Think Again

Introduction

Think Again, written by Adam Grant, is a book about the benefits of doubt.

• Adam Grants argues that the ability to learn, unlearn and adapt our thinking is critical in our ever-changing world.
• The book serves as an open invitation to abandon stale opinions and instead value mental flexibility, humility and curiosity over blind consistency.
• It delves into how we can become more comfortable with the unknown and even find joy in being wrong.
• If knowledge is power, knowing what you do not know is wisdom.

The First-Instinct Fallacy

Intelligence is traditionally viewed as the ability to think and learn.

• The smarter you are, the more complex the problems you can solve, and the faster you can solve them.
• Yet, in a turbulent world, another set of cognitive skills might matter more: the ability to rethink and unlearn.

When answering multiple-choice questions, experience shows that many students who change their answers end up choosing the wrong one.

• However, research suggests that trusting first instinct can actually hurt your performance. This is because most answer revisions are from wrong to right, a phenomenon known as the first-instinct fallacy.
• Second guesses are often better only because students are generally reluctant to switch answers and only do so when they are fairly confident. The key is not simply changing answers, but considering whether a change is necessary.

In most circumstances, we hesitate at the very idea of rethinking.

• To illustrate, once we learn something and accept it as the truth, we rarely bother to question it.
• Under acute stress, people typically revert to their automatic, well-learned responses.
• Part of the problem is cognitive laziness. We often prefer the ease of hanging on to old views over the difficulty of grappling with new ones.
• Questioning ourselves also requires us to admit that the facts may have changed, that what was once right may now be wrong.

Individual Rethinking: Updating Our Own Views

From Preachers, Prosecutors and Politicians to Scientists

Progress is impossible without change; and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything. -- George Bernard Shaw

Most of us take pride in our knowledge and expertise, and in staying true to our beliefs and opinions.

• However, living in a rapidly changing world where knowledge is increasing at ever-increasing rate, we need to question our beliefs more readily than ever before.
• Therefore, we need to spend as much time rethinking as we do thinking.

We question the judgement of experts readily by seeking a second opinion on a medical diagnosis. Unfortunately, when it comes to our own knowledge and opinions, we often favour feeling right over being right.

• We often slip into the mindsets of 3 different professions, which potentially contribute to ill-fated decision.
• Preachers
• When our sacred beliefs are in jeopardy, we deliver sermons to protect and promote our ideals.
• Prosecutors
• When we recognize flaws in other people's reasoning, we marshal arguments to prove them wrong and win our case (the debunking and discrediting mode).
• Politicians
• When seeking to win over an audience, we campaign and lobby for the approval of our constituents.
• The risk is that we become so wrapped up in preaching that we are right, prosecuting others who are wrong, and politicking for support that we do not bother to rethink our own views.

On the other hand, for scientists, rethinking is a fundamental to their profession.

• They are expected to doubt what they know, be curious about what they do not know, and update their views based on new data. The flexibility to change their minds is the key underlying principle.
• Rather than simply trusting in the results, they run experiments to test hypotheses to discover knowledge.
• They seek systematic analysis and seek out more perspectives from credible sources, instead of gambling.

In psychology, there are at least two biases that drive intelligent people the pattern of failure to interpret the results that contradict their views, and contour their intelligence into a weapon against the truth.

• Confirmation bias: seeing what we expect to see.
• Desirability bias: seeing what we want to see.

Smart people are more likely to fall into this trap.

• The brighter you are, the harder it can be to see your own limitations.
• We can easily find reasons to preach our faith more deeply.
• Being good at thinking can make you worse at rethinking.

Therefore, to think like a scientist involves being actively open-minded and willing to disagree with your own arguments.

• It requires searching for reasons why you might be wrong, not for reasons why you must be right - and revising your views based on what you learn.

Beyond Dunning-Kruger: The Sweet Spot of Confidence

In theory, confidence and competence go hand in hand, but in practice, they often diverge.

