Strong beliefs help loosely… and multiple beliefs harmoniously
/By Duncan Anderson. To see all blogs click here.
One Sentence Summary: ideas and beliefs can always be updated, so try not to attach your ego to them by thinking there is a right / wrong!
Definitions:
Fact: there is a known right / wrong.
Eg today is Tuesday. Eg the coffee costs $4.00.
Idea (belief): there is no right / wrong. Ideas can always be upgraded and often it makes sense to have multiple schools of thought for each Idea.
Eg how to best spend a Tuesday. Eg how to make the best coffee. Eg How to live a good life.
Even physics is an ‘Idea’. There was Newtonian physics => Relativity => Quantum Mechanics => String Theory etc etc. There is no ‘right’ for physics, the Idea can be constantly updated.
Overview of steps:
1. Build belief for a problem space (typically start with the prevailing orthodoxy) / identify a belief you have for a particular situation/thing
2. Sense check where the belief for works and doesn’t work.
Why do you have this belief? “Everything works somewhere nothing works everywhere.”
3. Find a second belief (school of thought) that can help you understand the gaps in your current belief.
Do the two beliefs overlap? “The opposite of a profound truth is another profound truth.”
4. Understand the pros / cons of each belief and where they work / don’t. Not just ‘strong beliefs held loosely’ but ‘multiple beliefs held harmoniously’.
++++++++++
Details
“Strong beliefs held loosely”
IMO normally one goes from not knowing about a topic and therefore being open minded (ie no knowledge = open minded)...
… to having a stronger and stronger belief and corresponding ‘confidence’ in the belief about a topic (ie knowledge = close minded).
Unfortunately I think this is normally counter productive.
This is where the saying ‘strong beliefs held loosely’ comes from. IMO you want to go have increasing knowledge about a topic (ie increase confidence and belief) but remain open minded to new information and different points of view (ie flexible to change your view, aka held loosely).
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” Voltaire
Learning about the world is so much fun… but learning about it in an unhealthy fashion can lead one to be locked in a prison of others beliefs; confirmation biasing and defending “your” beliefs to a negative sum life :(!?!
What I try to do:
1. Learn about a new area / problem space and understand the prevailing orthodoxy / ‘school of thought’ / doctrine / belief.
Example:
Nuclear weapons are bad, therefore Governments should regulate nuclear weapons. So government regulate everything?
2. Once I think I understand a ‘school of thought’ I then try to find where it doesn’t work.
“Everything works somewhere, nothing works everywhere.”
IMO one shouldn’t hold a view / belief unless one knows where it doesn’t work.
How to do things badly: fit a ‘belief’ everywhere in a blunt fashion.
Your map will fit some terrain, it won’t fit all terrain.
Example:
The government should ban proliferation of nuclear weapons, so the government should ban alcohol (aka prohibition in the US). Alcohol can be made in anyone’s basement, nuclear weapons can’t. Effectively banning alcohol proved not possible and a second order consequence was the rise of the major US crime families which are still kicking today (more than 100 years later). Ok so the government can effectively ban some things (eg nuclear weapons) but not others (eg alcohol).
3. Once you have a decent understanding of one ‘school of thought’ / belief (eg what it is and where it doesn’t work) then it’s time to find another school of thought that you can apply to the problem space.
“The opposite of a profound truth is another profound truth.”
“I never allow myself to have an opinion on anything that I don’t know the other side’s argument better than they do.” Charlie Munger
Example:
The government should regulate some areas saying ‘this isn’t allowed’ (nuclear weapons production) and regulate others saying ‘this is allowed but with certain rules’ (eg alcohol production, no sales to minors)... but should there be areas where the government doesn’t need to regulate? Ie that markets can be self regulating?
“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest.” Adam Smith
In ‘The Wealth Of Nations’ Adam Smith put forward a concept that ‘looking after one’s own self interest IS looking after society's interest’, ie the two are aligned. Ie that markets can be self regulating.
Basically, ‘School of thought 1: government regulation needed for good society outcomes’ vs ‘School of thought 2: government regulation not needed for good society outcomes’. Hmmm…
4. Now it’s time to see where each of these schools of thought work well and don’t work well and compare and contrast.
“One person’s trash is another’s treasure.”
