Anthony Magnabosco explores strategies for addressing relativistic views of truth in Street Epistemology, highlighting the importance of clarifying whether truth is viewed as subjective or objective to foster meaningful dialogues.

13 November 2017

By Anthony Magnabosco

One of the most common questions I receive from people who have watched me engage with others using Street Epistemology (SE) is, “How are you able to remain so calm and focused when people say ridiculous things? I can’t resist presenting counter-evidence, getting agitated, or ridiculing people who spout such nonsense!”

This question comes up so frequently that I decided to write this blog post with my observations and suggestions on how to best address this challenge. As I have mentioned in other blog posts, if I think of anything to add later, I will append my thoughts in the comments section below.

Conduct a Self-Assessment

People often say it’s not in their nature to let egregious claims slide—they absolutely have to make sure the other person is aware of just how mistaken they are. “I’m simply incapable of letting people get away with it!” is the explanation I often hear. Rather than give up completely, take a closer look at your strengths and weaknesses. Is there a particular type of person that tends to upset you the most? Is there a particular topic that makes you see red? Do you have expertise in a particular area and find those are the chats that trigger you most?

Identifying which people or subjects have you struggling to maintain your composure will help you avoid those conversations and practice with safer topics for the time being. Recognizing that you always blow your lid when the subject of religion comes up, and yet you can easily keep your cool when discussing non-religious topics, can remind a person how rewarding productive dialogue can be overall.

After you complete a conversation, reflect on the effectiveness and feelings of goodwill you likely experienced. Remind yourself of these successes on easier subjects before you re-engage with people on topics that challenge your patience and keep progressing forward.

If you relapse, revisit those earlier, successful dialogues and slowly work your way back up.

Know When to Stop

When I reflect back on conversations where I deviated from SE and ended up debating, it’s usually accompanied with the thought, “I wish that talk ended 30 minutes ago when we reached that high point.” In other words, I was having a respectful discussion, but then I didn’t know where to go next or I was getting fatigued, got sloppy, and then ended up arguing with the person. To make matters worse, the little good that did happen was usually overshadowed by the embarrassingly bad blowout at the end.

To avoid dialogues turning sour, the first thing is to know your personal limits, so you can wrap up well before fatigue sets in. Also, watch out for gestures, words, or other indications that you or your conversation partner are starting to get heated. Crossed arms, aggressive hair flips, sighs of exasperation and decreased or non-existent pauses between questions and answers could all be indications that it might be time to wrap up your talk.

If your discussion is text-based, snarky remarks, sarcasm, disparaging memes, uppercasing words, or near-instantaneous responses back (which may suggest a lack of careful consideration) could also be an indication that a break is in order.

A simple, “It looks like things are heating up a bit and I’m concerned it might get in the way of our mutual understanding. So, if it’s alright with you, let’s end the talk for now but pick it up soon. Sound good?” Most people will agree to your suggestion, and many will take it as a kind gesture. If the person responds by goading you to continue or teasing you, that is absolute confirmation that you’ve made the right choice to take a break.

Don’t allow anyone to pressure you into continuing in an unpleasant or confrontational dialog. It’s always all right to gracefully exit a conversation.

Assess Your Goals

We generally converse with people because we value these relationships and we think these individuals are worthy of being helped. It’s usually in everyone’s best interest to encourage people to reflect on their beliefs because we care about them, we want ourselves and others to hold accurate views of reality, and we recognize that a person’s actions based on untrue beliefs can cause real harm.

So before you embark on your next SE talk, stop and ask what you are hoping to gain by engaging in a particular conversation. What is your objective by having a talk? What would you consider to be a success? How invested are you in the topic at hand? What repercussions might one expect from having a dialogue on this subject? Is it worth the time and effort to have a chat right now? Do I have time after the talk to be supportive if this person abandons their belief? Write your goals down or even share them with your interlocutor before starting the talk. Feel free to reference this list occasionally during the chat to ensure you are staying on track.

