Read on Twitter
If you have people in your lives—close friends and family—who have been influenced by disinformation, do not argue with them. It will not work.
If you do want to make that person a deprogramming project, step 1 is to establish rapport and trust.
If you do want to make that person a deprogramming project, step 1 is to establish rapport and trust.
Step 0, of course is to accept that it's a long game to try to counter months or years of messages and social reinforcement that have a lot of money and power behind them.
The best way to establish rapport and trust is to demonstrate genuine interest in their lives.
Centering the needs of someone who has aligned themselves with the baddies may make you feel like a traitor to the cause.
But again, arguing with facts is likely to backfire badly.
Centering the needs of someone who has aligned themselves with the baddies may make you feel like a traitor to the cause.
But again, arguing with facts is likely to backfire badly.
So, make that person a research project, learn about their interests and habits and concerns. Understand why certain narratives are meaningful and validating.
Eventually you may get to a place where you can establish that science is true in specific comfortable domains—birdwatching, woodworking, cooking—and work out from there.
And, once you have trust, do some light socratic method on the counterfactual beliefs.
And, once you have trust, do some light socratic method on the counterfactual beliefs.
Will a process like this be successful?
It depends in large part on whether the counterfactual beliefs are connected to core identity or membership in some other social group with more influence.
It depends in large part on whether the counterfactual beliefs are connected to core identity or membership in some other social group with more influence.
Is it worth your time?
That is totally up to you to determine.
But getting into arguments about facts or truth when you disagree on the standard of evidence is pointless in all contexts.
That is totally up to you to determine.
But getting into arguments about facts or truth when you disagree on the standard of evidence is pointless in all contexts.
And in any case, I always recommend talking about marine biology fun facts because no one is prepared with talking points for those (except for that lobster jerk) and ocean life itself subverts a lot of rigid false beliefs.
If you get annoyed with your relatives, remember, the nuclear option is pivoting to "flatworm penis fencing" on the family Thanksgiving zoom. https://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/00000144-0a29-d3cb-a96c-7b2d8f260000
Another tip: Try responding with "huh, tell me more about that" if someone close to you utters a bananas claim, especially if it seems like they are trying to bait you into an argument.
Arguing with other people can be a means to reinforce one's own beliefs and a non-confrontational response will catch them off guard and may provoke reflection.
But it has to come from a place of genuine interest. So, practice your mindfulness.
But it has to come from a place of genuine interest. So, practice your mindfulness.
This sort of thing is really tough to practice, I say as someone who has gotten into a LOT of shouty arguments about the fact that you can't argue people out of their beliefs with facts.