• Similar to Anton's syndrome, we all could have blind spots in our knowledge and opinions, yet remains oblivious to them. This fosters false confidence in our judgement and hinders rethinking (armchair quarterback syndrome).
• On the other extreme, self-doubt and low confidence can make us fail to recognize relevant skills and experience that others see in us, leading to an inferiority complex (impostor syndrome).
• Hence, the ideal level of confidence lies in between these extremes.

Based on the Dunning-Kruger effect, it is when we lack competence that we are most likely to be overflowing with confidence.

• Fueld by ego and arrogance, the more superior participants believed their knowledge to be, the more they overestimated themselves - and the less interested they were in learning and updating.
• Those absolute beginners rarely fall into the Dunning-Kruger trap because they recognize their lack of experience and tend to underestimate themselves.
• It is when we progress from novice to amateur that we become overconfident with our false sense of mastery (our confidence climbs faster than competence).

The sweet spot of confidence is when you can be confident in your ability to achieve a goal in the future while maintaining the humility to question whether you have the right tools in the present.

• One of the Latin roots of humility means "from the earth". It is about being grounded - recognizing that we are flawed and fallible.
• Rather than being certain in our existing knowledge, we should seek help and actively engage with reading materials that contradicts our opinions to gain new knowledge and insight.
• We can actually thrive on the growth that comes from embracing self-doubt.

The quest for knowledge should be a life-long journey, where we can constantly learn something new from others.

• We should not boast about how much we know, but marvel at how little we understand.

The Unexpected Upside of Being Wrong

The goal is not to be wrong more often, but it is to recognize that we are all wrong more often than we would like to admit.

• Growing up, we were determined to be right all the time.
• Additionally, we fear that others will find out we were wrong and damage our reputations.
• Therefore, it becomes difficult for us to accept our own fallibility in a core belief
  

Counterintuitively, realizing we are wrong should lead us to being less wrong than before (which becomes a beneficial learning experience).

• Laughing at ourselves reminds us not to take ourselves too seriously.
• Instead of beating ourselves up about our mistakes, we can turn some of our past misconceptions into sources of present amusement.

Mistakes, though painful, are essential for progress.

The Power of Constructive Conflict: When Disagreement Breeds Progress

A meta-analysis reveals that while relationship conflict generally hinders performance, some task conflict can actually be beneficial. Task conflict is linked to increased creativity and better decision-making.

• Relationship conflict is fuelled by emotions, making us defensive and dismissive of opposing viewpoints.
• Task conflict, on the other hand, focuses on the issue at hand, fostering a diversity of ideas. This prevents us from falling into the trap of overconfidence and helps us uncover the truth.

Agreeable people are valuable for fostering a great support network.

• However, their desire to avoid conflict may not challenge our expertise or push us to consider new perspectives, thus hindering growth.

Similarly, power imbalances can silence dissenting voices.

• People lacking power or status may suppress their disagreements to conform to the "HIPPO" (Highest Paid Person's Opinion). Sometimes, they have no other choice if they want to survive.

Unfortunately, we learn more from people who challenge our thought process than those who affirm our conclusions.

• Strong leaders understand this and actively engage with their critics to build a stronger team.

Agreeable is about seeking social harmony, not cognitive consensus.

• Sometimes, the absence of conflict signifies apathy, not peace.

However, a major problem with task conflict is that its potential to escalate into unproductive relationship conflict.

Interpersonal Rethinking: Opening Other People's Mind

Shifting Minds, Not Winning Arguments

We often approach persuasion like a battle, aiming to overpower with logic and rigorous data.

• But this adversarial approach backfires. People shut down, defending their beliefs or retreating entirely, sometimes by simply telling us what we want to hear without genuine change.
• The harder we push, the more resistance we encounter.

Effective persuasion is more akin to a negotiation.

• Skilled negotiators seek common ground, not victory, to open minds to new possibilities.
• While piling on reasons may seem logical, it creates opportunities to pick apart your points. The more reasons you put on the table, the easier it is for people to dismiss the weakest one. Once one justifications is rejected, the whole case can be dismissed.
• Asking questions, though seemingly less assertive, is a powerful tool. It encourages your partner to think critically and potentially reach new conclusions themselves.