Pay attention to your own motives and those of your interlocutor. One or both of you might enjoy debating and/or placing yourself in a competitive scenario where one must avoid "losing" at all costs (whatever that means). Sometimes, simply hearing or thinking about the views of “the enemy" can trigger an angry response. In these cases, you have to prepare your own state of mind to view the dialogue as a peaceful collaboration and not a battle.

It is also common for individuals to feel anger when discussing their former faith for some time after leaving a belief system. During that period it may be better not to engage with the more abrasive believers or those you've had angry exchanges with in the past. You might even consider working with a professional therapist at the Secular Therapy Project to assist you in moving on.

They Could Be Right

While at times this may seem far-fetched, remind yourself that your interlocutor could have a reliable epistemology and what they believe could be true, no matter how unlikely it seems to you in light of your current beliefs. Acknowledging your biases and striving to stay neutral during a talk is a great way to help a person stay emotionally detached from a conversation.

Aim for inquisitiveness rather than aggressiveness. Model the openness you want your interlocutor to exhibit with your own candor and sincerity.

Mind the Backfire Effect

Many select Street Epistemology as the approach of choice because we wish to avoid the “backfire effect,” the phenomenon where a person responds to attacks, facts, and counter-evidence by becoming even more entrenched in their views. Ask yourself, “If I respond with that, will it be harder or easier to continue making progress with this person?”

Remind yourself that slipping into “debate mode” during a one-on-one talk will almost certainly impede your conversation and trigger that flight-or-fight reaction. This is so critical that you might consider keeping around this actual MRI image highlighting the amygdala in green and insular cortex in yellow, as a visual reminder to avoid triggering amygdala hijack.

If a visual reminder like this could help you stay on track, print it out and tape it to your monitor, make it the wallpaper on your phone, or update your profile image during the course of an online discussion. Your brain and the brain of your conversation partner are going to respond in much the same way, so be aware of your own tendencies to hunker down when you are being confronted with ideas that do not fit your preconceived notions.

While your conversation partner may not be familiar with the “backfire effect,” you now are, so the responsibility will likely fall on you to be aware of the potential pitfalls.

A Slice of Pie

One source of conversational frustration is finding that the dialogue has looped back on itself, or not knowing exactly where to go next. Creating a reminder of the SE questions you wish to ask will likely help keep you from getting worked up and resorting to your old, argumentative ways.

In my talk to the Chicago Atheist Society called ‘Things I Have Learned’, I discuss three categories of questions that usually come up during an effective SE-based talk. Grouped by importance, not frequency, remind yourself that you are striving to understand what a person believes (~10 percent), their justifications (why) for the belief (~20 percent), and how they determined that their methods for arriving at the belief were reliable (~70 percent).

Please note that these percentages are not based on carefully calculated conclusions, but are merely trends I’ve noticed after participating in and reviewing hundreds of SE-based talks.

If you find yourself becoming irate at your interlocutor, return to asking the more basic what-type questions, and then slowly build back to the why- and how-type questions, which will require more listening and patience. Revisiting what a person believes gives your conversation partner a chance to further explain their beliefs, will likely be perceived as genuine interest (which can foster goodwill), and gives you a little bit of time to regain your composure.

Pretend There’s an Audience

One of the main things that help me keep cool when I'm growing frustrated with an interlocutor is reminding myself that other people may very well be watching. Whether I am live streaming over social media or recording a talk to upload later to my YouTube channel, I have to remind myself that my behavior is being observed very closely by lots of people (and not just by those who share my views).

It’s very common for people to leave a comment on a video or message me directly to point out something that I said or did after watching one of my interactions. For example: “Never offer to shake a Muslim woman’s hand!”, “Why did you pronounce the word ‘epistemology’ slower for those two ladies?”, “Don’t tell people to have a nice day; you should say that you hope that they have a nice day!”, “You were awfully abrupt with that guy. Is something bugging you?”, and so on. At first, this was a little off-putting and I could feel myself getting defensive: “How dare they judge me! Show me a video of you trying this!” But as time progressed, I began to discover not only the value of this feedback, I began to realize that having people watching me was in fact helping me stay more calm, cool and collected during the encounter!

