Everyone is an influencer. And that's good and bad. It's bad because dumb ideas seem to spread just as easily as well-founded ideas.
For this reason, social networks have contributed toempower conspiracy theorists: anti-vaccines, anti-5G, those who think that the coronavirus does not exist or that it was created in a laboratory.
Avoid frustration
Talking to these types of people is frustrating, sometimes because they are very well informed, other times because they are very stubborn. Next, Tanya Basu, from MIT Technology Review, proposes ten strategies To do it most efficiently:
-
Treat others with respect. Although it can be considered a simple rhetorical trick (a trick to win the debate, not to get to the truth, because what matters are the ideas and data, not the persuasion to get them to nest in the other), without respect, compassion and empathy, our interlocutor will shut down and stop listening to our ideas, no matter how valid they may be. Sometimes, that is very difficult, of course, because it can also happen that in front of us there is a real nutcase.
-
Prevent others from attending the debate. Having an audience is the best way to influence people's behavior and the course of a conversation. Social networks tend to lead to the harsh exchange of invective and insults, precisely because there are millions of eyes potentially reading what is said. It is better to resolve these types of issues in private, perhaps through a Twitter DM, rather than through a tweet that leaves the conspiracy theorist at the mercy of ludibrio. Embarrassing someone in public is one of the worst formulas when it comes to reaching an agreement.
- Don't waste time with lost cases. If the person in front of you categorically states that they will never change their mind, don't waste time and energy: you are unlikely to achieve anything useful. Sometimes people just want to give their opinion without being bothered because their opinion is actually a way of describing themselves to the world: it does not matter if that opinion is true or not, but if the opinion allows them to be part of a social club.
- Show agreement on some points. People are not wrong about absolutely everything, there are surely parts of their argument that you agree with. Make them clear and reinforced to show that you are on the same side and thus generate an environment of trust. The adversarial format always tends to be very thorny.
- Try the 'truth sandwich'. It uses the fact-fallacy-fact approach, a method first proposed by linguist George Lakoff. It involves stating what is true, debunking the conspiracy theory and re-stating what is true, says Donovan. For example, if you're talking to someone who believes in the 5G conspiracy theory, you could structure your argument like this: "Coronavirus is an airborne virus, meaning it is transmitted by sneezing or coughing; Because viruses are not transmitted via radio waves, the coronavirus, which is an airborne virus, cannot be carried by 5G. It's repetitive, but it reinforces the facts and points out where the conspiracy theory doesn't work.
- Use the Socratic method. In other words, use questions to help others test their own argument and see if it holds up. Because the best way to change someone's mind is to make them feel like they've figured it out themselves.
- Be careful with your loved ones. Before embarking on a debate with a family member or close friend, perhaps you should consider how harmful that idea is and whether it is worth confronting. Social relationships are preferable to winning depending on what debates. Sometimes you have to bite your tongue, be polite, or even think that everyone can hold their own. Imagine trying to convince your mother, devastated by the death of her husband, that Heaven does not exist when she uses that belief to combat her sadness.
- There are ideas that are difficult to change.. All ideas that have to do in a deep way with worldview, morality, politics and others are very difficult to change because they are linked with other sets of ideas that support the entire personality and way of facing the world at a level. social. That means it won't be enough to simply show peer-reviewed studies or overwhelming logic. The other person may never change their mind. The world, after all, is more interesting if there is neurodiversity.
- If it gets worse, quit.. All debate is like weather: a non-linear dynamic system. You have to be attentive to those storm clouds that lurk: if they grow, give up. That can mean both that the other person is starting to lose it and that you yourself are losing it because your demons are taking over. You simply have to know how to stop.
- Every little bit helps. One conversation probably won't change a person's mind, and that's okay. People are not going to have profound changes in beliefs all at once. Sometimes you can change someone's perspective a little, like water eroding a rock. You won't debunk a conspiracy theory, but you will pave the way for someone in the future to do so.
Bonus track: above all, above all, avoid the ad hominem. It doesn't matter who the other person is, nor their studies, nor their culture, nor their ideology. What matters are the ideas. Let the ideas be the ones that confront each other, not the people; Respect the latter, be merciless as much as possible with the former; listen to the koala:
–
The news
Ten tips for talking to someone who believes in conspiracy theory
was originally published in
Xataka Science
by
Sergio Parra
.