:34,880
did this thought experiment where he

735
00:22:37,750 --> 00:22:36,559
flipped the status quo around and said

736
00:22:39,510 --> 00:22:37,760
well suppose i was already in san

737
00:22:41,270 --> 00:22:39,520
francisco working at this exciting job

738
00:22:43,830 --> 00:22:41,280
but i had an opportunity to move back

739
00:22:46,390 --> 00:22:43,840
home to be closer to my friends

740
00:22:47,190 --> 00:22:46,400
would that seem like a tempting deal and

741
00:22:48,549 --> 00:22:47,200
he realized

742
00:22:49,990 --> 00:22:48,559
no that really wouldn't be tempting at

743
00:22:50,870 --> 00:22:50,000
all i would want to stay in san

744
00:22:52,549 --> 00:22:50,880
francisco

745
00:22:54,310 --> 00:22:52,559
either that could mean that he had been

746
00:22:55,110 --> 00:22:54,320
influenced irrationally by a status quo

747
00:22:57,510 --> 00:22:55,120
bias

748
00:22:59,430 --> 00:22:57,520
or it could mean that he just is a verse

749
00:23:01,909 --> 00:22:59,440
to change for whatever reason could be

750
00:23:02,470 --> 00:23:01,919
fear of risk or it could be just the

751
00:23:03,990 --> 00:23:02,480
effort

752
00:23:05,750 --> 00:23:04,000
of of making a change which is sort of

753
00:23:07,270 --> 00:23:05,760
what you were alluding to earlier

754
00:23:08,630 --> 00:23:07,280
the fact that he got that result in the

755
00:23:09,750 --> 00:23:08,640
thought experiment doesn't prove that

756
00:23:11,430 --> 00:23:09,760
he's being irrational

757
00:23:13,270 --> 00:23:11,440
but it at least highlights to him it

758
00:23:14,230 --> 00:23:13,280
makes it very kind of clear and salient

759
00:23:16,710 --> 00:23:14,240
and explicit

760
00:23:17,270 --> 00:23:16,720
like okay is this transaction cost is

761
00:23:19,430 --> 00:23:17,280
the

762
00:23:20,789 --> 00:23:19,440
cost of change of moving to a new city

763
00:23:22,710 --> 00:23:20,799
is that actually

764
00:23:24,230 --> 00:23:22,720
a good enough reason in my opinion to

765
00:23:24,950 --> 00:23:24,240
not do this thing that seems better to

766
00:23:28,070 --> 00:23:24,960
me

767
00:23:28,950 --> 00:23:28,080
you can ask yourself that question

768
00:23:30,310 --> 00:23:28,960
explicitly

769
00:23:31,909 --> 00:23:30,320
instead of having that be working on

770
00:23:34,149 --> 00:23:31,919
your judgments in the background and not

771
00:23:36,870 --> 00:23:34,159
be able to be consciously aware of it

772
00:23:38,149 --> 00:23:36,880
in the part five you talk at length

773
00:23:40,390 --> 00:23:38,159
about identities in fact you've

774
00:23:42,230 --> 00:23:40,400
dedicated uh three chapters

775
00:23:44,310 --> 00:23:42,240
why are identities an important factor

776
00:23:46,310 --> 00:23:44,320
in adopting this card mindset

777
00:23:47,830 --> 00:23:46,320
i'll just explain what i mean by

778
00:23:50,390 --> 00:23:47,840
identities affecting your

779
00:23:52,149 --> 00:23:50,400
uh your ability to reason people are

780
00:23:54,390 --> 00:23:52,159
already very used to the idea that

781
00:23:56,230 --> 00:23:54,400
you know politics can be part of our

782
00:23:57,669 --> 00:23:56,240
identity you know our political beliefs

783
00:23:59,269 --> 00:23:57,679
our religious beliefs are part of our

784
00:24:00,789 --> 00:23:59,279
identity you're supposed to not talk

785
00:24:01,269 --> 00:24:00,799
about things like politics and religion

786
00:24:02,950 --> 00:24:01,279
on

787
00:24:05,110 --> 00:24:02,960
first dates or at you know social

788
00:24:06,390 --> 00:24:05,120
gatherings and the reason is because

789
00:24:08,390 --> 00:24:06,400
when something's part of our your

790
00:24:09,190 --> 00:24:08,400
identity someone disagreeing with it

791
00:24:12,149 --> 00:24:09,200
feels

792
00:24:13,909 --> 00:24:12,159
like they're you know stomping on your

793
00:24:15,510 --> 00:24:13,919
country's flag or something it's

794
00:24:17,350 --> 00:24:15,520
you get indignant you feel outraged and

795
00:24:18,470 --> 00:24:17,360
offended even just learning that someone

796
00:24:20,310 --> 00:24:18,480
else has a different opinion even if

797
00:24:21,909 --> 00:24:20,320
they're not actively challenging you

798
00:24:24,149 --> 00:24:21,919
it feels like they're on another team

799
00:24:25,909 --> 00:24:24,159
basically and politics and religion are

800
00:24:27,510 --> 00:24:25,919
a couple very common examples but

801
00:24:29,669 --> 00:24:27,520
anything can become part of your

802
00:24:31,269 --> 00:24:29,679
identity so the reason that i spend so

803
00:24:33,590 --> 00:24:31,279
much time in the book on identity

804
00:24:34,710 --> 00:24:33,600
is because so many things can become

805
00:24:36,149 --> 00:24:34,720
part of our identities

806
00:24:37,190 --> 00:24:36,159
and make it hard to reason about what's

807
00:24:38,630 --> 00:24:37,200
happening in the background when

808
00:24:39,350 --> 00:24:38,640
something is part of your identity is

809
00:24:42,149 --> 00:24:39,360
that

810
00:24:43,750 --> 00:24:42,159
a you get defensive when someone

811
00:24:45,510 --> 00:24:43,760
criticizes it so it's hard to think

812
00:24:46,950 --> 00:24:45,520
honestly about criticisms of those

813
00:24:48,710 --> 00:24:46,960
beliefs and be

814
00:24:50,630 --> 00:24:48,720
just in the background when you're

815
00:24:52,230 --> 00:24:50,640
reading or hearing

816
00:24:54,630 --> 00:24:52,240
any information that's relevant to those

817
00:24:56,549 --> 00:24:54,640
beliefs you're kind of unconsciously

818
00:24:58,149 --> 00:24:56,559
searching for things you can use to

819
00:24:59,510 --> 00:24:58,159
support your belief in

820
00:25:01,669 --> 00:24:59,520
argument with other people and the

821
00:25:04,070 --> 00:25:01,679
search process that you're using for

822
00:25:05,669 --> 00:25:04,080
deciding which evidence to pick up is is

823
00:25:07,110 --> 00:25:05,679
really biased and so this doesn't mean

824
00:25:08,789 --> 00:25:07,120
that you shouldn't have anything

825
00:25:10,390 --> 00:25:08,799
in your identity at all that you should

826
00:25:12,789 --> 00:25:10,400
be a completely identity-less

827
00:25:14,149 --> 00:25:12,799
robot but that you should just hold your

828
00:25:14,470 --> 00:25:14,159
identity a little more lightly and try

829
00:25:15,750 --> 00:25:14,480
to

830
00:25:17,590 --> 00:25:15,760
maintain a little more emotional

831
00:25:20,549 --> 00:25:17,600
distance so that you

832
00:25:22,070 --> 00:25:20,559
just keep in mind yes i believe this

833
00:25:23,110 --> 00:25:22,080
strongly or passionately or i think this

834
00:25:26,149 --> 00:25:23,120
is important

835
00:25:28,230 --> 00:25:26,159
but that's contingent that could change

836
00:25:29,269 --> 00:25:28,240
you know if i learned something that

837
00:25:30,789 --> 00:25:29,279
changed my mind

838
00:25:33,029 --> 00:25:30,799
the goal is basically to avoid

839
00:25:34,230 --> 00:25:33,039
supporting the identity just because

840
00:25:36,230 --> 00:25:34,240
it's the identity

841
00:25:37,990 --> 00:25:36,240
um you should only be supporting it

842
00:25:39,269 --> 00:25:38,000
because your current view is that it's

843
00:25:41,510 --> 00:25:39,279
true and important

844
00:25:43,029 --> 00:25:41,520
that's my summary of why identity is

845
00:25:44,390 --> 00:25:43,039
important to pay attention to if you

846
00:25:46,549 --> 00:25:44,400
want to be a scout it sounds like

847
00:25:48,230 --> 00:25:46,559
identity could be a problem for the

848
00:25:49,510 --> 00:25:48,240
scout mindset are there any

849
00:25:52,630 --> 00:25:49,520
are there any ways in which it can

850
00:25:55,110 --> 00:25:52,640
contribute to the scout mindset

851
00:25:56,149 --> 00:25:55,120
yeah so at the end i kind of flip things

852
00:25:57,830 --> 00:25:56,159
around and say

853
00:25:59,430 --> 00:25:57,840
well if they're going to be things that

854
00:26:00,310 --> 00:25:59,440
are part of our identity that we pride

855
00:26:02,390 --> 00:26:00,320
ourselves on

856
00:26:04,149 --> 00:26:02,400
and you know strive to live up to and so

857
00:26:05,750 --> 00:26:04,159
on then why not make

858
00:26:07,830 --> 00:26:05,760
things related to scout mindset part of

859
00:26:09,510 --> 00:26:07,840
your identity so you're priding yourself

860
00:26:11,909 --> 00:26:09,520
on doing the things that make you

861
00:26:13,909 --> 00:26:11,919
more accurate and more truth-seeking you

862
00:26:15,430 --> 00:26:13,919
know congratulating yourself when you

863
00:26:17,590 --> 00:26:15,440
notice you were wrong about something

864
00:26:19,430 --> 00:26:17,600
or feeling good about yourself when you

865
00:26:21,510 --> 00:26:19,440
can accurately

866
00:26:22,870 --> 00:26:21,520
summarize your critic's argument

867
00:26:24,149 --> 00:26:22,880
accurately enough that they

868
00:26:25,590 --> 00:26:24,159
hear your summary and they go oh yes

869
00:26:27,190 --> 00:26:25,600
that is exactly what i'm trying to say

870
00:26:28,630 --> 00:26:27,200
you don't want to

871
00:26:31,110 --> 00:26:28,640
just pat yourself on the back for being

872
00:26:32,710 --> 00:26:31,120
a scout and not do anything to earn it

873
00:26:34,230 --> 00:26:32,720
because that's not actually making you

874
00:26:35,269 --> 00:26:34,240
more accurate it's probably making you

875
00:26:37,110 --> 00:26:35,279
less accurate but

876
00:26:39,029 --> 00:26:37,120
if you pride yourself on doing the

877
00:26:40,789 --> 00:26:39,039
things taking the actions that actually

878
00:26:41,750 --> 00:26:40,799
move you in the direction of truth and

879
00:26:43,990 --> 00:26:41,760
accuracy

880
00:26:45,830 --> 00:26:44,000
then i think that's a really good use of

881
00:26:48,549 --> 00:26:45,840
the identity function of our brains

882
00:26:50,070 --> 00:26:48,559
instead of the all the other uses so

883
00:26:52,789 --> 00:26:50,080
yeah i encourage people

884
00:26:54,149 --> 00:26:52,799
to make true seeking or intellectual

885
00:26:55,909 --> 00:26:54,159
honesty or scout mindset

886
00:26:57,190 --> 00:26:55,919
