A person with an open mind answers questions by following the evidence, not by fitting facts into an established narrative. Accuracy involves letting go of the need to prove what you believe is correct. Avoiding narratives and rhetorical techniques is needed to clearly view the world. What is the difference between reason and rhetoric?
The Two Types of Arguments
The division between reason and rhetoric goes back to ancient philosophy. Aristotle described two areas of argument:
1.) Dialectic – An accurate and correct argument from systematic reasoning. This is what we associate with reason.
2.) Rhetoric – Persuasive argument involving emotion, the credibility of the speaker, and logic.
Dialectic responds to questions with dispassionate discussions aimed at verifying observations and making reasonable deductions. Dialectic accepts the facts and conclusions without regard to if you like them.
Rhetoric uses speech techniques and engages emotions to defend an established position or narrative. Persuasion is not open-minded; its aim is to convince you of a position. Being able to change your mind is needed for accuracy.
Supporting Narratives Means You’re Not Open to New Information
The use of rhetoric and supporting narratives often point to strongly held values, beliefs, and emotions. These are very sensitive areas for most people and are often part of our identity. People tend to defend their values, beliefs, and emotions rather than being open to new information. This motivates people to construct facts into narratives to protect their values and identities.
Values, beliefs, and emotions are good things. However, they need to be informed by accurate information. Constructed narratives are signs that you are not open to contrary evidence and changing your mind. They stand for determining what is true before hearing the evidence, not determining what is true based on the evidence.
Are you a Scout or Soldier?
Julia Galef, the host of the Rationally Speaking podcast, had a TED talk and recently published book discussing the difference between what she calls a Scout and Soldier mindset. This Scout archetype is a symbol for seeking accuracy and changing an opinion when contrary evidence arises. The Soldier archetype is a symbol for defending an entrenched position despite contrary evidence. Julia argues that rationality involves a Scout mindset. The archetypes are useful models. It can be helpful to ask if you are acting like a scout?
When anyone presents a position, ask yourself are they using rhetoric to support a narrative? Do they selectively cherry-pick facts, while ignoring other evidence? These are all signs that the position is not based on accuracy, but a predetermined position. Although rhetoric is useful to convince people to change a position, reason is the best way to assess accuracy of a position.