The most persuasive arguments often come from within.

• Effectively, you should not dictate what someone should think. Instead, give them the freedom to choose a stance, subtly guiding them to consider a different perspective.
• For example, start by acknowledging the validity of their points, then explore potential challenges or limitations in practice.
• The goal is not to prove them definitely wrong, but to plant the seed of doubt and invite exploration.
• People are more receptive to change they arrive at through their own reasoning, due to the sense of ownership.

By communicating ideas with some uncertainty, you signal confident humility, invite curiosity, and lead to a richer, more nuanced discussion.

Divided by Groups, United by Understanding

Humans are social creatures with a natural drive for belonging and status.

• We often identify with groups, finding pride in their successes and forming rivalries with similar, geographically close competitors.
• This can lead to stereotyping the "out-groups" and developing prejudices based on limited information.

Furthermore, strongly held beliefs, especially those tied to our group identity, become even harder to change.

• Ironically, we become particularly hostile when defending opinions that we know may not be entirely accurate.
• We tend to gravitate towards people who share our views, which can solidify and even extremify existing biases through a phenomenon known as group polarization.

Fortunately, encountering a person who defies our stereotypes can trigger a re-evaluation.

• It may not be an overnight process, but these new experiences prompt us to question our assumptions and update our views.
• Here is the key question: "Why would I hate someone I do not even truly know?"
• Disliking someone based solely on their single characteristic (e.g. race, sports team preference) is simply unfair.
• Shared experiences and perspectives can bridge the gap between rivals, fostering meaningful relationships.

Empowering Change By Listening

Motivational interviewing is powerful tool used by health professionals to help individuals make positive behaviour changes, such as quitting smoking, overcoming alcohol abuse or adopting safer sexual practices.

Motivational interviewing operates on a key principle: We can rarely motivate someone else to change.

• People naturally resist pressure and the feeling that being controlled (the deep-seated need for autonomy and freedom).
• Therefore, instead of issuing commands or offering recommendations, motivational interviewing focuses on helping individuals discover their own internal motivation for change.

This approach replaces confrontation and negativity with 4 core techniques.

• Ask open-ended questions that encourage elaboration with an attitude of humility and curiosity.
• Engage in reflective listening to their answers.
• Affirm the person's desire and capacity for change.
• Periodically summarize your understanding of their motivations and inquire about their plans and possible next steps.

Empathy, non-judgement and attentive listening are crucial for building trust.

• This starts with genuine interest in others' perspectives, not attempts to judge their status or assert your own.
• The power of listening lies in providing space for self-reflection, demonstrating respect and expressing care.
• Resists the "righting reflex" to swoop in with solutions. Often, people seek empathy, not answers.
• Let go of the assumption that you know what is best for them.

Collective Thinking: Creating Communities of Lifelong Learners

Embracing Complexity of Reality

Binary bias, the human tendency to simplify complex issues into two categories (good/bad, right/wrong), can hinder our understanding of the world.

• Fortunately, exposing audiences to a range of perspectives on a topic can prompt them to reconsider their initial stances.

Introducing complexity disrupts cycles of overconfidence and spurs rethinking cycles.

• It cultivates humility about our knowledge, fosters healthy scepticism of our opinions, and ignites a curiosity that propels us toward uncovering missing information.

Perhaps counterintuitively, embracing complexity does not diminish the persuasiveness of speakers and writers.

• In fact, it enhances their credibility.
• By acknowledging the nuances of a topic, they demonstrate intellectual honesty and a deeper understanding of the issue at hand.

Beyond Textbooks: Cultivating Curiosity and Rethinking in Education

Throughout our education, we are conditioned to view textbooks as infallible sources of truth.

• However, even in in education, curriculum updates and textbook revisions cag lag years behind historical revelation and scientific breakthroughs.

By recognising that knowledge is constantly evolving, we can encourage students to think critically like scientists and questioning the information they learn in school.