part of their identity is to try to you

887
00:26:59,830 --> 00:26:57,200
know counteract some of

888
00:27:00,630 --> 00:26:59,840
the other identity effects and do you

889
00:27:03,269 --> 00:27:00,640
think

890
00:27:04,870 --> 00:27:03,279
that scout mindset can be applied to

891
00:27:05,669 --> 00:27:04,880
moral and political questions which

892
00:27:08,789 --> 00:27:05,679
you've kind of

893
00:27:10,549 --> 00:27:08,799
kind of mentioned uh absolutely

894
00:27:11,909 --> 00:27:10,559
yeah i mean i think a lot of my favorite

895
00:27:13,269 --> 00:27:11,919
examples of scout minds that are about

896
00:27:16,310 --> 00:27:13,279
moral and political questions

897
00:27:17,909 --> 00:27:16,320
so i often talk about truth and you know

898
00:27:19,029 --> 00:27:17,919
scout mindset is about trying to see

899
00:27:21,269 --> 00:27:19,039
what's true

900
00:27:22,389 --> 00:27:21,279
and that becomes a bit hairy when you're

901
00:27:24,470 --> 00:27:22,399
talking about

902
00:27:25,430 --> 00:27:24,480
you know your views on moral questions

903
00:27:27,430 --> 00:27:25,440
because

904
00:27:29,430 --> 00:27:27,440
well it's unclear whether there is like

905
00:27:32,310 --> 00:27:29,440
a right answer to moral questions

906
00:27:32,789 --> 00:27:32,320
so in that context the way i would

907
00:27:35,190 --> 00:27:32,799
define

908
00:27:36,310 --> 00:27:35,200
scout mindset is about really just

909
00:27:38,389 --> 00:27:36,320
avoiding the bias

910
00:27:39,669 --> 00:27:38,399
that i was describing earlier in our

911
00:27:40,870 --> 00:27:39,679
conversation so

912
00:27:42,870 --> 00:27:40,880
being in scout mindset about moral

913
00:27:44,310 --> 00:27:42,880
questions would just entail

914
00:27:46,950 --> 00:27:44,320
trying to reason about them in a way

915
00:27:48,870 --> 00:27:46,960
that's not influenced by things like

916
00:27:50,470 --> 00:27:48,880
which answer is most convenient for me

917
00:27:52,950 --> 00:27:50,480
personally that doesn't

918
00:27:54,950 --> 00:27:52,960
get us to one particular correct answer

919
00:27:56,310 --> 00:27:54,960
but at least it eliminates some of the

920
00:27:59,110 --> 00:27:56,320
the ways of reasoning that i think are

921
00:28:00,950 --> 00:27:59,120
kind of more obviously egregiously

922
00:28:02,389 --> 00:28:00,960
biased i don't know when i'm reasoning

923
00:28:03,590 --> 00:28:02,399
about moral questions

924
00:28:05,430 --> 00:28:03,600
i'm not sure it makes sense to say there

925
00:28:06,549 --> 00:28:05,440
is a right answer about moral questions

926
00:28:09,669 --> 00:28:06,559
but at least

927
00:28:12,149 --> 00:28:09,679
i try to do thought experiments

928
00:28:12,870 --> 00:28:12,159
that kind of challenge my current moral

929
00:28:15,669 --> 00:28:12,880
position

930
00:28:16,549 --> 00:28:15,679
and i try to find the best the best

931
00:28:18,549 --> 00:28:16,559
representatives

932
00:28:20,630 --> 00:28:18,559
of moral views that disagree with mine

933
00:28:23,190 --> 00:28:20,640
and i try to

934
00:28:25,190 --> 00:28:23,200
notice whether my like the emotional

935
00:28:27,750 --> 00:28:25,200
texture of my thinking on moral issues

936
00:28:29,350 --> 00:28:27,760
like does it feel like i'm hurriedly

937
00:28:30,950 --> 00:28:29,360
reaching for an answer

938
00:28:32,389 --> 00:28:30,960
that will you know get me to the

939
00:28:34,870 --> 00:28:32,399
conclusion i want or does it feel like

940
00:28:36,549 --> 00:28:34,880
i'm genuinely curious and taking my time

941
00:28:38,630 --> 00:28:36,559
and so these are all criteria that i

942
00:28:39,909 --> 00:28:38,640
think even if you don't think there's a

943
00:28:42,789 --> 00:28:39,919
single right answer

944
00:28:44,230 --> 00:28:42,799
about morality i think it is fair to say

945
00:28:45,110 --> 00:28:44,240
that there's like some conclusions that

946
00:28:47,350 --> 00:28:45,120
are a little more

947
00:28:48,230 --> 00:28:47,360
justified and reasoned than others and

948
00:28:50,470 --> 00:28:48,240
i'm trying to

949
00:28:51,510 --> 00:28:50,480
aim at the former i suppose the

950
00:28:53,510 --> 00:28:51,520
corollary of

951
00:28:55,750 --> 00:28:53,520
that question is uh do you think there's

952
00:28:58,549 --> 00:28:55,760
a correlation or link between

953
00:28:59,430 --> 00:28:58,559
scound versus soldier mindset and

954
00:29:01,990 --> 00:28:59,440
conservatism

955
00:29:03,110 --> 00:29:02,000
versus progressivism uh certainly not a

956
00:29:05,110 --> 00:29:03,120
simple link

957
00:29:07,269 --> 00:29:05,120
in that i can definitely find lots of

958
00:29:09,350 --> 00:29:07,279
examples on both sides of people

959
00:29:12,230 --> 00:29:09,360
being in soldier mindset or in scout

960
00:29:14,950 --> 00:29:12,240
mindset there are definitely theories

961
00:29:16,870 --> 00:29:14,960
most of which come from progressive

962
00:29:18,149 --> 00:29:16,880
social scientists so take this with us

963
00:29:19,750 --> 00:29:18,159
a salt shaker worth of salt but there

964
00:29:22,070 --> 00:29:19,760
are definitely theories that there's

965
00:29:25,110 --> 00:29:22,080
something about conservative ideology

966
00:29:27,830 --> 00:29:25,120
that attracts personality types

967
00:29:28,310 --> 00:29:27,840
who are less inclined to be open-minded

968
00:29:29,909 --> 00:29:28,320
and

969
00:29:31,909 --> 00:29:29,919
question their beliefs or their their

970
00:29:33,830 --> 00:29:31,919
lifestyle or background etc

971
00:29:35,909 --> 00:29:33,840
that seems maybe plausible to me

972
00:29:37,350 --> 00:29:35,919
although the research that claims to

973
00:29:38,870 --> 00:29:37,360
support that

974
00:29:40,230 --> 00:29:38,880
theory is pretty terrible which i

975
00:29:41,430 --> 00:29:40,240
actually talk about in the book but just

976
00:29:43,110 --> 00:29:41,440
because but just because the research

977
00:29:44,789 --> 00:29:43,120
supporting that theory is bad doesn't

978
00:29:46,870 --> 00:29:44,799
mean the claim is necessarily false so

979
00:29:48,149 --> 00:29:46,880
that could be true i don't have strong

980
00:29:49,510 --> 00:29:48,159
intuitions one way or the other and i

981
00:29:50,070 --> 00:29:49,520
don't think we have great evidence about

982
00:29:52,470 --> 00:29:50,080
it

983
00:29:54,389 --> 00:29:52,480
so in the book you mentioned the studies

984
00:29:56,950 --> 00:29:54,399
about the rigidity of the right

985
00:29:57,990 --> 00:29:56,960
and the the problems that right that's

986
00:30:00,870 --> 00:29:58,000
what i was referring to

987
00:30:01,909 --> 00:30:00,880
do you wanna sure the theory is that

988
00:30:04,549 --> 00:30:01,919
conservatives

989
00:30:05,590 --> 00:30:04,559
or people on the right in in the us tend

990
00:30:07,430 --> 00:30:05,600
to have

991
00:30:08,870 --> 00:30:07,440
personalities that are more rigid and

992
00:30:11,990 --> 00:30:08,880
less open-minded

993
00:30:13,029 --> 00:30:12,000
and some of the sort of core research

994
00:30:15,669 --> 00:30:13,039
that claimed to

995
00:30:16,470 --> 00:30:15,679
support this theory the way they

996
00:30:19,430 --> 00:30:16,480
measured

997
00:30:20,389 --> 00:30:19,440
how rigid someone is was by asking

998
00:30:22,549 --> 00:30:20,399
questions like

999
00:30:23,990 --> 00:30:22,559
do you think that women should have the

1000
00:30:25,029 --> 00:30:24,000
right to get an abortion whenever they

1001
00:30:27,350 --> 00:30:25,039
want or

1002
00:30:28,549 --> 00:30:27,360
do you think it's a great thing when

1003
00:30:31,669 --> 00:30:28,559
women

1004
00:30:33,430 --> 00:30:31,679
and gay people challenge the traditional

1005
00:30:35,269 --> 00:30:33,440
values of their societies

1006
00:30:37,110 --> 00:30:35,279
and and forge their own paths et cetera

1007
00:30:38,789 --> 00:30:37,120
or um do you support the death penalty

1008
00:30:40,470 --> 00:30:38,799
and your answers to these questions

1009
00:30:41,669 --> 00:30:40,480
determine how rigid the researchers

1010
00:30:43,269 --> 00:30:41,679
consider you to be

1011
00:30:45,110 --> 00:30:43,279
and of course the problem is that these

1012
00:30:46,630 --> 00:30:45,120
these are very political questions

1013
00:30:48,630 --> 00:30:46,640
they're essentially asking you like are

1014
00:30:49,110 --> 00:30:48,640
you on the right or the left and if you

1015
00:30:50,549 --> 00:30:49,120
answer

1016
00:30:52,389 --> 00:30:50,559
questions that indicate you're on the

1017
00:30:53,990 --> 00:30:52,399
right then you get classified as rigid

1018
00:30:55,669 --> 00:30:54,000
and then the researchers conclude like

1019
00:30:57,430 --> 00:30:55,679
oh wow what a surprise

1020
00:30:59,509 --> 00:30:57,440
rigid people are more likely to be on

1021
00:31:02,310 --> 00:30:59,519
the right it's completely circular and

1022
00:31:04,630 --> 00:31:02,320
and logical and so i i brought that up

1023
00:31:06,549 --> 00:31:04,640
in the book as kind of an example of how

1024
00:31:08,310 --> 00:31:06,559
just because you're you know smart and

1025
00:31:09,909 --> 00:31:08,320
well-educated and very knowledgeable

1026
00:31:11,750 --> 00:31:09,919
about your subject area

1027
00:31:13,269 --> 00:31:11,760
does not mean you're immune from soldier

1028
00:31:14,070 --> 00:31:13,279
mindset because i think these

1029
00:31:15,669 --> 00:31:14,080
researchers

1030
00:31:17,190 --> 00:31:15,679
are kind of a good example of people who

1031
00:31:18,230 --> 00:31:17,200
are smart and well-educated and

1032
00:31:20,630 --> 00:31:18,240
knowledgeable about

1033
00:31:21,509 --> 00:31:20,640
cognitive science but i think the fact

1034
00:31:25,110 --> 00:31:21,519
that they

1035
00:31:26,389 --> 00:31:25,120
went unchallenged in their little

1036
00:31:28,230 --> 00:31:26,399
subfield for

1037
00:31:30,070 --> 00:31:28,240
so many years is kind of a bad sign

1038
00:31:32,870 --> 00:31:30,080
about their ability to think

1039
00:31:33,830 --> 00:31:32,880
objectively uh about these questions i

1040
00:31:35,830 --> 00:31:33,840
hope you will give me

1041
