Are you willing to change your mind?

If you are reading this and have an interest in self-development. I am guessing you consider yourself open-minded to hold any idea up to unemotional critique. Allowing your opinion on said subject to be shaped by the strength of argument.

Now, think hard. When was the last time you revised a belief or admitted a mistake? Probably less than you care to admit.

Why then, with this intransigence, are we no longer the person we were five or ten years ago?

It is because growth has come through the acquisition of facts, stories and points of view that resonant with our baseline beliefs.

We have collected more things not to change our mind about.

A fan of Monet, by nature, will be drawn to Turner, Degas and Renoir. Over time, their appreciation for the impressionist movement will grow. But outside this sphere, they remain ignorant of classical or post-modern artists.

What does this mean?

By default, we do not live our lives according to the scientific method. There is inherent selective bias of the facts we pick to hypothesis test our values which influences our growth trajectory.

You need to be aware that these biases influence the way we react to presentation of facts, their source and the stories around them.

This creates a cognitive dissonance between how we form our own viewpoint compared to how we believe we can persuade others about an issue in the face of a new finding.

It is where emotions become involved.

Let’s take a recent court case surrounding a headline in the UK Newspaper, the Mail on Sunday:

“Drugged and tethered … what Harry didn’t tell you about those awe-inspiring wildlife photos”

The headline refers to a photograph taken by Prince Harry of an elephant within a national parkland of Malawi. The elephant is being relocated to prevent over population that can result in encroachment onto farmer’s land. The photograph was posted to his @sussexroyal Instagram to celebrate Earth Day.

The contention is the picture on Instagram does not show a rope around the elephant’s hind leg. The court case centers on whether Harry misled the public regarding the elephant’s sedation when he took the picture.

My initial reaction had nothing to do with this question. Instead, I was jarred by my perception that the Mail on Sunday was attempting to undermine the conservation movement.

This shows how our reactions can be swayed by, in this case:

• Our opinion or lack thereof about the Royal Family.
• Perception of the British Press.
• Whether we believe animals should be sedated or not regardless of the cause.
• Our thoughts on conservationism and habitat loss.
• The question of global warming.
• Our sensitivity to feelings of being manipulated.

This goes far beyond the original innocuous question, and in my case, to miss the point entirely. The result, we can find ourselves arguing about different things from a position we are not willing to move from.

This prevents any further exploration of the subject.

How can you break this cycle?

Next time you feel your values are being crossed, recognize your reaction is based on your beliefs. Fight or flight is kicking in presenting you with two options, defend your position or disengage.

This is a false dilemma.

As Gabor Maté highlights in his interview with Tim Ferriss. You don’t respond to the situation but your perception of the situation. And often, your brain will make its own worst possible interpretation resulting in black and white thinking, narrowing your options.

Is there a third way? Yes, through understanding.

Understanding allows us all to reframe the situation. Therefore, you should engage, but in a non-judgmental manner. Lean into the discomfort to learn more.

Joe Rogan is an imperfect example of leaning in to learn more. He is open in his beliefs on diet, personal responsibility and gender fluidity in sport.  But he will engage with these topics, seeking to understand his guests by allowing them to express themselves uninhibited.

Why imperfect them? Because he still reacts emotionally and retrenches in his viewpoint. However, this is part of leaning into the discomfort. It forces you to struggle with your beliefs, while showing respect for other perspectives.

It is easier for you to avoid the friction. But you need to open up and be vulnerable. To go deeper and engage both emotionally and rationally with differing viewpoints and not blame others if their values are different. As Thich Nhat Hanh states:

“Blaming has no positive effect at all, nor does trying to persuade using reason and argument. That is my experience. No blame, no reasoning, no argument, just understanding. If you understand, and you show you understand, you can love, and the situation will change”

May Thich Nhat Hanh offer inspiration to us all and you remember his words the next time encounter a different way of thinking.