Example:
It makes sense that the government regulates the creation of all new home loans. It doesn’t make sense the the government regulate the creation of all new businesses.
In other words you have to pick regulation that works well for different circumstances, but get out of the way in other places. Basically, it’s complicated and messy!
Good government = good. Bad government = bad. Not a blunt ‘all government = good’ or ‘all government = bad’.
5. Try to dissociate your ego from any ‘beliefs’ / ‘schools of thought’
I sometimes think of there being two types of knowledge: Facts and Ideas.
Fact = there is a known right answer. Eg today is Sunday.
Idea = there isn’t a known right answer. Eg how best to spend a Sunday.
Even things like physics are Ideas. Eg Newtonian physics => Relativity => Quantum Mechanics => String Theory etc etc.
For ‘Ideas’ IMO it’s best try not to attach any part of your identity to them. IMO Ideas can always be updated (eg see physics) and should be balanced with other Ideas / beliefs that help further explain a problem space.
If someone says it’s Sunday but it’s Monday gently correct them.
If someone says ‘the government should run everything always’ gently try and put forward a place where it might not be best for the government to run something… hint: the person you are likely talking to most is yourself!
“Make your interests gradually wider and more impersonal, until bit by bit the walls of the ego recede, and your life becomes increasingly merged in the universal life.” Bertrand Russel.
IMO the existing schooling system inculcates that there is a right and wrong answer. For Facts I agree, for Ideas I don’t. IMO this programming is deep in society and is net net negative. Eg see what happens if a politician changes their mind on a topic!
I don’t want to be defined by my beliefs, I want to be defined by trying to hold many beliefs on the one area and trying to understand why others have their beliefs. “The ability to change your mind is a superpower.” Ray Dalio
One should try to be tolerant of the intolerant. :)
I hope to constantly learn about the world and myself, I hope to constantly update and build new believes. I hope to change my mind on many many things. I hope to become increasingly tolerant!
I hope to have ‘strong beliefs held loosely’ and ‘multiple beliefs held harmoniously’ :).
Here is another ‘lens’ on this concept, from Harvard Professor Robert Kegan:
Stage 1: I am unaware of the rules (beliefs, schools of thought, etc)
Stage 2: I am aware of the rules but not how the rules related to each other.
Stage 3-5:
Another lens - Perfectionism vs Sufficiency
For Facts you can have right / wrong.
For Ideas there is no such thing, so you need to stop at ‘sufficient’.
For example most of secondary school physics is Newtonian Physics. This has many ‘holes’ in it, it is not a perfect reflection of reality. However it can still be very useful. So at times Newtonian Physics can be the best level to use, it is sufficient!
I try to embrace the idea that I'll never know what is ‘right’ for an ‘Idea’... and that often when someone has a different view that is an opportunity to learn more about the idea, not that someone is ignorant!
One thing to take away: for Ideas try not to think you know the answer or that there is a right / wrong. Try instead to constantly upgrade your understanding and add new schools of thought to your repertoire.
… and a fun exercise I do from time to time:
Think about someone you really dislike (eg in politics) and find something they believe that you agree with. Eg if you are left leaning find a policy from the right you really believe. And if you are right leaning visa versa.
For your best friend, find something they believe that you strongly disagree with… and then watch the mental acrobatics you perform justifying why they are a good person… then think about if you met a stranger and found out they believed this what you’d think of them! Yes your friend is still a good person despite this belief but that random is a d!ck and representative of what is wrong with the world… chew on your bias for a minute :)
… ok and one more for fun :)
IMO if you don't know what your biases are it's because you are blind to them, not that you don't have any. Blind bias is the most dangerous kind!
IMO for an Idea, if you don't think you can be wrong, you are likely highly biased.
IMO you should be trying to find where you are close minded (ie have bias, ie believe something strongly) and attempt to open your mind there. Ie systematically try turn close mindedness into open mindedness.
This doesn't mean you can have a strong belief, but ideally it's held loosely… And with multiple other beliefs harmoniously :)