00:31:37,190 --> 00:31:35,840
a bit more of your time because i have

1042
00:31:37,750 --> 00:31:37,200
so many more questions that i want to

1043
00:31:40,389 --> 00:31:37,760
ask you

1044
00:31:41,990 --> 00:31:40,399
so first of all you've given a ted talk

1045
00:31:44,310 --> 00:31:42,000
in 2016

1046
00:31:45,990 --> 00:31:44,320
uh which is now on almost five million

1047
00:31:47,830 --> 00:31:46,000
views i

1048
00:31:49,830 --> 00:31:47,840
checked last night at like 4.9 million

1049
00:31:51,990 --> 00:31:49,840
or something in which you discuss

1050
00:31:53,430 --> 00:31:52,000
the scout mindset i'm just wondering is

1051
00:31:56,710 --> 00:31:53,440
that where the book started

1052
00:31:58,549 --> 00:31:56,720
no i've been using this metaphor for

1053
00:32:00,389 --> 00:31:58,559
a little while before that so the

1054
00:32:00,789 --> 00:32:00,399
genesis of the metaphor actually which i

1055
00:32:02,149 --> 00:32:00,799
don't

1056
00:32:03,909 --> 00:32:02,159
know if i really made clear in the book

1057
00:32:05,830 --> 00:32:03,919
but it's kind of a

1058
00:32:07,909 --> 00:32:05,840
what's the word chimera of several

1059
00:32:09,990 --> 00:32:07,919
different metaphors all lumped together

1060
00:32:11,750 --> 00:32:10,000
one of those metaphors is the idea of

1061
00:32:13,990 --> 00:32:11,760
our beliefs as fortresses

1062
00:32:15,990 --> 00:32:14,000
like we fortify and support and defend

1063
00:32:18,230 --> 00:32:16,000
them and also the metaphor of

1064
00:32:19,669 --> 00:32:18,240
arguments as battle that we try to you

1065
00:32:20,310 --> 00:32:19,679
know knock down or shoot down opposing

1066
00:32:22,070 --> 00:32:20,320
arguments

1067
00:32:23,590 --> 00:32:22,080
and those metaphors i first encountered

1068
00:32:25,430 --> 00:32:23,600
in george lakoff's book

1069
00:32:26,710 --> 00:32:25,440
metaphors we live by i think it's called

1070
00:32:28,710 --> 00:32:26,720
so that's where the idea for soldier

1071
00:32:31,669 --> 00:32:28,720
mindset came from and then

1072
00:32:33,430 --> 00:32:31,679
scout mindset came from the metaphor of

1073
00:32:35,269 --> 00:32:33,440
the map and the territory

1074
00:32:36,950 --> 00:32:35,279
which i originally encountered on les

1075
00:32:37,990 --> 00:32:36,960
wrong but it actually comes from some

1076
00:32:41,669 --> 00:32:38,000
philosophers

1077
00:32:43,190 --> 00:32:41,679
idea of the map and the territory

1078
00:32:44,870 --> 00:32:43,200
is it's just what i was referring to

1079
00:32:45,590 --> 00:32:44,880
earlier that you need to keep in mind

1080
00:32:47,350 --> 00:32:45,600
that your

1081
00:32:48,950 --> 00:32:47,360
the judgments you form about the world

1082
00:32:51,509 --> 00:32:48,960
your map essentially

1083
00:32:51,990 --> 00:32:51,519
is is different from the world itself

1084
00:32:53,590 --> 00:32:52,000
basically

1085
00:32:55,029 --> 00:32:53,600
it's a warning against what

1086
00:32:55,990 --> 00:32:55,039
psychologists sometimes call naive

1087
00:32:57,190 --> 00:32:56,000
realism where you just

1088
00:32:58,870 --> 00:32:57,200
assume that the way you perceive the

1089
00:33:00,389 --> 00:32:58,880
world is the objective truth and you

1090
00:33:01,750 --> 00:33:00,399
forget or just don't acknowledge that

1091
00:33:03,190 --> 00:33:01,760
there's this filter that everything's

1092
00:33:04,789 --> 00:33:03,200
passing through and that filter can be

1093
00:33:05,669 --> 00:33:04,799
flawed yeah so the idea of the map and

1094
00:33:08,389 --> 00:33:05,679
the territory

1095
00:33:09,990 --> 00:33:08,399
kind of combined with this soldier

1096
00:33:11,350 --> 00:33:10,000
metaphor in my head to produce the

1097
00:33:13,269 --> 00:33:11,360
soldier in the scout

1098
00:33:15,029 --> 00:33:13,279
so that's where that came from yeah okay

1099
00:33:17,269 --> 00:33:15,039
well i definitely recommend people go

1100
00:33:19,990 --> 00:33:17,279
and watch that talk it was excellent

1101
00:33:21,830 --> 00:33:20,000
now you define yourself as a rationalist

1102
00:33:23,029 --> 00:33:21,840
i suppose you have the podcast

1103
00:33:24,870 --> 00:33:23,039
rationally speaking

1104
00:33:26,470 --> 00:33:24,880
i think i've heard you referred to

1105
00:33:29,509 --> 00:33:26,480
yourself in an interview

1106
00:33:31,110 --> 00:33:29,519
as a rationalist you know i never

1107
00:33:33,269 --> 00:33:31,120
actively self-identify

1108
00:33:35,509 --> 00:33:33,279
that way i just feel compelled to jump

1109
00:33:36,230 --> 00:33:35,519
into arguments online about rationalists

1110
00:33:38,789 --> 00:33:36,240
when people are

1111
00:33:39,830 --> 00:33:38,799
using them of various things and so then

1112
00:33:41,430 --> 00:33:39,840
i have to jump in and defend the

1113
00:33:42,950 --> 00:33:41,440
rationalists and i think yes like i

1114
00:33:46,310 --> 00:33:42,960
count as a rationalist

1115
00:33:49,190 --> 00:33:46,320
but i i do try to avoid wearing my

1116
00:33:51,990 --> 00:33:49,200
self-identifying labels proudly yeah you

1117
00:33:53,830 --> 00:33:52,000
know or waving them as a flag and so

1118
00:33:55,350 --> 00:33:53,840
yes i by all like reasonable definitions

1119
00:33:56,710 --> 00:33:55,360
i count as a rationalist but

1120
00:33:58,789 --> 00:33:56,720
i'm not trying to like go out there and

1121
00:34:01,269 --> 00:33:58,799
proclaim that

1122
00:34:02,549 --> 00:34:01,279
you're not uh i i recognize that the

1123
00:34:04,070 --> 00:34:02,559
name of my podcast might seem to

1124
00:34:05,669 --> 00:34:04,080
undermine my claim that i'm not trying

1125
00:34:06,549 --> 00:34:05,679
to go out there and proclaim myself to

1126
00:34:07,909 --> 00:34:06,559
be a rationalist

1127
00:34:09,589 --> 00:34:07,919
but it's actually a bit of a just

1128
00:34:11,109 --> 00:34:09,599
coincidence because the name of the

1129
00:34:13,510 --> 00:34:11,119
podcast came from

1130
00:34:14,869 --> 00:34:13,520
the name of massimo piluchi's blog

1131
00:34:16,790 --> 00:34:14,879
rationally speaking

1132
00:34:18,470 --> 00:34:16,800
which existed years ago before i ever

1133
00:34:19,669 --> 00:34:18,480
met him or encountered the skeptics and

1134
00:34:22,869 --> 00:34:19,679
i met him in

1135
00:34:24,629 --> 00:34:22,879
i guess 2010 or late 20 2009

1136
00:34:26,550 --> 00:34:24,639
and he he proposed that we start this

1137
00:34:27,430 --> 00:34:26,560
podcast together and we just decided to

1138
00:34:29,589 --> 00:34:27,440
give it the same name

1139
00:34:30,550 --> 00:34:29,599
as his blog and so now i'm i'm solo

1140
00:34:32,230 --> 00:34:30,560
hosting it but i

1141
00:34:34,629 --> 00:34:32,240
i didn't actually choose the name myself

1142
00:34:35,349 --> 00:34:34,639
so it's uh it's a bit of a coincidence

1143
00:34:36,629 --> 00:34:35,359
that i

1144
00:34:39,030 --> 00:34:36,639
am a rationalist and also have this

1145
00:34:40,629 --> 00:34:39,040
podcast rationally speaking okay

1146
00:34:43,669 --> 00:34:40,639
uh just a little anecdote about the

1147
00:34:45,990 --> 00:34:43,679
podcast by the way is that uh when

1148
00:34:46,869 --> 00:34:46,000
my partner maya and i met one of the

1149
00:34:48,790 --> 00:34:46,879
things

1150
00:34:50,470 --> 00:34:48,800
i think it was on the first date we

1151
00:34:52,950 --> 00:34:50,480
compared podcast lists

1152
00:34:54,310 --> 00:34:52,960
yours popped up in both of ours and that

1153
00:34:55,109 --> 00:34:54,320
was kind of one of the things this is a

1154
00:34:57,430 --> 00:34:55,119
good sign

1155
00:34:58,710 --> 00:34:57,440
oh that's so lovely and now we live

1156
00:35:01,109 --> 00:34:58,720
together and you know

1157
00:35:01,990 --> 00:35:01,119
oh wow i'm talking that up in my you

1158
00:35:05,190 --> 00:35:02,000
know as a win in my

1159
00:35:05,990 --> 00:35:05,200
column yeah but being rational poses uh

1160
00:35:08,630 --> 00:35:06,000
some risks

1161
00:35:11,270 --> 00:35:08,640
uh but uh in your book it's best

1162
00:35:13,670 --> 00:35:11,280
exemplified by mr spock's blunders

1163
00:35:15,670 --> 00:35:13,680
uh due to not understanding human nature

1164
00:35:16,069 --> 00:35:15,680
uh now in a world dominated by social

1165
00:35:18,310 --> 00:35:16,079
media

1166
00:35:19,670 --> 00:35:18,320
where you get instant feedback on a lot

1167
00:35:21,270 --> 00:35:19,680
of things straight away

1168
00:35:22,870 --> 00:35:21,280
there are some risks involved in trying

1169
00:35:25,190 --> 00:35:22,880
to find the truth that i would like

1170
00:35:26,870 --> 00:35:25,200
to discuss with you and get your view on

1171
00:35:29,109 --> 00:35:26,880
the first one is how do you best deal

1172
00:35:32,790 --> 00:35:29,119
with sensitive topics i could mention

1173
00:35:34,230 --> 00:35:32,800
gender as an example how do we ensure

1174
00:35:36,069 --> 00:35:34,240
that we find the truth but

1175
00:35:37,270 --> 00:35:36,079
don't unnecessarily offend people in the

1176
00:35:39,910 --> 00:35:37,280
process

1177
00:35:40,950 --> 00:35:39,920
and other questions that we should that

1178
00:35:43,750 --> 00:35:40,960
we shouldn't ask

1179
00:35:44,069 --> 00:35:43,760
i don't think that there are questions

1180
00:35:45,910 --> 00:35:44,079
that

1181
00:35:47,750 --> 00:35:45,920
no one should ask sorry for the double

1182
00:35:49,990 --> 00:35:47,760
negative there but i think it's it would

1183
00:35:51,829 --> 00:35:50,000
be a really strong claim to say that

1184
00:35:53,589 --> 00:35:51,839
no one anywhere in any academic

1185
00:35:55,910 --> 00:35:53,599
department or in any blog or social

1186
00:35:57,670 --> 00:35:55,920
circle should ever be allowed to ask

1187
00:35:59,430 --> 00:35:57,680
such and such question that's a very

1188
00:36:01,190 --> 00:35:59,440
strong and very restrictive

1189
00:36:02,790 --> 00:36:01,200
claim that i i would definitely not

1190
00:36:05,109 --> 00:36:02,800
stand behind i would say

1191
00:36:06,470 --> 00:36:05,119
the loss to freedom of speech and

1192
00:36:07,990 --> 00:36:06,480
freedom of thought and our just

1193
