Understanding the blind spots of the person you are talking with and bringing them to their awareness is a skill. It might very well be that you are not used to talking to people who have that skill set.
If you follow a procedure like double crux and the person you are talking with have a decent skill-level there’s a good chance that they will point out blind spots to you.
I almost always find that when I’ve engaged in a combative discussion I’ll update around an hour later, when I notice ways I defended my position that are silly in hindsight.
“silly” is a pretty big requirement. It would be better if people don’t need to believe that there old positions are silly to update to be able to do so.
Professional philosophers as a class who’s culture is combative have a bad track record of changing their opinion when confronted with opposing views. Most largely still hold those position that were important to them a decade ago.
In Silicon Valley startup culture there are many people who are able to pivot when it turns out that there initial assumptions were wrong.
Nassim Taleb makes in his books the claim that successful traders are good at changing their opinion when there are goods arguments to change positions.
CFAR went from teaches Bayes rule and Fermi estimation to teaching parts work. A lot of their curriculum manages to change.
Understanding the blind spots of the person you are talking with and bringing them to their awareness is a skill. It might very well be that you are not used to talking to people who have that skill set.
If you follow a procedure like double crux and the person you are talking with have a decent skill-level there’s a good chance that they will point out blind spots to you.
“silly” is a pretty big requirement. It would be better if people don’t need to believe that there old positions are silly to update to be able to do so.
Professional philosophers as a class who’s culture is combative have a bad track record of changing their opinion when confronted with opposing views. Most largely still hold those position that were important to them a decade ago.
As opposed to whom? Who’s good?
In Silicon Valley startup culture there are many people who are able to pivot when it turns out that there initial assumptions were wrong.
Nassim Taleb makes in his books the claim that successful traders are good at changing their opinion when there are goods arguments to change positions.
CFAR went from teaches Bayes rule and Fermi estimation to teaching parts work. A lot of their curriculum manages to change.