Have you ever had a friend who, for whatever reason, had very poor judgment in restaurants, or home contractors, or something like that? Or at least, it seemed like that in your experience? Someone who’d rave about some new store or place to eat or something, and it would always be awful? Eventually, you might half-joke, “Let’s ask so-and-so if they can recommend any new restaurants, so we know where not to eat.”

In other words, you would treat their opinion (on such a matter) not just as likely to be useless to you, but as reliably the opposite of what yours should be.

I’m thinking about this because I see this phenomenon in politics. Some people think of this habit as trolling, “owning the libs,” etc. But I think it’s more than that. What it really amounts to is outsourcing your thinking to the people you disagree with or dislike. And I would ask: why should their opinion on a matter be all you need to know? Why would you let people you don’t like determine your views for you?

Now I know what some people who, probably inadvertently, do this would say: it’s not that I’m outsourcing my views to people I disagree with. It’s that I’m assuming it’s a good rule of thumb that if those people are for something, it’s probably bad, and if they’re against something, it’s probably good. Obviously this is not operable once you get to “Hitler was a vegetarian” territory. But is it completely wrong?

Yeah, generally I think it is. At best, it’s akin to a stereotype or generalization. At worst it ends up being circular reasoning, and it cuts off critical thinking. If you find that someone you generally disagree with makes an interesting point, you should wonder “Maybe this person is right about this thing” or “Maybe people’s views on things are idiosyncratic and don’t always line up the way I would expect,” rather than “That idea sounds good, but I know it must actually be bad because of who’s saying it.”

I’m leaving this general, so that you can think of your own examples. But here’s a hint: for a long time I’ve been meaning to write a piece probably titled “‘I Agree With Urbanists, But I Don’t Trust Them,’” about this question of how to deal with good ideas being held by people you might generally be skeptical of.

A lot of our opinions are not derived from abstract reasoning or critical thinking or consistent principles, though that’s what we’re taught in college. Most of us outsource our views on things we don’t care about very deeply. On some level, we have to, because we all have lives to live. (Of course, you can also choose to have no opinion, which in some ways is more thoughtful than outsourcing it.)

Anyway, I’m curious if you can give an example of this phenomenon, especially one where maybe you’ve changed your mind or thought differently about an issue. Leave comment!

Related Reading:

“I Like My Opinions, Why Would I Want New Ones?”

Look What You Made Me Think

Expert Tease

Thank you for reading! Please consider upgrading to a paid subscription to help support this newsletter. You’ll get a weekly subscribers-only piece, plus full access to the archive: over 1,100 pieces and growing. And you’ll help ensure more like this!

Share