00:36:09,109 --> 00:36:08,000
collective ability as a society to

1194
00:36:10,950 --> 00:36:09,119
figure stuff out together

1195
00:36:12,390 --> 00:36:10,960
of such a policy would be huge compared

1196
00:36:14,630 --> 00:36:12,400
to the benefit so

1197
00:36:15,910 --> 00:36:14,640
no i wouldn't support that policy but i

1198
00:36:17,430 --> 00:36:15,920
do think it's totally fine and

1199
00:36:19,910 --> 00:36:17,440
reasonable to say that

1200
00:36:20,630 --> 00:36:19,920
in some spaces or in some contexts you

1201
00:36:22,310 --> 00:36:20,640
should avoid

1202
00:36:23,589 --> 00:36:22,320
such and such questions because they're

1203
00:36:24,150 --> 00:36:23,599
going to be inflammatory or they're

1204
00:36:25,750 --> 00:36:24,160
going to

1205
00:36:28,230 --> 00:36:25,760
antagonize people or whatever on a

1206
00:36:29,670 --> 00:36:28,240
case-by-case basis i think it's fine to

1207
00:36:31,829 --> 00:36:29,680
have some questions or topics be

1208
00:36:33,349 --> 00:36:31,839
off-limits um and then we just you know

1209
00:36:35,510 --> 00:36:33,359
get into the weeds about like well when

1210
00:36:36,710 --> 00:36:35,520
exactly or like in what context or and

1211
00:36:38,150 --> 00:36:36,720
who gets to decide and those are all

1212
00:36:40,230 --> 00:36:38,160
very complicated questions but

1213
00:36:42,069 --> 00:36:40,240
i just wanted to distinguish between not

1214
00:36:43,430 --> 00:36:42,079
allowing discussion of a topic anywhere

1215
00:36:44,630 --> 00:36:43,440
versus not allowing it in certain

1216
00:36:45,670 --> 00:36:44,640
specific cases

1217
00:36:47,589 --> 00:36:45,680
i feel like those two things get

1218
00:36:49,030 --> 00:36:47,599
conflated sometimes yeah i think there's

1219
00:36:51,430 --> 00:36:49,040
there's also the you know the

1220
00:36:53,109 --> 00:36:51,440
the thin line between asking questions

1221
00:36:55,349 --> 00:36:53,119
and just asking questions

1222
00:36:56,390 --> 00:36:55,359
if you you know what i mean yeah i do

1223
00:36:58,310 --> 00:36:56,400
yeah so

1224
00:36:59,670 --> 00:36:58,320
just asking questions right right right

1225
00:37:00,470 --> 00:36:59,680
i heard those quote marks so i'm just

1226
00:37:03,430 --> 00:37:00,480
wondering

1227
00:37:05,670 --> 00:37:03,440
whether that could be perhaps an issue

1228
00:37:07,910 --> 00:37:05,680
of how we navigate that and

1229
00:37:09,510 --> 00:37:07,920
perhaps how would we make it clear that

1230
00:37:10,069 --> 00:37:09,520
the questions we're asking are genuine

1231
00:37:11,750 --> 00:37:10,079
because

1232
00:37:13,349 --> 00:37:11,760
very often the difference between asking

1233
00:37:14,150 --> 00:37:13,359
questions and just asking questions see

1234
00:37:15,670 --> 00:37:14,160
the perception

1235
00:37:17,430 --> 00:37:15,680
of the other side the person being

1236
00:37:19,510 --> 00:37:17,440
questions or those observing i'm just

1237
00:37:22,150 --> 00:37:19,520
wondering whether some of it is

1238
00:37:23,910 --> 00:37:22,160
simply about making it clear that the

1239
00:37:25,190 --> 00:37:23,920
questions are genuine and you do see

1240
00:37:27,190 --> 00:37:25,200
online people saying

1241
00:37:29,990 --> 00:37:27,200
honest question or genuine question

1242
00:37:32,870 --> 00:37:30,000
right before they ask something

1243
00:37:34,470 --> 00:37:32,880
whether that's possibly sometimes when

1244
00:37:37,109 --> 00:37:34,480
someone says genuine question

1245
00:37:39,030 --> 00:37:37,119
colin what follows doesn't does indeed

1246
00:37:40,150 --> 00:37:39,040
seem to me to be a genuine question

1247
00:37:41,750 --> 00:37:40,160
they're just curious or they don't

1248
00:37:43,430 --> 00:37:41,760
understand and then other times it's

1249
00:37:44,390 --> 00:37:43,440
really not a genuine question it's just

1250
00:37:46,630 --> 00:37:44,400
them

1251
00:37:48,710 --> 00:37:46,640
trying to get a dig in at the other side

1252
00:37:51,270 --> 00:37:48,720
you know like genuine question colin

1253
00:37:52,870 --> 00:37:51,280
do the democrats really not understand

1254
00:37:54,950 --> 00:37:52,880
you know such a such obvious fact

1255
00:37:56,150 --> 00:37:54,960
or what's going on there like so this is

1256
00:37:59,349 --> 00:37:56,160
part of the problem that

1257
00:38:01,190 --> 00:37:59,359
because people so often pretend to be

1258
00:38:02,710 --> 00:38:01,200
just asking questions when really

1259
00:38:04,310 --> 00:38:02,720
they're trying to ask

1260
00:38:06,230 --> 00:38:04,320
leading questions to make the other side

1261
00:38:07,510 --> 00:38:06,240
look bad or they're not actually

1262
00:38:08,790 --> 00:38:07,520
interested in what you have to say in

1263
00:38:10,150 --> 00:38:08,800
response to their questions

1264
00:38:11,990 --> 00:38:10,160
they're just trying to troll you or

1265
00:38:15,030 --> 00:38:12,000
whatever because that's so common

1266
00:38:17,109 --> 00:38:15,040
it becomes really hard to have those

1267
00:38:18,790 --> 00:38:17,119
those ideal conversations in which you

1268
00:38:19,349 --> 00:38:18,800
you are genuinely asking and answering

1269
00:38:21,349 --> 00:38:19,359
questions

1270
00:38:22,630 --> 00:38:21,359
it becomes hard to honestly signal that

1271
00:38:24,150 --> 00:38:22,640
there's no way to just say like by the

1272
00:38:25,430 --> 00:38:24,160
way guys i'm i'm honestly asking

1273
00:38:27,190 --> 00:38:25,440
questions here and have everyone just

1274
00:38:28,390 --> 00:38:27,200
accept like well of course yes

1275
00:38:29,990 --> 00:38:28,400
you must be telling the truth because

1276
00:38:31,190 --> 00:38:30,000
lots of people are lying or not lying

1277
00:38:33,109 --> 00:38:31,200
but just kind of

1278
00:38:34,470 --> 00:38:33,119
self-deceiving but thinking that they're

1279
00:38:34,950 --> 00:38:34,480
just asking questions when they really

1280
00:38:37,270 --> 00:38:34,960
aren't

1281
00:38:38,310 --> 00:38:37,280
i think this is honestly one of the one

1282
00:38:40,069 --> 00:38:38,320
of the big causes

1283
00:38:41,349 --> 00:38:40,079
of like one of the big problems with our

1284
00:38:43,349 --> 00:38:41,359
discourse today is

1285
00:38:45,109 --> 00:38:43,359
the fact that so many people pretend

1286
00:38:45,990 --> 00:38:45,119
they're asking questions or arguing in

1287
00:38:48,069 --> 00:38:46,000
good faith when they really

1288
00:38:49,829 --> 00:38:48,079
aren't and that just poisons the well i

1289
00:38:52,230 --> 00:38:49,839
don't think that there's a

1290
00:38:53,030 --> 00:38:52,240
an easy straightforward solution to that

1291
00:38:55,990 --> 00:38:53,040
but

1292
00:38:57,190 --> 00:38:56,000
one thing that can help is to read your

1293
00:38:59,109 --> 00:38:57,200
question

1294
00:39:00,710 --> 00:38:59,119
to yourself before you post it or tweet

1295
00:39:01,990 --> 00:39:00,720
it or say it or whatever and just ask

1296
00:39:03,510 --> 00:39:02,000
yourself does this actually sound like

1297
00:39:05,990 --> 00:39:03,520
what someone would say

1298
00:39:07,030 --> 00:39:06,000
if they were genuinely interested in

1299
00:39:08,710 --> 00:39:07,040
asking in good faith

1300
00:39:10,150 --> 00:39:08,720
and i sometimes notice that that's not

1301
00:39:11,829 --> 00:39:10,160
the case for me when i

1302
00:39:13,510 --> 00:39:11,839
ask a question like i don't know there

1303
00:39:15,349 --> 00:39:13,520
was an example recently where i said

1304
00:39:16,550 --> 00:39:15,359
i was responding to someone and i said

1305
00:39:17,349 --> 00:39:16,560
something or i was about to say

1306
00:39:20,150 --> 00:39:17,359
something like

1307
00:39:21,109 --> 00:39:20,160
so in your mind you know such and such

1308
00:39:23,349 --> 00:39:21,119
is true

1309
00:39:24,230 --> 00:39:23,359
and when i wrote that when i typed that

1310
00:39:27,109 --> 00:39:24,240
out

1311
00:39:28,150 --> 00:39:27,119
i didn't feel like i was being snarky or

1312
00:39:30,310 --> 00:39:28,160
antagonistic

1313
00:39:31,990 --> 00:39:30,320
or anything i felt like i was just

1314
00:39:33,990 --> 00:39:32,000
trying to clarify what they meant

1315
00:39:35,510 --> 00:39:34,000
but when i read it out loud to myself

1316
00:39:38,470 --> 00:39:35,520
before hitting send

1317
00:39:39,030 --> 00:39:38,480
i realized oh that phrase so in your

1318
00:39:41,109 --> 00:39:39,040
mind

1319
00:39:42,950 --> 00:39:41,119
that's really it's kind of a sneer but

1320
00:39:44,950 --> 00:39:42,960
it hadn't felt that way to me

1321
00:39:46,550 --> 00:39:44,960
consciously when i first typed it i was

1322
00:39:48,069 --> 00:39:46,560
feeling annoyed at them i was feeling

1323
00:39:49,990 --> 00:39:48,079
some disdain for their

1324
00:39:51,589 --> 00:39:50,000
position or their arguments or whatever

1325
00:39:53,190 --> 00:39:51,599
and that came through in the words that

1326
00:39:55,190 --> 00:39:53,200
i chose but i wasn't consciously aware

1327
00:39:56,950 --> 00:39:55,200
of it when i chose those words

1328
00:39:58,470 --> 00:39:56,960
and it was only when i read it aloud to

1329
00:39:59,829 --> 00:39:58,480
myself and imagined

1330
00:40:00,950 --> 00:39:59,839
seeing someone else write those words

1331
00:40:01,829 --> 00:40:00,960
and i was like oh yeah that's kind of an

1332
00:40:04,230 --> 00:40:01,839
obnoxious

1333
00:40:05,750 --> 00:40:04,240
phrasing so yeah the part of the

1334
00:40:06,790 --> 00:40:05,760
solution i think is just becoming more

1335
00:40:09,190 --> 00:40:06,800
self-aware about

1336
00:40:10,069 --> 00:40:09,200
when your irritation with the other side

1337
00:40:12,069 --> 00:40:10,079
is showing through

1338
00:40:13,109 --> 00:40:12,079
it's really hard to just declare in a

1339
00:40:14,790 --> 00:40:13,119
one-off instance

1340
00:40:16,150 --> 00:40:14,800
i'm just asking questions in good faith

1341
00:40:17,510 --> 00:40:16,160
and expect everyone to believe you

1342
00:40:19,750 --> 00:40:17,520
you kind of have to develop a track

1343
00:40:21,589 --> 00:40:19,760
record over time as someone who

