From LW and Rationality in general.
This is a really helpful way I’ve found of resolving disagreements.
Here’s how it works:
- You and someone else disagree on a topic (let’s call it A).
- You both find a second statement (B) that is crucial to your belief in A (meaning if B were false, you would likely change your mind on A).
- You both also disagree on B (one person believes B, the other doesn’t).
- By discussing B and exploring the reasons behind your differing beliefs, you gain a deeper understanding of each other’s perspectives and potentially find common ground or identify flaws in your initial reasoning.
This approach aims to shift the focus from “winning” the argument to genuinely understanding each other’s views and potentially changing your mind if evidence suggests your initial belief was flawed.
A personal application of this that works really well with reconciling arguments within yourself is the Internal Double Crux.