• Educators should foster rethinking cycles by instilling intellectual humility, encouraging healthy doubt, and cultivating curiosity.
• These practices extend far beyond the classroom, empowering students to make informed choices in all aspects of life, both social and professional.
• Interestingly, students with perfect grades may struggle to question established practices or conventional knowledge. Fearing the possibility of being wrong, they often settle into the system, neglecting the value of critical thinking and innovation.

Ultimately, education is more than just accumulating information.

• Good teachers introduce new ideas, while great teachers ignite curiosity and equip students with the tools for lifelong learning, fostering new ways of thinking.
• This process is akin to refining a draft - a continuous cycle of learning, revision, and growth.

Fostering Psychological Safety in Teams

Psychological safety is not a matter of relaxing standards, making people comfortable, being nice and agreeable, or giving unconditional praise.

• At its core, psychological safety is about building a team environment where trust, respect, and openness flourish.
• Here, individuals feel empowered to voice concerns, suggest improvements, and even admit mistakes without fear of retribution.
• It is the foundation of a learning culture, where growth is the core value and rethinking cycles are routine.
• Mistakes become opportunities for improvement, not sources of shame.

Performance-driven cultures, on the other hand, often emphasize results and undermine psychological safety.

• Witnessing others punished for missteps creates an atmosphere of fear and discourages individuals from taking risks or admitting errors.
• This fear manifests in various ways:
• We become fixated on proving our competence and protecting our careers.
• We hold back questions and concerns, afraid to speak up.
• We cling to established best practices, neglecting the potential for improvement.
• We hesitate to challenge authority figures, particularly superiors.
• In psychologically unsafe environments, mistakes become buried secrets. People conceal problems to avoid blame, hindering efforts to identify root causes and prevent future occurrences. Teams become stuck in a cycle of repeating errors.
• Furthermore, a blind reliance on established routines can be equally detrimental. Teams can become overconfident, clinging to assumptions instead of critically re-evaluating their approach in light of new information.

Rethinking Our Life Paths

Since a young age, we all develop ideas about who we want to be and how we envision our lives unfolding (e.g. careers, education, marriage and kids).

• However, the danger of these identify foreclosure is that they can create tunnel vision, blinding us to a wealth of alternative possibilities.
• To illustrate, as we get older, our focus often shifts towards searching for meaning in life.

When we dedicate ourselves to a specific plan and it does not go as expected, our initial reaction is usually not to rethink it.

• Instead, we tend to double down, investing more resources into the plan. This pattern is known as escalation of commitment.
• Escalation of commitment occurs because we are inherently rationalizing creatures. We constantly seek self-justifications for our past beliefs, attempting to soothe our egos, protect our self-image, and validate our previous decisions.
• Moreover, by the time people realize they are in a poor fit, they may feel it is too late to think again. The stakes seem too high to walk away; the sacrifices made in terms of salary, status, skill, and time appear insurmountable.

Nonetheless, there is a fine line between heroic persistence and foolish stubbornness.

• Sometimes the truest form of grit lies in acknowledging the situation, accepting the sunk cost and changing course.
• Remember, it is better to lose the progress of the past than to waste more resources (times, energy and money).

In essence, both at work and in life, the best approach is to plan for what we want to learn and contribute in the next year or two, while remaining open to what the future may hold.

• Our identities and lives are not fixed entities; they are open systems that can evolve. We do not have to remain chained to outdated visions of who we want to be or where we want to go.
• It takes humility to reconsider past commitments, a healthy dose of doubt to question current decisions, and a spirit of curiosity to reimagine future plans.

Summary

Rethinking of knowledge and opinions should be a seamless part (or regular habit) of our intellectual journey once it is fixated as a mindset.

• It should be readily done as we refresh our wardrobes when they go out of style and renovate our kitchens when they are no longer in vogue.
• This continuous process allows us to generate new solutions to old problems and revisit old solutions in the light of new information, ultimately leading to a more comprehensive understanding of the world around us.

In the age of artificial intelligence, the ability to think again is more crucial than ever.

• As AI systems provide us with answers, we must be equipped to evaluate them critically.