1344
00:40:23,510 --> 00:40:21,599
is operating in good faith and that

1345
00:40:25,109 --> 00:40:23,520
means you know kind of

1346
00:40:26,870 --> 00:40:25,119
demonstrating scout mindset on a lot of

1347
00:40:28,390 --> 00:40:26,880
really controversial topics and being

1348
00:40:30,069 --> 00:40:28,400
willing to say you know

1349
00:40:31,349 --> 00:40:30,079
yep that is a good point or like yes

1350
00:40:33,030 --> 00:40:31,359
that is something that people on my side

1351
00:40:34,550 --> 00:40:33,040
do that's wrong or you know when you

1352
00:40:35,750 --> 00:40:34,560
summarize the other side's position

1353
00:40:37,589 --> 00:40:35,760
doing it in

1354
00:40:39,430 --> 00:40:37,599
an accurate and fair way and not in a

1355
00:40:41,589 --> 00:40:39,440
straw many way you kind of have to

1356
00:40:43,109 --> 00:40:41,599
do that over time so that when you say

1357
00:40:44,550 --> 00:40:43,119
hey guys here's this controversial issue

1358
00:40:46,870 --> 00:40:44,560
that i have a question about

1359
00:40:48,390 --> 00:40:46,880
they can actually trust that yes she

1360
00:40:49,990 --> 00:40:48,400
genuinely has a question she's

1361
00:40:51,910 --> 00:40:50,000
not just trying to be a dick so yeah you

1362
00:40:53,910 --> 00:40:51,920
need that that reputation built up and

1363
00:40:55,829 --> 00:40:53,920
that's that does take a little while

1364
00:40:57,270 --> 00:40:55,839
yeah probably does controversial

1365
00:40:58,710 --> 00:40:57,280
question so i'd like to know what you

1366
00:41:00,790 --> 00:40:58,720
think of cancelled culture and i'm

1367
00:41:02,790 --> 00:41:00,800
referring both to the term

1368
00:41:04,950 --> 00:41:02,800
and to the phenomenon that it supposedly

1369
00:41:06,230 --> 00:41:04,960
describes i'd like to know whether you

1370
00:41:09,589 --> 00:41:06,240
think it's real

1371
00:41:12,230 --> 00:41:09,599
and i'd also if assuming that it is real

1372
00:41:14,309 --> 00:41:12,240
whether it's new or different from past

1373
00:41:16,950 --> 00:41:14,319
attempts at silencing dissent

1374
00:41:18,069 --> 00:41:16,960
i do think it's real and i do think it's

1375
00:41:20,630 --> 00:41:18,079
somewhat different from

1376
00:41:21,510 --> 00:41:20,640
what existed 15 years ago it seems to me

1377
00:41:23,510 --> 00:41:21,520
that the main

1378
00:41:25,829 --> 00:41:23,520
crux of disagreement between the people

1379
00:41:27,829 --> 00:41:25,839
who talk about cancel culture

1380
00:41:29,109 --> 00:41:27,839
you know with worry and the people who

1381
00:41:31,349 --> 00:41:29,119
scoff at

1382
00:41:32,630 --> 00:41:31,359
them i think one of the main cruxes of

1383
00:41:34,550 --> 00:41:32,640
disagreement is over

1384
00:41:35,750 --> 00:41:34,560
well one is over how serious the

1385
00:41:37,030 --> 00:41:35,760
consequences actually are

1386
00:41:38,870 --> 00:41:37,040
because the people who say like oh

1387
00:41:40,630 --> 00:41:38,880
cancel culture isn't a real thing stop

1388
00:41:42,630 --> 00:41:40,640
complaining about it we'll often say

1389
00:41:43,990 --> 00:41:42,640
like oh well those people you say were

1390
00:41:45,510 --> 00:41:44,000
canceled quote unquote

1391
00:41:47,030 --> 00:41:45,520
they still have jobs or you know they

1392
00:41:48,470 --> 00:41:47,040
can get another job

1393
00:41:50,790 --> 00:41:48,480
or they still have audiences they're not

1394
00:41:51,349 --> 00:41:50,800
really canceled and that's true in a

1395
00:41:54,230 --> 00:41:51,359
sense

1396
00:41:56,069 --> 00:41:54,240
but there are still real and often

1397
00:41:56,870 --> 00:41:56,079
significant consequences to saying

1398
00:41:59,349 --> 00:41:56,880
something that

1399
00:42:00,309 --> 00:41:59,359
the internet or or your your social

1400
00:42:03,270 --> 00:42:00,319
circles decide

1401
00:42:03,990 --> 00:42:03,280
is is over the line just the fact that

1402
00:42:05,589 --> 00:42:04,000
you

1403
00:42:07,829 --> 00:42:05,599
develop a reputation as someone who's a

1404
00:42:09,990 --> 00:42:07,839
bigot or a racist if that's not

1405
00:42:11,109 --> 00:42:10,000
actually warranted that that alone seems

1406
00:42:12,069 --> 00:42:11,119
to me like a pretty significant

1407
00:42:13,430 --> 00:42:12,079
consequence like

1408
00:42:14,710 --> 00:42:13,440
if someone googles you and finds

1409
00:42:16,069 --> 00:42:14,720
articles about how you're a bigot and a

1410
00:42:18,470 --> 00:42:16,079
racist that seems like

1411
00:42:19,829 --> 00:42:18,480
an unfortunate outcome to me it does

1412
00:42:21,030 --> 00:42:19,839
seem like a sad thing

1413
00:42:22,309 --> 00:42:21,040
if that's happening to a lot of people

1414
00:42:22,950 --> 00:42:22,319
who don't actually deserve it and that's

1415
00:42:24,390 --> 00:42:22,960
like a cons

1416
00:42:25,670 --> 00:42:24,400
that's a thing we should be concerned

1417
00:42:26,950 --> 00:42:25,680
about and should be trying to minimize

1418
00:42:28,069 --> 00:42:26,960
the number of people who get

1419
00:42:29,990 --> 00:42:28,079
charred with that brush who don't

1420
00:42:32,470 --> 00:42:30,000
deserve it that i think is a legitimate

1421
00:42:34,069 --> 00:42:32,480
thing to be concerned about and then the

1422
00:42:34,870 --> 00:42:34,079
other crux of disagreement i think is

1423
00:42:37,030 --> 00:42:34,880
over

1424
00:42:39,190 --> 00:42:37,040
it's less about like should we cancel

1425
00:42:41,589 --> 00:42:39,200
people for saying the wrong thing

1426
00:42:42,630 --> 00:42:41,599
and it's more about the boundaries of

1427
00:42:45,430 --> 00:42:42,640
what what kind of

1428
00:42:46,069 --> 00:42:45,440
mainstream online society considers to

1429
00:42:47,510 --> 00:42:46,079
be

1430
00:42:49,349 --> 00:42:47,520
a reasonable view that someone could

1431
00:42:52,230 --> 00:42:49,359
hold what it seems like to me is

1432
00:42:53,589 --> 00:42:52,240
is happening is that in like 15 years

1433
00:42:55,190 --> 00:42:53,599
ago or 20 years ago

1434
00:42:56,790 --> 00:42:55,200
there were a lot of things that people

1435
00:42:57,270 --> 00:42:56,800
might disagree about but they were like

1436
00:42:59,589 --> 00:42:57,280
well

1437
00:43:01,030 --> 00:42:59,599
you know yeah i disagree but the fact

1438
00:43:02,390 --> 00:43:01,040
that you hold that view doesn't make you

1439
00:43:04,710 --> 00:43:02,400
the worst person in the world

1440
00:43:05,910 --> 00:43:04,720
and now it seems like the set of things

1441
00:43:08,470 --> 00:43:05,920
that you can disagree about

1442
00:43:09,270 --> 00:43:08,480
and not be a villain is um is much

1443
00:43:11,670 --> 00:43:09,280
smaller

1444
00:43:13,510 --> 00:43:11,680
it's not necessarily that people are

1445
00:43:15,589 --> 00:43:13,520
reacting more strongly

1446
00:43:17,270 --> 00:43:15,599
to taboo views than they used to it's

1447
00:43:18,470 --> 00:43:17,280
that there are more views that are taboo

1448
00:43:21,030 --> 00:43:18,480
than there used to be

1449
00:43:22,470 --> 00:43:21,040
does that make sense yeah i must say i'm

1450
00:43:24,309 --> 00:43:22,480
not as

1451
00:43:26,309 --> 00:43:24,319
confident as you are about this i think

1452
00:43:27,190 --> 00:43:26,319
there is i mean two minds about it on

1453
00:43:29,829 --> 00:43:27,200
the one hand

1454
00:43:30,309 --> 00:43:29,839
i agree that uh there's definitely a lot

1455
00:43:32,870 --> 00:43:30,319
of

1456
00:43:34,630 --> 00:43:32,880
taboos and there's potentially be severe

1457
00:43:36,630 --> 00:43:34,640
outcomes to saying

1458
00:43:37,750 --> 00:43:36,640
what's considered to be the wrong thing

1459
00:43:39,670 --> 00:43:37,760
online but

1460
00:43:41,030 --> 00:43:39,680
but i'm not entirely sure that it's not

1461
00:43:43,750 --> 00:43:41,040
simply a factor

1462
00:43:45,349 --> 00:43:43,760
of the technology the the fact that we

1463
00:43:47,990 --> 00:43:45,359
live online now

1464
00:43:49,829 --> 00:43:48,000
so there's a chance the chance that we

1465
00:43:52,790 --> 00:43:49,839
would encounter

1466
00:43:55,030 --> 00:43:52,800
somebody who disagree disagrees with us

1467
00:43:56,870 --> 00:43:55,040
is significantly larger

1468
00:43:58,150 --> 00:43:56,880
and somebody would comment on it whereas

1469
00:43:59,829 --> 00:43:58,160
in the fact you know if you think about

1470
00:44:01,829 --> 00:43:59,839
a village in the family

1471
00:44:03,430 --> 00:44:01,839
you know you were not exposed you could

1472
00:44:05,430 --> 00:44:03,440
have dissenting views

1473
00:44:07,349 --> 00:44:05,440
it was mostly within a community that

1474
00:44:08,230 --> 00:44:07,359
already knew you there was less of a

1475
00:44:10,390 --> 00:44:08,240
chance that they would

1476
00:44:12,230 --> 00:44:10,400
you know immediately shun you because

1477
00:44:14,630 --> 00:44:12,240
there was the personal relationship

1478
00:44:16,150 --> 00:44:14,640
people's views were not exposed in the

1479
00:44:17,270 --> 00:44:16,160
same way that they are today so i'm just

1480
00:44:19,910 --> 00:44:17,280
wondering whether that

1481
00:44:21,670 --> 00:44:19,920
is whether that's the difference or

1482
00:44:23,190 --> 00:44:21,680
simply that there's

1483
00:44:24,870 --> 00:44:23,200
more and more we live in a more

1484
00:44:27,109 --> 00:44:24,880
sensorious society

1485
00:44:28,710 --> 00:44:27,119
i'm just not sure well i don't know

1486
00:44:30,790 --> 00:44:28,720
let's take an example

1487
00:44:32,630 --> 00:44:30,800
so you do you know the story of david

1488
00:44:35,670 --> 00:44:32,640
shore yes i do

1489
00:44:37,589 --> 00:44:35,680
it seems to me that tweeting a study in

1490
00:44:38,309 --> 00:44:37,599
the wake of like black lives matter

1491
00:44:40,470 --> 00:44:38,319
protests

1492
00:44:41,349 --> 00:44:40,480
tweeting a study by a respectable

1493
00:44:43,589 --> 00:44:41,359
academic

1494
00:44:44,710 --> 00:44:43,599
showing that violent protests are often

1495
00:44:46,390 --> 00:44:44,720
counterproductive

1496
00:44:48,390 --> 00:44:46,400
david shore did that and was fired from

