This 350-year-old trick will let you change anyone’s mind
There’s nothing more frustrating than being stuck in a heated debate with someone and seeming as though you can’t make any headway, despite the legitimacy of your argument. This classic situation usually ends in tears for both parties.
But there’s another way.
17th century French philosopher, inventor, physicist and mathematician Blaise Pascal developed a handy trick for getting on the right side of arguments in his book Pensees:
“When we wish to correct with advantage, and to show another that he errs, we must notice from what side he views the matter, for on that side it is usually true, and admit that truth to him, but reveal to him the side on which it is false. He is satisfied with that, for he sees that he was not mistaken, and that he only failed to see all sides,” Pascal wrote.
“Now, no one is offended at not seeing everything; but one does not like to be mistaken, and that perhaps arises from the fact that man naturally cannot see everything, and that naturally he cannot err in the side he looks at, since the perceptions of our senses are always true.”
To put this in common terms, what Pascal is saying is that if you want to tell someone they are wrong, what you first must do is tell them that they are right.
Changing someone’s mind about something is easier if you point out the parts of their argument that are correct, before pointing out the elements that are wrong. This removes a layer of defensiveness from most people.
“People are generally better persuaded by the reasons which they have themselves discovered than by those which have come into the mind of others,” Pascal wrote.
Arthur Marman, psychology professor at The University of Texas at Austin, believes this 350-year-old advice couldn’t be more relevant in today’s world.
“One of the first things you have to do to give someone permission to change their mind, is to lower their defences and prevent them from digging their heels in to the position they already staked out,” Marman told SBS.
“If I immediately start to tell you all the ways in which you’re wrong, there’s no incentive for you to co-operate. But if I start by saying, ‘Ah yeah, you made a couple of really good points here, I think these are important issues,’ now you’re giving the other party a reason to want to co-operate as part of the exchange. And that gives you a chance to give voice your own concerns about their position in a way that allows co-operation.”
Do you think this advice is worth a try?