Even when engaging in a conversation that is not being recorded or broadcasted, I try to imagine what an audience watching the encounter might think. By pretending that others (from impressionable youngsters to my peers to my heroes) are intently watching my every move, I can usually dial back my frustrations considerably.

The next time you start up a discussion, pretend that you and your interlocutor are standing on a stage in front of a large audience. Imagining this scenario should help you stay emotionally distanced from the topic being discussed and should keep you on your best behavior. In turn, your questions will probably seem less like an attack and more like an exciting, mutual exploration of ideas.

See Victims, Not Victories

Rather than view your interlocutor as an enemy opponent or competitor in a contest, try to remind yourself that they are probably a nice person who just happens to be holding a mistaken view of reality. Many people have never been taught how to think critically, and simply lack the skills necessary to adequately question their belief claims. People like this are probably not stupid or deluded. They are merely unwitting victims of a faulty epistemology. We are obligated to try and help them!

Reminding myself that no one is immune to this mental trap—even me—has been immensely helpful in keeping my cool when I encounter someone who is pushing all of my buttons. It’s also a bit liberating to recognize how easy it is to be mistaken, and that it’s alright to say, “You know, I’m really not sure why I think that’s true!” Viewing your conversation partner as a casualty of the fickleness of the human mind, rather than a foe who must be crushed, is extremely helpful in keeping those angry emotions at bay.

Create a Decompression Plan

By preparing for yourself a plan for dissipating your frustration after the dialogue, you may find it easier to keep your cool during the dialogue itself.

After my nearly 30-minute long talk with an on-campus Christian minister who spouted all sorts of ridiculous things, I waited until we shook hands, wished each other well, and he walked away before suddenly venting my frustration to the (probably now shocked!) live stream audience.

Being able to disclose your conversation to others is essential, so give some thought as to which people in your circle can hear you out. Sometimes, simply making a tweet or post in one of the SE-based Facebook Groups about your experience will be enough to help get things off your chest and be more refreshed for next time.

I have learned to leave the frustration, sadness, and pity I often experience from my chats out in the field. I don’t want to take it home with me. I have far too many conversations with people these days to become emotionally invested in them. And while that might seem heartless, I’ve decided that I cannot and do not wish to burden the loved ones in my life with such things.

This is worth repeating: never direct your frustration towards your interlocutor. Hold and get it off your chest later.

Prepare Yourself for Change

Coming to the realization that my own anger could be the biggest barrier preventing me from conducting an effective SE-based talk has been both humbling and motivating.

Humbling because I can look back and see how becoming aggressive has hurt feelings and damaged relationships, and motivating because this is one of those rare times where there is a factor that I actually have some degree of control over.

These days, if someone starts to become irate with me, I’ve found that it is now difficult for me to match their anger. And it’s more than realizing that they will likely ramp things up even further if I did. If anything, I find myself becoming curious as to why they might be responding in such a heated manner and then sincerely offer to investigate their response if they are willing. People have asked me if I use mindfulness meditation to stay so calm, and yet I don't meditate. Maybe this is a hidden benefit of practicing Street Epistemology, of cultivating a Zen-like calm in an otherwise difficult situation.

I have received countless notes from people over the years saying how much learning SE has had on improving their own temperament, conversations, relationships, and overall outlook on life. It’s truly inspiring to hear such things.

And I can definitely relate to this feedback because I often feel this way about my own interactions and personal growth—it’s one of the things that inspire me to pour nearly everything I have into practicing and promoting this approach.

Closing

It is my hope that these suggestions and anecdotes will help you stay more focused and calm when you embark on your Street Epistemology conversations. While I still struggle occasionally, these concepts have absolutely helped me improve in more ways than one.

Don’t expect to see improvements immediately. These things take time. Continue to remind yourself about your objectives, the things you can do when you detect that anger rising, and the feelings of satisfaction one can experience when you have helped someone honestly reflect on a deeply-held belief.

.