1497
00:44:48,870 --> 00:44:48,400
his job as a result because people felt

1498
00:44:51,510 --> 00:44:48,880
that

1499
00:44:52,230 --> 00:44:51,520
supportive of black lives matter

1500
00:44:54,630 --> 00:44:52,240
protests

1501
00:44:55,430 --> 00:44:54,640
it seems to me that that like holding

1502
00:44:58,390 --> 00:44:55,440
the view that

1503
00:44:58,870 --> 00:44:58,400
hey it's good to take into account

1504
00:44:59,910 --> 00:44:58,880
whether

1505
00:45:01,750 --> 00:44:59,920
different kinds of activism are

1506
00:45:03,109 --> 00:45:01,760
productive or not and like here's some

1507
00:45:04,790 --> 00:45:03,119
evidence

1508
00:45:06,150 --> 00:45:04,800
that seems to me like a view that would

1509
00:45:08,950 --> 00:45:06,160
not have been considered

1510
00:45:09,510 --> 00:45:08,960
over the line or like beyond the pale 20

1511
00:45:13,109 --> 00:45:09,520
years ago

1512
00:45:15,430 --> 00:45:13,119
but now is often it's very messy because

1513
00:45:16,950 --> 00:45:15,440
there's not a ton of rhyme or reason

1514
00:45:17,750 --> 00:45:16,960
about like who gets canceled and for

1515
00:45:19,829 --> 00:45:17,760
what and like

1516
00:45:21,190 --> 00:45:19,839
how bad the canceling is i'm sure like

1517
00:45:22,550 --> 00:45:21,200
lots of people have said

1518
00:45:24,230 --> 00:45:22,560
the same thing that david shore has said

1519
00:45:25,990 --> 00:45:24,240
in in different contexts and

1520
00:45:27,750 --> 00:45:26,000
and it's been fine it seems like there's

1521
00:45:29,589 --> 00:45:27,760
a bit of randomness and you know

1522
00:45:31,750 --> 00:45:29,599
like which events are going to trigger

1523
00:45:33,190 --> 00:45:31,760
the the mob getting angry at you and you

1524
00:45:34,710 --> 00:45:33,200
losing your job or

1525
00:45:37,190 --> 00:45:34,720
getting called a bigot by lots of

1526
00:45:38,630 --> 00:45:37,200
magazines i don't think that it's easy

1527
00:45:39,829 --> 00:45:38,640
to predict exactly what's going to

1528
00:45:41,670 --> 00:45:39,839
trigger that but i don't know

1529
00:45:42,630 --> 00:45:41,680
do you think that that event is

1530
00:45:43,510 --> 00:45:42,640
something that could have happened 20

1531
00:45:45,750 --> 00:45:43,520
years ago

1532
00:45:47,190 --> 00:45:45,760
it couldn't but but i think a lot of it

1533
00:45:48,069 --> 00:45:47,200
is to do with the technology just like

1534
00:45:50,630 --> 00:45:48,079
you said uh

1535
00:45:52,230 --> 00:45:50,640
david shaw's situation and i encourage

1536
00:45:53,270 --> 00:45:52,240
people who don't know the case just to

1537
00:45:55,349 --> 00:45:53,280
look it up and

1538
00:45:56,710 --> 00:45:55,359
say it's a very interesting story my

1539
00:45:58,230 --> 00:45:56,720
recollection is that it's not that he

1540
00:45:59,750 --> 00:45:58,240
was fired he didn't even start he was

1541
00:46:01,190 --> 00:45:59,760
about to start the job and

1542
00:46:02,390 --> 00:46:01,200
and they told him you couldn't start but

1543
00:46:03,990 --> 00:46:02,400
i could be wrong about that oh no i

1544
00:46:05,670 --> 00:46:04,000
think he was fired

1545
00:46:07,910 --> 00:46:05,680
but whatever the case whatever the case

1546
00:46:08,710 --> 00:46:07,920
may be it doesn't make it any better or

1547
00:46:11,270 --> 00:46:08,720
worse it's

1548
00:46:12,390 --> 00:46:11,280
it's it's bad as it's bad as it is but

1549
00:46:15,030 --> 00:46:12,400
as you pointed out

1550
00:46:16,550 --> 00:46:15,040
others may have voiced the same opinion

1551
00:46:18,230 --> 00:46:16,560
perhaps more strongly

1552
00:46:20,309 --> 00:46:18,240
but we're not punished in the same way

1553
00:46:22,950 --> 00:46:20,319
so there's a level of randomness to it

1554
00:46:23,589 --> 00:46:22,960
and i'm just wondering whether that is

1555
00:46:25,589 --> 00:46:23,599
simply

1556
00:46:26,790 --> 00:46:25,599
the result of social media somebody must

1557
00:46:28,550 --> 00:46:26,800
have picked it up

1558
00:46:30,069 --> 00:46:28,560
and made a big hura about it and you

1559
00:46:31,910 --> 00:46:30,079
know that person will have had lots of

1560
00:46:32,790 --> 00:46:31,920
followers so it made more noise than

1561
00:46:35,510 --> 00:46:32,800
others

1562
00:46:36,309 --> 00:46:35,520
yeah i i tend to think that it the issue

1563
00:46:38,630 --> 00:46:36,319
here is

1564
00:46:40,950 --> 00:46:38,640
social media rather than the

1565
00:46:41,349 --> 00:46:40,960
sensoriousness and also i must say also

1566
00:46:43,589 --> 00:46:41,359
as

1567
00:46:44,630 --> 00:46:43,599
somebody who doesn't live in the u.s

1568
00:46:45,829 --> 00:46:44,640
employment at will

1569
00:46:47,670 --> 00:46:45,839
is not something that's common

1570
00:46:49,349 --> 00:46:47,680
throughout the western world so people

1571
00:46:50,950 --> 00:46:49,359
don't get fired as easily

1572
00:46:53,109 --> 00:46:50,960
uh whereas in the us you could more

1573
00:46:53,990 --> 00:46:53,119
easily lose your job and of course that

1574
00:46:56,870 --> 00:46:54,000
plays a part

1575
00:46:58,790 --> 00:46:56,880
the whole whole other issue just i want

1576
00:47:01,990 --> 00:46:58,800
to ask you one more question

1577
00:47:04,630 --> 00:47:02,000
as a scout you want to find the truth

1578
00:47:05,510 --> 00:47:04,640
but how do we do that in very complex

1579
00:47:07,430 --> 00:47:05,520
fields

1580
00:47:09,510 --> 00:47:07,440
how do we assess evidence that's beyond

1581
00:47:11,349 --> 00:47:09,520
our capacity to judge directly

1582
00:47:12,550 --> 00:47:11,359
so you know in science for example we

1583
00:47:14,710 --> 00:47:12,560
know that we can go

1584
00:47:17,030 --> 00:47:14,720
to sci hub for example to read the

1585
00:47:19,270 --> 00:47:17,040
original articles very often

1586
00:47:20,870 --> 00:47:19,280
how do we know what we don't know yeah

1587
00:47:21,670 --> 00:47:20,880
so this is i'm so glad you asked this

1588
00:47:25,030 --> 00:47:21,680
question

1589
00:47:26,309 --> 00:47:25,040
because one thing i wish i'd emphasized

1590
00:47:28,950 --> 00:47:26,319
more strongly in the book

1591
00:47:30,950 --> 00:47:28,960
is that having an accurate map or a map

1592
00:47:34,230 --> 00:47:30,960
that's as accurate as possible

1593
00:47:35,430 --> 00:47:34,240
my definition of accurate there is not

1594
00:47:36,790 --> 00:47:35,440
necessarily the same as

1595
00:47:38,549 --> 00:47:36,800
you might be thinking as your listeners

1596
00:47:39,910 --> 00:47:38,559
might be thinking um it doesn't

1597
00:47:42,069 --> 00:47:39,920
necessarily mean

1598
00:47:43,589 --> 00:47:42,079
knowing the precise truth about every

1599
00:47:45,270 --> 00:47:43,599
question it just means

1600
00:47:46,950 --> 00:47:45,280
being well calibrated or some

1601
00:47:49,190 --> 00:47:46,960
combination of you know

1602
00:47:51,030 --> 00:47:49,200
having the right answers and having uh

1603
00:47:53,589 --> 00:47:51,040
having the right amount of uncertainty

1604
00:47:55,589 --> 00:47:53,599
about your answers the appropriate

1605
00:47:56,309 --> 00:47:55,599
strategy for the vast majority of things

1606
00:47:58,150 --> 00:47:56,319
in the world

1607
00:47:59,349 --> 00:47:58,160
because you just don't have time to

1608
00:48:00,230 --> 00:47:59,359
investigate everything even if you

1609
00:48:01,750 --> 00:48:00,240
wanted to

1610
00:48:04,950 --> 00:48:01,760
the appropriate strategy for the vast

1611
00:48:07,270 --> 00:48:04,960
majority of things is just to recognize

1612
00:48:08,309 --> 00:48:07,280
how uncertain you are or or to say you

1613
00:48:10,309 --> 00:48:08,319
know well

1614
00:48:11,670 --> 00:48:10,319
my guess about this complex medical

1615
00:48:14,150 --> 00:48:11,680
question is that

1616
00:48:14,870 --> 00:48:14,160
probably stents help prevent this

1617
00:48:17,349 --> 00:48:14,880
disease

1618
00:48:18,950 --> 00:48:17,359
but i have you know i could end up being

1619
00:48:20,630 --> 00:48:18,960
wrong about that i'm just basing that

1620
00:48:21,990 --> 00:48:20,640
off of whatever you know my impression

1621
00:48:23,349 --> 00:48:22,000
of the medical consensus

1622
00:48:25,109 --> 00:48:23,359
you have these error bars around your

1623
00:48:27,030 --> 00:48:25,119
estimates and you are

1624
00:48:28,630 --> 00:48:27,040
self-aware about what your judgments are

1625
00:48:29,510 --> 00:48:28,640
based on and what could cause them to

1626
00:48:31,670 --> 00:48:29,520
change

1627
00:48:32,870 --> 00:48:31,680
um and so that process for the vast

1628
00:48:34,309 --> 00:48:32,880
majority of things doesn't actually take

1629
00:48:36,069 --> 00:48:34,319
that much time and effort it just it

1630
00:48:38,710 --> 00:48:36,079
just requires self-awareness basically

1631
00:48:40,710 --> 00:48:38,720
uh and calibration you still want to

1632
00:48:42,390 --> 00:48:40,720
sometimes you have to make

1633
00:48:43,910 --> 00:48:42,400
decisions and they don't necessarily

1634
00:48:45,030 --> 00:48:43,920
need to be practical decisions in your

1635
00:48:45,829 --> 00:48:45,040
day-to-day life you could but it could

1636
00:48:48,069 --> 00:48:45,839
be something about

1637
00:48:50,309 --> 00:48:48,079
who you vote for or what what charity

1638
00:48:52,549 --> 00:48:50,319
you decide to support

1639
00:48:54,710 --> 00:48:52,559
you know do i spend this money on

1640
00:48:56,870 --> 00:48:54,720
supporting a climate change activist

1641
00:48:57,990 --> 00:48:56,880
group for example i want to know whether

1642
00:48:59,910 --> 00:48:58,000
the risks that they're

1643
00:49:01,589 --> 00:48:59,920
highlighting are real or not and of

1644
00:49:03,990 --> 00:49:01,599
course for that

1645
00:49:04,950 --> 00:49:04,000
i need to know what the science says uh

1646
00:49:06,309 --> 00:49:04,960
and again i'm

1647
00:49:08,150 --> 00:49:06,319
you know if you're not in atmospheric

1648
00:49:09,829 --> 00:49:08,160
science or somebody who like

1649
00:49:11,030 --> 00:49:09,839
i know that in the case of climate

1650
00:49:11,910 --> 00:49:11,040
