They can hold two or more conflicting concepts in their mind

Monday, August 6th, 2018

Closed-minded people would never consider that they could actually be closed-minded. In his book Principles, Ray Dalio lays out ways you can tell the difference between the open- and closed-minded:

  • Closed-minded people don’t want their ideas challenged. They are typically frustrated that they can’t get the other person to agree with them instead of curious as to why the other person disagrees.
  • Closed-minded people are more likely to make statements than ask questions.
  • Open-minded people genuinely believe they could be wrong; the questions that they ask are genuine.
  • Closed-minded people focus much more on being understood than on understanding others.
  • Open-minded people feel compelled to see things through others’ eyes.
  • Closed-minded people say things like “I could be wrong … but here’s my opinion.” This is a classic cue I hear all the time. It’s often a perfunctory gesture that allows people to hold their own opinion while convincing themselves that they are being open-minded. If your statement starts with “I could be wrong”…, you should probably follow it with a question and not an assertion.
  • Open-minded people know when to make statements and when to ask questions.
  • Closed-minded people block others from speaking.
  • Open-minded people are always more interested in listening than in speaking.
  • Closed-minded people have trouble holding two thoughts simultaneously in their minds.
  • Open-minded people can take in the thoughts of others without losing their ability to think well — they can hold two or more conflicting concepts in their mind and go back and forth between them to assess their relative merits.
  • Closed-minded people lack a deep sense of humility.
  • Open-minded people approach everything with a deep-seated fear that they may be wrong.

Comments

  1. Harry Jones says:

    So many of these indicators of open-mindedness could be faked, once everyone knows what they are. It’s easy to fake humility, for example. And it’s easy to pretend to listen.

    And some of the indicators of closed-mindedness match reasonable behavior. Suppose an idiot is babbling at the top of his voice about UFOs in his underwear drawer or something, and you need to inform everyone of a car with lights on in the parking lot. In order to be heard, you need to shut the idiot up, or at least shout louder than him. There you are, blocking others from speaking. It’s the bandwidth problem. Sometimes free speech is zero sum.

    Me, I suspect this whole closed-minded vs open-minded dichotomy. Drawing conclusions about the world is an important mental process. We’d have a hard time functioning without it. To draw a conclusion is to close one’s mind on a particular question. And all of empirical science is based on the idea that if you can reproduce something in the lab over and over again, then anyone who says it isn’t so is suspect. Repeated experience gradually closes a rational mind.

    If you’re of a Bayesian bent, you always maintain a philosophical doubt. But beyond a certain point, the philosophical doubt gets lost in the background noise. Are there actually UFOs in the idiot’s underwear drawer? You may never know for sure, but you have to operate on the more plausible theory.

  2. HCM says:

    This is stupid. The whole idea of open mindedness as a virtue is liberal dogma to give themselves the power to decide what is right and what is wrong. Any traditional value is closed minded, anything upending the social order is open minded. Open mindedness is about as useful of a concept as racism.

    And setting that aside, the “closed minded” traits just decribe someone who is right. If I spend all day arguing that 2+2=5 you are going to look awfully “closed minded” in your reactions.

  3. Harry Jones says:

    I propose a substitute for the virtue of open-mindedness: empiricism. Admire those of an empirical mindset while despising those who reject reality checks.

    Let your mind be first open to experience, and then closed by experience.

    Be humble toward the universe, and haughty toward lesser minds.

  4. Wang Wei Lin says:

    Harry Jones: I was thinking along the same lines. If you accept facts as true–empirical observation–then what’s the point of considering a diametric view? There. Are. Four. Lights.

  5. Kirk says:

    I really dislike the way this is framed, here. Not to mention, the fact that this Ray Dalio character is a hedge fund manager, and this excerpt is from a New York Times touted “bestseller”… Well, color me a little skeptical. The sourcing of this does not fill me with either awe or confidence in the background–Most of the New York financial types I’ve met out in the real world are more like really good con men than they are people I’d either let into my house, or sit down and discuss things with.

    To my mind, the things they’re saying here that are indicative of an open mind are things I associate with utter f**king idiocy.

    The usual run of this crap is that I hear some utterly idiotic idea being put forth by the supposedly (and, self-declaredly…) “open-minded”, such as “Let’s put women into combat arms jobs, where they’ll have a strong likelihood of seeing direct combat…”, I refute it and point out the various issues with the idea/concept, and then I am promptly excoriated for not having an “open mind” on the subject.

    Openness can very often equate to utter vacuity, in my experience.

    Then, too… Every time someone tells me that they have an “open mind”, wellllll… Usually, they don’t. It’s a warning sign–Guy that says he’s open-minded is usually like that biblically guilty man, who fleeth where no man pursues.

    If you have to tell other people you’re open-minded about things… Well, usually, you aren’t. You’re just mouthing the words, in pious hope that they let you get away with your BS.

  6. Graham says:

    Thank you all, especially HCM.

    When I saw this one I giggled aloud on the bus. People looked at me as though I might be dangerous. That was cool, at least for a moment.

    It’s hard not to laugh when these self-regarding tropes are allowed to break free of their intellectual places as tools and become moral shibboleths and combs for moral preening.

    I am reminded of a few years ago when progressives started accusing conservatives of “epistemic closure”. Good times. I can’t remember who first threw that one out but I dimly remember wondering whether he had found it on word a day toilet paper.

  7. Felix says:

    Sure, if you know the score, save time and energy by closing your mind. If you haven’t a clue, open your mind. Do what’s appropriate for the circumstances.

    The process of moving from an open mind to a closed mind is called, in English, “learning”.

    His list may be useful for detecting open/close in yourself and others.

  8. Graham says:

    Felix,

    Solid advice.

    I am only reacting to it because so much of it these days seems to be more in the vein of “I hold these ideas so I am open minded and you hold those ideas so you are closed-minded”.

    For example, his advice to know when to ask questions and when to make assertions is excellent, but this comment:

    “Closed-minded people say things like “I could be wrong … but here’s my opinion.” This is a classic cue I hear all the time. It’s often a perfunctory gesture that allows people to hold their own opinion while convincing themselves that they are being open-minded. If your statement starts with “I could be wrong”…, you should probably follow it with a question and not an assertion.”

    is more a stylistic trope than anything else. It depends on how perfunctory the speaker is when deploying this turn of phrase. Criticizing it in this manner is easily turned into a blanket rhetorical weapon in which one can automatically discredit one’s interlocutor’s opinion or even their right to offer one without having to argue against it.

Leave a Reply