I’ve been helping with a new book on problem-solving (it’s months away, so don’t get too excited yet), and my radar for jumping-to-conclusions has been on overdrive lately.

At a few gatherings with friends, I overheard the following:

“Kasich is probably the best alternative for the Republicans at this point.”

“Unless you’re a woman or work in a union.”

It’s a pretty decisive jump, and very good at shutting down a conversation, putting someone on the defensive, and scoring points. As it happens, Kasich won his gubernatorial election in 2014 with a strong edge among women and more support among union households than he did in his first race. So it’s not only an oversimplification, but it’s probably not entirely accurate, either.

The other one I heard a few days back:

“I’m frustrated with Netanyahu’s policy of building in the West Bank. It feels like apartheid.”

“So you don’t mind if Israel is destroyed?”

Yet another friend was told that supporting Republicans meant that they wanted to “murder black babies.” A number of Democrats I know have been told that they must want to turn the United States into a Soviet-style communist state. It obviously gets pretty silly.

Such knee-jerk reactions when we hear something we don’t like are fairly natural. But they’re based on a fairly absurd caricature of people that seem to disagree with us: when we go tribal, we disarm ourselves of critical thinking. Unless we are on our guard, we will shut down our brains and kill any chance of learning or convincing.

You might be surprised to find people supporting candidates or holding certain positions for reasons you hadn’t guessed. This PhD immigrant, for example, is supporting Trump, and is happy to tell you why. Some traditionally-conservative Republicans are supporting Sanders.

Next time you hear someone take a position and your brain jumps to, “ah, so you must…” try asking an elaborating question instead. You may be delighted at the results.

–Erik

Erik Fogg

Erik Fogg is co-author of ReConsider’s written work, co-host of the ReConsider podcast and author of Wedged: How you became a tool of the partisan Political Establishment and How to Start Thinking for Yourself Again. Erik has a masters degree in political science from MIT and has spent years working with various NGOs, Harvard, MIT, United Nations and various private advocacy groups organizations. He’s ghost-written published books. He’s now running a software startup. Erik grew up in a very red part of Pennsylvania and moved to a very blue part of Massachusetts. Having a foot in both worlds has enabled Erik to see how both sides of the political spectrum caricature the other and has sparked his mission to create a real dialogue that cuts through the noise. Erik podcasts from his office in suburban San Mateo, surrounded by 17th and 18th-century European art, a costume-construction toolkit and table, a VR kit, and a small bed for his Boston Terrier, Oscar.

View Comments

Recent Posts

Ukraine XI: Asymmetric Momentum

Ukrainian victories on the ground have been swift, dramatic, and devastating. And each win seems…

1 year ago

Ukraine X: The Absolutely Dazzling Counter-Blitzkrieg

The Russians just got whipped. What the heck happened?

1 year ago

ReConsidering Russia: The Complex History of Russia

Mark Schauss is the host of Russian Rulers History and Battle Ground History. Known for…

1 year ago

Ukraine IX: Oh HI, MARS

https://play.acast.com/s/d1a6ddca-f102-4b5c-8d87-630132fe5aaa/62f43f685dc1ea00136539f2 Hot Updates Severodonetsk fell slowly as expected, but then Lysychansk fell quickly because Russian…

1 year ago

It Was the Best of Times, It Was the Worst of Times, Part 2

https://embed.acast.com/d1a6ddca-f102-4b5c-8d87-630132fe5aaa/62d0a6529385dd0012e405d1 Lots of ways we can split this. Much has been discussed about decoupling of…

1 year ago