change we're talking about multiple

1651
00:49:13,990 --> 00:49:11,920
fields that show

1652
00:49:15,990 --> 00:49:14,000
all show the same conclusions but but if

1653
00:49:17,670 --> 00:49:16,000
you're not a scientist or you're not

1654
00:49:19,030 --> 00:49:17,680
equipped to judge then that makes it

1655
00:49:19,910 --> 00:49:19,040
difficult for you but i would say

1656
00:49:21,109 --> 00:49:19,920
there's there's a

1657
00:49:23,109 --> 00:49:21,119
there are cases where it's even more

1658
00:49:24,390 --> 00:49:23,119
complex than that i if i may i would

1659
00:49:27,190 --> 00:49:24,400
like to give an example from

1660
00:49:28,549 --> 00:49:27,200
a podcast one of your podcasts so sure

1661
00:49:30,549 --> 00:49:28,559
there are situations where

1662
00:49:32,230 --> 00:49:30,559
knowledge is required similarly to

1663
00:49:33,910 --> 00:49:32,240
science but the field is

1664
00:49:35,589 --> 00:49:33,920
uh tinted with interpretation and

1665
00:49:37,510 --> 00:49:35,599
opinion for example

1666
00:49:38,950 --> 00:49:37,520
the law and i think you know where i'm

1667
00:49:41,349 --> 00:49:38,960
heading with this

1668
00:49:42,710 --> 00:49:41,359
with you recently interviewed professor

1669
00:49:44,630 --> 00:49:42,720
william board

1670
00:49:46,309 --> 00:49:44,640
and he talked about he defended uh

1671
00:49:49,349 --> 00:49:46,319
originalism and uh

1672
00:49:52,069 --> 00:49:49,359
i i posted about this to a uh

1673
00:49:52,870 --> 00:49:52,079
a lawyer who has a podcast uh opening

1674
00:49:55,190 --> 00:49:52,880
arguments and

1675
00:49:56,630 --> 00:49:55,200
andre torres i oh yeah posted to him and

1676
00:49:59,190 --> 00:49:56,640
asked him what he thought about because

1677
00:50:00,549 --> 00:49:59,200
he's a he rejects uh originalism very

1678
00:50:01,349 --> 00:50:00,559
very strongly and i was wondering what

1679
00:50:03,750 --> 00:50:01,359
he thought

1680
00:50:04,950 --> 00:50:03,760
and he made two shows about it and i he

1681
00:50:07,910 --> 00:50:04,960
said he contacted you

1682
00:50:08,390 --> 00:50:07,920
dude and and william board to discuss

1683
00:50:09,750 --> 00:50:08,400
this

1684
00:50:12,870 --> 00:50:09,760
anyway i don't have an opinion about

1685
00:50:14,549 --> 00:50:12,880
this because i'm not

1686
00:50:16,790 --> 00:50:14,559
i'm not a legal mind i don't have legal

1687
00:50:18,069 --> 00:50:16,800
training i find this discussion very

1688
00:50:20,150 --> 00:50:18,079
interesting but

1689
00:50:21,190 --> 00:50:20,160
i find the arguments on both sides

1690
00:50:24,309 --> 00:50:21,200
compelling to

1691
00:50:25,589 --> 00:50:24,319
one degree or another but let's assume

1692
00:50:27,030 --> 00:50:25,599
for a moment that i needed to make

1693
00:50:28,790 --> 00:50:27,040
decisions based on this

1694
00:50:30,069 --> 00:50:28,800
how do i know in a situation like this

1695
00:50:31,589 --> 00:50:30,079
you know again this is a field where

1696
00:50:33,109 --> 00:50:31,599
knowledge is required but here we have

1697
00:50:34,790 --> 00:50:33,119
two eminent people

1698
00:50:36,390 --> 00:50:34,800
that both sound trustworthy and

1699
00:50:36,870 --> 00:50:36,400
knowledgeable disagreeing with each

1700
00:50:38,870 --> 00:50:36,880
other

1701
00:50:39,990 --> 00:50:38,880
what do i do about something like that

1702
00:50:43,030 --> 00:50:40,000
the short answer is there's

1703
00:50:44,230 --> 00:50:43,040
no you know easy rule of course the

1704
00:50:45,670 --> 00:50:44,240
longer answer is that

1705
00:50:47,670 --> 00:50:45,680
you end up just using this bundle of

1706
00:50:49,270 --> 00:50:47,680
heuristics different heuristics you

1707
00:50:49,829 --> 00:50:49,280
might lean on more in some domains than

1708
00:50:52,230 --> 00:50:49,839
others

1709
00:50:53,510 --> 00:50:52,240
one heuristic i use is like i may not

1710
00:50:55,670 --> 00:50:53,520
really understand the field

1711
00:50:57,190 --> 00:50:55,680
but i can look at the people supporting

1712
00:50:59,109 --> 00:50:57,200
one side and the other side

1713
00:51:01,910 --> 00:50:59,119
and i can kind of get a sense of do the

1714
00:51:03,670 --> 00:51:01,920
people supporting side a

1715
00:51:04,950 --> 00:51:03,680
seem more reasonable than the people

1716
00:51:07,109 --> 00:51:04,960
supporting side b

1717
00:51:07,990 --> 00:51:07,119
um that's a heuristic i often use i

1718
00:51:11,190 --> 00:51:08,000
often will

1719
00:51:11,829 --> 00:51:11,200
also just use just priors like if a

1720
00:51:15,270 --> 00:51:11,839
theory

1721
00:51:16,150 --> 00:51:15,280
is is really new and unusual i might say

1722
00:51:17,589 --> 00:51:16,160
like well

1723
00:51:19,589 --> 00:51:17,599
how often are really new and unusual

1724
00:51:22,230 --> 00:51:19,599
theories correct and

1725
00:51:23,990 --> 00:51:22,240
and if it's really rare then i might put

1726
00:51:25,430 --> 00:51:24,000
lower probability on that being true

1727
00:51:27,270 --> 00:51:25,440
even if again even if i don't really

1728
00:51:27,589 --> 00:51:27,280
understand the subject matter because

1729
00:51:29,270 --> 00:51:27,599
it's

1730
00:51:30,790 --> 00:51:29,280
outside of my area of expertise none of

1731
00:51:32,549 --> 00:51:30,800
these heuristics are guaranteed and i'm

1732
00:51:35,910 --> 00:51:32,559
applying them in kind of this

1733
00:51:36,549 --> 00:51:35,920
messy subjective way i'm kind of making

1734
00:51:38,309 --> 00:51:36,559
a lot of

1735
00:51:39,829 --> 00:51:38,319
educated guesses and i can't prove that

1736
00:51:42,390 --> 00:51:39,839
i'm right and that's okay

1737
00:51:43,349 --> 00:51:42,400
and that's inevitable but over time you

1738
00:51:44,950 --> 00:51:43,359
want to sort of

1739
00:51:46,630 --> 00:51:44,960
pay attention to which of your

1740
00:51:48,549 --> 00:51:46,640
heuristics seem to be

1741
00:51:50,549 --> 00:51:48,559
working out well like when you can

1742
00:51:52,230 --> 00:51:50,559
actually find the answer to something

1743
00:51:53,910 --> 00:51:52,240
uh you want to look at like well how

1744
00:51:55,430 --> 00:51:53,920
accurate were my heuristics in this case

1745
00:51:55,990 --> 00:51:55,440
like did they lead me astray or did they

1746
00:51:57,910 --> 00:51:56,000
help me

1747
00:51:59,670 --> 00:51:57,920
get the right answer um and over time

1748
00:52:01,430 --> 00:51:59,680
you kind of update your sticks and learn

1749
00:52:02,150 --> 00:52:01,440
which ones to rely more on or to rely

1750
00:52:03,670 --> 00:52:02,160
less on

1751
00:52:05,270 --> 00:52:03,680
the way i'm describing it it sounds

1752
00:52:06,069 --> 00:52:05,280
really pretty messy and qualitative and

1753
00:52:09,349 --> 00:52:06,079
it is

1754
00:52:12,150 --> 00:52:09,359
but a less messy and and somewhat more

1755
00:52:12,870 --> 00:52:12,160
more like analytical version of this

1756
00:52:15,030 --> 00:52:12,880
approach

1757
00:52:16,309 --> 00:52:15,040
is i think in the example of the super

1758
00:52:17,430 --> 00:52:16,319
forecasters that i wrote about in the

1759
00:52:20,150 --> 00:52:17,440
book these are the people

1760
00:52:21,349 --> 00:52:20,160
in the longitudinal multi-year

1761
00:52:23,510 --> 00:52:21,359
forecasting tournament

1762
00:52:25,190 --> 00:52:23,520
that was run by the government the

1763
00:52:28,549 --> 00:52:25,200
department of the us government called

1764
00:52:30,390 --> 00:52:28,559
darpa or irpa in which they

1765
00:52:32,870 --> 00:52:30,400
pitted teams of forecasters against each

1766
00:52:34,710 --> 00:52:32,880
other to see you know who was better at

1767
00:52:36,549 --> 00:52:34,720
predicting the outcomes of various world

1768
00:52:37,829 --> 00:52:36,559
events like you know which world leader

1769
00:52:39,510 --> 00:52:37,839
will be re-elected or

1770
00:52:41,510 --> 00:52:39,520
when the such-and-such civil war will

1771
00:52:42,230 --> 00:52:41,520
end etc and the super forecasters were

1772
00:52:44,870 --> 00:52:42,240
this team

1773
00:52:45,430 --> 00:52:44,880
that was recruited and led by among

1774
00:52:46,710 --> 00:52:45,440
other people

1775
00:52:48,549 --> 00:52:46,720
a political scientist named philip

1776
00:52:49,829 --> 00:52:48,559
tetlock and he called them the super

1777
00:52:51,190 --> 00:52:49,839
forecasters because they

1778
00:52:52,950 --> 00:52:51,200
just blew the competition out of the

1779
00:52:54,230 --> 00:52:52,960
water um and were

1780
00:52:56,069 --> 00:52:54,240
were more accurate at predicting

1781
00:52:57,270 --> 00:52:56,079
political and economic events than like

1782
00:52:59,829 --> 00:52:57,280
the cia's

1783
00:53:01,030 --> 00:52:59,839
analysts uh not to mention you know

1784
00:53:02,630 --> 00:53:01,040
professors who were

1785
00:53:04,069 --> 00:53:02,640
allegedly experts in politics and

1786
00:53:06,390 --> 00:53:04,079
economics over the years

1787
00:53:07,990 --> 00:53:06,400
um they were i think like 30 more

1788
00:53:09,270 --> 00:53:08,000
accurate than the cia despite not even

1789
00:53:10,630 --> 00:53:09,280
having access to the classified

1790
00:53:12,069 --> 00:53:10,640
information that the cia had

1791
00:53:13,990 --> 00:53:12,079
these are the kinds of things that super

1792
00:53:15,349 --> 00:53:14,000
forecasters talk about doing

1793
00:53:16,390 --> 00:53:15,359
uh when they make their forecast they

1794
00:53:17,510 --> 00:53:16,400
have certain heuristics they have

1795
00:53:19,190 --> 00:53:17,520
certain priors

1796
00:53:21,589 --> 00:53:19,200
they use to try to you know make their

1797
00:53:23,430 --> 00:53:21,599
guesses always with a corresponding

1798
00:53:25,270 --> 00:53:23,440
confidence level like they might say i'm

1799
00:53:27,270 --> 00:53:25,280
90 confident that such and such leader

1800
00:53:28,870 --> 00:53:27,280
will get reelected or i'm only 60

1801
00:53:30,950 --> 00:53:28,880
confident that civil war will end this

1802
00:53:31,910 --> 00:53:30,960
year et cetera over time they revise

1803
00:53:33,990 --> 00:53:31,920
those heuristics

