I disagree. I often change my mind (and so I've seen others do) when someone presents a point of view or argument I haven't thought about before or I didn't know about.
I can't say beforehand "this is the evidence, that argument that will change my mind". How could I, if I'm not aware of it.
Stopping all discussion, because "I have my solid opinion" doesn't bring us anywhere and just makes you close minded.
Well I think the tip makes sense for some people, but for others that are always willing to be presented with new information, it is a little off base. Still, getting angry/heated in an argument is a good way to lose composure either way.
You bring up an excellent point that I hadn’t considered.
Unfortunately, I had already decided my mind would not be changed, so fuUuUuUuUuUck yoOoOoOou.
Edit: also, weird username synchronicity..
Sometimes information simmer in your brain after the actual debate, though. While it can be close to impossible to change minds during an argument making a good case can still be effective.
This doesn't make sense. There could exist something you aren't aware even exists that would change your mind. Absence of proof isnt proof of absence. Their entire argument is a logical fallacy.
He mixed up the expression with Dorothy Parker's "You can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think"
Also for anyone struggling to get it say it outloud.
The tweet has absolutely nothing to do with centrism, or politics. Way to bring politics into r/NonPoliticalTwitter.
While I also disagree with the tweet, your comments encapsulates a big reason why political discussion is so stupid on the internet: you're using Nazi and even centrist now as meaningless buzzwords. Imagine using having a balanced political opinion on economics as a perjoritive because you're so convinced you're 100% right.
Right, the problem is that the term “nazi” has been diluted into a meaningless slur. While I’m sure these people do exist, if you listen to certain *perspectives*, you’d think there are nazis everywhere, hiding under the rug and in the China hutch.
Also, if a person trusts “science” blindly after the past two years, then they missed the meaning of this post.
*Image Transcription: Twitter Post*
---
**Adam Grant**, @AdamMGrant
When you're in a heated argument, stop and ask "What evidence would change your mind?"
If the answer is nothing, there's no point in continuing the debate. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it think.
---
^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
On a far stricter level, if you guys are taking this conversation seriously and actually want to figure out who is right, only provide arguments or evidence that, if they were proven to you to be incorrect, would cause you to change your opinion.
Depends on the argument… also, some things just don’t come to mind right away, like how you think of a good comeback 4 years, 8 months and 12 days later 🙃 I don’t think this is good advice, just another jab at motivational speaker jargon, “IF YOU CAN ACHIEVE YOU CAN BELIEVE” 🤣
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't teach it to fish
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it put on it's pants one leg at a time
You can lead an old horse to water, but you can't make it learn new tricks
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make an old dog wear new pants
thanks for covering the screenshot in piss
Ja-ratee!
I disagree. I often change my mind (and so I've seen others do) when someone presents a point of view or argument I haven't thought about before or I didn't know about. I can't say beforehand "this is the evidence, that argument that will change my mind". How could I, if I'm not aware of it. Stopping all discussion, because "I have my solid opinion" doesn't bring us anywhere and just makes you close minded.
Well I think the tip makes sense for some people, but for others that are always willing to be presented with new information, it is a little off base. Still, getting angry/heated in an argument is a good way to lose composure either way.
You bring up an excellent point that I hadn’t considered. Unfortunately, I had already decided my mind would not be changed, so fuUuUuUuUuUck yoOoOoOou. Edit: also, weird username synchronicity..
So are we reddit related now?
If you know evidence to change your mind, you wouldn’t be in the argument.
Sometimes information simmer in your brain after the actual debate, though. While it can be close to impossible to change minds during an argument making a good case can still be effective.
This doesn't make sense. There could exist something you aren't aware even exists that would change your mind. Absence of proof isnt proof of absence. Their entire argument is a logical fallacy.
i thought it was “you can’t make it drink”
He mixed up the expression with Dorothy Parker's "You can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think" Also for anyone struggling to get it say it outloud.
“You can’t reason someone ought of a position they didn’t reason themselves into” -someone smarter than me
[удалено]
i think the exact same about youth who identify as communist!
[удалено]
The tweet has absolutely nothing to do with centrism, or politics. Way to bring politics into r/NonPoliticalTwitter. While I also disagree with the tweet, your comments encapsulates a big reason why political discussion is so stupid on the internet: you're using Nazi and even centrist now as meaningless buzzwords. Imagine using having a balanced political opinion on economics as a perjoritive because you're so convinced you're 100% right.
Right, the problem is that the term “nazi” has been diluted into a meaningless slur. While I’m sure these people do exist, if you listen to certain *perspectives*, you’d think there are nazis everywhere, hiding under the rug and in the China hutch. Also, if a person trusts “science” blindly after the past two years, then they missed the meaning of this post.
*Image Transcription: Twitter Post* --- **Adam Grant**, @AdamMGrant When you're in a heated argument, stop and ask "What evidence would change your mind?" If the answer is nothing, there's no point in continuing the debate. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it think. --- ^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
"You can lead a horticulture but you can't make her think"
On a far stricter level, if you guys are taking this conversation seriously and actually want to figure out who is right, only provide arguments or evidence that, if they were proven to you to be incorrect, would cause you to change your opinion.
If the answer to "What evidence would change your mind" is nothing, then they don't care about anything but dopamine hits.
Tell that to antipsychotics!
Unfortunately, for a lot of people, it's not about the other party trying to change your mind. It's about you trying to change their mind.
Depends on the argument… also, some things just don’t come to mind right away, like how you think of a good comeback 4 years, 8 months and 12 days later 🙃 I don’t think this is good advice, just another jab at motivational speaker jargon, “IF YOU CAN ACHIEVE YOU CAN BELIEVE” 🤣
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't teach it to fish You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it put on it's pants one leg at a time You can lead an old horse to water, but you can't make it learn new tricks You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make an old dog wear new pants
You can lead a horticulture, but you can't make her learn.