Adversarial Collaboration: An EDGE Lecture by Daniel Kahneman

the laboratory already intuit that most ideas don’t pan out, and those that do sometimes result from chance or charitable interpretations. Conversely, they also recognize that replicability means they’re really onto something.

I then went back to my scientific training and began to reframe my opinions as working hypotheses. I changed my vocabulary to reflect this mental shift. At conferences, instead of saying “I argue…,” I began to say “This paper hypothesizes.…” In my case, this subtle verbal tweak tricked my mind into separating my arguments from my personal identity.

Refuting a point of view produces antibodies against future influence attempts. We become more certain of our opinions and less curious about alternative views. Counterarguments no longer surprise us or stump us—we have our rebuttals ready.

Replacing the “natural,” that is age-old, processes that have survived trillions of high-dimensional stressors with something in a “peer-reviewed” journal that may not survive replication or statistical scrutiny is neither science nor good practice.

Deep canvassing starts by asking sensitive questions, listening to the answers with real interest, and then asking follow-up questions as a way to start a conversation. Why is this approach more likely to be effective? Because in the standard argumentative approach we tend to start counterarguing (at least in our heads, but sometimes out loud, too)