1804
00:53:35,589 --> 00:53:34,000
and they learn when to rely more on

1805
00:53:37,910 --> 00:53:35,599
certain kinds of evidence or when to

1806
00:53:39,510 --> 00:53:37,920
rely less on it and that's just i think

1807
00:53:41,670 --> 00:53:39,520
the best you can do

1808
00:53:43,589 --> 00:53:41,680
but isn't the key i think i loved that

1809
00:53:45,670 --> 00:53:43,599
part of the the book where but

1810
00:53:47,670 --> 00:53:45,680
i thought to me the key in all of that

1811
00:53:48,710 --> 00:53:47,680
was that they constantly you you discuss

1812
00:53:51,270 --> 00:53:48,720
this how they

1813
00:53:52,069 --> 00:53:51,280
constantly update they they it's not

1814
00:53:55,190 --> 00:53:52,079
like they

1815
00:53:56,790 --> 00:53:55,200
say i'm 60 confident and that's it

1816
00:53:58,549 --> 00:53:56,800
they will constantly update their

1817
00:54:00,470 --> 00:53:58,559
prediction and they will constantly

1818
00:54:01,829 --> 00:54:00,480
update the margins of error

1819
00:54:03,829 --> 00:54:01,839
the the error bars around that

1820
00:54:04,390 --> 00:54:03,839
prediction as well perhaps that is the

1821
00:54:06,950 --> 00:54:04,400
answer

1822
00:54:07,990 --> 00:54:06,960
just be constantly update updating your

1823
00:54:10,470 --> 00:54:08,000
view and

1824
00:54:11,829 --> 00:54:10,480
be open to recalibrating yeah and i

1825
00:54:13,349 --> 00:54:11,839
guess an important distinction i should

1826
00:54:14,150 --> 00:54:13,359
make the super forecasters were trying

1827
00:54:16,549 --> 00:54:14,160
to be

1828
00:54:18,069 --> 00:54:16,559
as accurate as possible but you can

1829
00:54:20,309 --> 00:54:18,079
actually be well calibrated

1830
00:54:22,549 --> 00:54:20,319
without putting in nearly as much time

1831
00:54:23,829 --> 00:54:22,559
and effort as the super forecasters did

1832
00:54:25,670 --> 00:54:23,839
sorry i should just define being well

1833
00:54:26,630 --> 00:54:25,680
calibrated to be well calibrated means

1834
00:54:28,069 --> 00:54:26,640
to have the appropriate level of

1835
00:54:29,589 --> 00:54:28,079
confidence in your beliefs out of all

1836
00:54:30,230 --> 00:54:29,599
the times you say you're 60 sure of

1837
00:54:32,390 --> 00:54:30,240
something

1838
00:54:33,910 --> 00:54:32,400
you're actually right 60 of the time out

1839
00:54:35,589 --> 00:54:33,920
of all the times you say you're 90

1840
00:54:37,510 --> 00:54:35,599
sure you're actually right about 90 of

1841
00:54:38,950 --> 00:54:37,520
the time that's good calibration

1842
00:54:40,630 --> 00:54:38,960
you can practice your calibration

1843
00:54:42,150 --> 00:54:40,640
without having to become an expert in

1844
00:54:44,549 --> 00:54:42,160
something so you can take

1845
00:54:45,670 --> 00:54:44,559
a quiz of 40 trivia questions try to

1846
00:54:47,670 --> 00:54:45,680
guess the answer to

1847
00:54:49,190 --> 00:54:47,680
which country is bigger or which

1848
00:54:50,470 --> 00:54:49,200
invention came first or whatever and

1849
00:54:52,069 --> 00:54:50,480
even if you know very little

1850
00:54:54,150 --> 00:54:52,079
kind of try to make guesses and put a

1851
00:54:55,910 --> 00:54:54,160
confidence level down next to your guess

1852
00:54:57,510 --> 00:54:55,920
and most people when they first take a

1853
00:54:58,549 --> 00:54:57,520
calibration test are

1854
00:55:00,549 --> 00:54:58,559
pretty bad they're pretty poorly

1855
00:55:01,990 --> 00:55:00,559
calibrated usually they're overconfident

1856
00:55:02,950 --> 00:55:02,000
so they're they're not right nearly as

1857
00:55:04,470 --> 00:55:02,960
much as they think they're going to be

1858
00:55:06,549 --> 00:55:04,480
right but if you do a few of them

1859
00:55:08,549 --> 00:55:06,559
you quickly become very well calibrated

1860
00:55:09,829 --> 00:55:08,559
because you just kind of get a sense for

1861
00:55:11,670 --> 00:55:09,839
when is it appropriate for me to be

1862
00:55:12,470 --> 00:55:11,680
confident and when is it not how much do

1863
00:55:14,470 --> 00:55:12,480
i really know

1864
00:55:15,990 --> 00:55:14,480
that's kind of a domain general skill

1865
00:55:17,670 --> 00:55:16,000
being good at noticing like can i

1866
00:55:18,789 --> 00:55:17,680
justify being confident about this or do

1867
00:55:20,150 --> 00:55:18,799
i not really know very much

1868
00:55:21,910 --> 00:55:20,160
there aren't like hard and fast rules

1869
00:55:23,190 --> 00:55:21,920
for how to be well calibrated but you

1870
00:55:25,030 --> 00:55:23,200
it's a skill you pick up just through

1871
00:55:26,470 --> 00:55:25,040
practice you can choose to like put in

1872
00:55:28,470 --> 00:55:26,480
the time and effort on some fields to

1873
00:55:29,910 --> 00:55:28,480
try to become really accurate but

1874
00:55:32,069 --> 00:55:29,920
failing that you can at least be well

1875
00:55:34,390 --> 00:55:32,079
calibrated okay well i think

1876
00:55:35,349 --> 00:55:34,400
that's a good point to uh end this

1877
00:55:37,270 --> 00:55:35,359
interview on

1878
00:55:39,349 --> 00:55:37,280
before we wrap up i want to say how much

1879
00:55:42,549 --> 00:55:39,359
i enjoy your podcast on a regular basis

1880
00:55:43,430 --> 00:55:42,559
yeah and i the book uh i can't recommend

1881
00:55:44,470 --> 00:55:43,440
it highly enough

1882
00:55:46,309 --> 00:55:44,480
i want to make sure that people

1883
00:55:48,069 --> 00:55:46,319
understand that despite the fact that

1884
00:55:50,549 --> 00:55:48,079
it's very thought-provoking

1885
00:55:52,150 --> 00:55:50,559
and as i mentioned earlier i think it

1886
00:55:54,150 --> 00:55:52,160
has the potential to be transformative

1887
00:55:56,390 --> 00:55:54,160
if you dedicate yourself to

1888
00:55:58,309 --> 00:55:56,400
using the advice in it i think it's it's

1889
00:56:00,470 --> 00:55:58,319
v it's extremely readable it's it's

1890
00:56:02,309 --> 00:56:00,480
really enjoyable to just read through

1891
00:56:03,750 --> 00:56:02,319
i've read i'm a very slow reader i read

1892
00:56:05,510 --> 00:56:03,760
this through this very quickly and

1893
00:56:08,150 --> 00:56:05,520
listened to the to the audiobook

1894
00:56:08,950 --> 00:56:08,160
as well and now as i mentioned i also

1895
00:56:12,950 --> 00:56:08,960
photocopied

1896
00:56:13,829 --> 00:56:12,960
future reference because i think they

1897
00:56:15,750 --> 00:56:13,839
could

1898
00:56:17,510 --> 00:56:15,760
make a change in the way i think about

1899
00:56:19,270 --> 00:56:17,520
things and i speak as somebody who's

1900
00:56:21,430 --> 00:56:19,280
really dedicated the last 20 years of

1901
00:56:24,390 --> 00:56:21,440
their lives to critical thinking into

1902
00:56:25,349 --> 00:56:24,400
trying to be better in thinking finding

1903
00:56:27,190 --> 00:56:25,359
the truth and

1904
00:56:28,390 --> 00:56:27,200
living life according to what's true not

1905
00:56:30,150 --> 00:56:28,400
according to what's

1906
00:56:31,750 --> 00:56:30,160
uh what i would like to be true i can't

1907
00:56:32,549 --> 00:56:31,760
recommend the book and the podcast

1908
00:56:34,630 --> 00:56:32,559
highly enough

1909
00:56:35,589 --> 00:56:34,640
okay where can people find you if they

1910
00:56:38,230 --> 00:56:35,599
want to

1911
00:56:38,870 --> 00:56:38,240
listen and read your work well i'm julia

1912
00:56:41,430 --> 00:56:38,880
gailiff

1913
00:56:42,470 --> 00:56:41,440
on twitter and my website is julia

1914
00:56:44,870 --> 00:56:42,480
gayliff.com

1915
00:56:46,870 --> 00:56:44,880
my podcast is rationally speaking it's

1916
00:56:48,390 --> 00:56:46,880
uh rationallyspeakingpodcast.org

1917
00:56:50,630 --> 00:56:48,400
and my book is the scout mindset and you

1918
00:56:51,990 --> 00:56:50,640
can find it on amazon or

1919
00:56:53,349 --> 00:56:52,000
hopefully lots of other booksellers

1920
00:56:53,990 --> 00:56:53,359
although now i'm worried that it's sold

1921
00:56:56,150 --> 00:56:54,000
out

1922
00:56:57,829 --> 00:56:56,160
no no it was just it wasn't so it was

1923
00:56:59,430 --> 00:56:57,839
sold out for the moment they actually

1924
00:57:00,549 --> 00:56:59,440
said you will take another two weeks or

1925
00:57:03,589 --> 00:57:00,559
something like that and

1926
00:57:05,589 --> 00:57:03,599
i didn't want to wait so okay okay good

1927
00:57:06,950 --> 00:57:05,599
and uh it's been a pleasure so uh so

1928
00:57:08,470 --> 00:57:06,960
great to be on your show so much

1929
00:57:24,870 --> 00:57:08,480
and all the best and thank you very much

1930
00:57:28,390 --> 00:57:26,549
thank you to a ransom gift for that

1931
00:57:29,430 --> 00:57:28,400
fascinating interview with the author

1932
00:57:31,349 --> 00:57:29,440
julia galif

1933
00:57:33,589 --> 00:57:31,359
and don't forget the regular episode of

1934
00:57:35,990 --> 00:57:33,599
the skeptic zone will be out on time

1935
00:57:37,750 --> 00:57:36,000
this weekend but for now this is richard

1936
00:57:43,349 --> 00:57:37,760
saunders the producer signing off

1937
00:57:46,549 --> 00:57:45,109
you've been listening to the skeptic

1938
00:57:49,789 --> 00:57:46,559
zone podcast

1939
00:57:51,190 --> 00:57:49,799
please visit our website at

1940
00:57:54,230 --> 00:57:51,200
www.skepticzone.tv

1941
00:57:56,230 --> 00:57:54,240
for show notes contacts and to access

1942
00:57:59,750 --> 00:57:56,240
the back catalog of episodes

1943
00:58:01,829 --> 00:57:59,760
going back to 2008 you can follow the

1944
00:58:05,270 --> 00:58:01,839
skeptic zone podcast on twitter

1945
00:58:08,789 --> 00:58:05,280
at skepticzone visit our facebook page

1946
00:58:10,230 --> 00:58:08,799
or leave a review on itunes you can also

1947
00:58:13,430 --> 00:58:10,240
support the skeptic zone

1948
00:58:14,789 --> 00:58:13,440
via patreon or paypal the skeptic zone

1949
00:58:17,190 --> 00:58:14,799
podcast is an

1950
00:58:19,270 --> 00:58:17,200
independent production the views and

1951
00:58:21,270 --> 00:58:19,280
opinions expressed on the skeptic zone

1952
00:58:22,549 --> 00:58:21,280
are not necessarily those of australian