Obstinance, beliefs, facts all part of forming opinions

Contrariness, or basic reflexive oppositionalism, runs strong in my family.

I often joke that I inherited it from my daughter when she was a teenager. (Thank goodness those years were left in the last century.)

This same contrariness often manifests when I listen to people lay out the underlying reasoning for their position on an issue. In my conversations, I try to determine not only the basic facts, beliefs or logic behind the position they are taking, but also what it would take for the person to change their position.

I sometimes find that I do this to myself as well. In mulling over a problem or issue, I practice jumping to conclusions – quickly staking out a position. I then go into opposition mode, thinking more critically about the problem or issue and examining what actual facts or logic support, or do not support, that position.

During my discussions with groups or individuals regarding some particular issue, I have often found that it is futile to try to persuade people as to the validity of my position by providing what I thought were very good reasons supporting my opinion. The reason for this, as I have now learned, is that the points or facts important or relevant to me regarding an issue may not be important or relevant to them.

In basing my arguments on what I thought would change or sway their minds, I ignored or was unaware of the fact that their own positions regarding the issues may be rooted strongly in some other set of facts or beliefs that remains hidden.

Take a hypothetical 14-story housing project proposed for downtown. Some of the expected objections might include that there are not enough parking spaces proposed, it would increase traffic and it is not in an area zoned for a residential building.

Because of the factual nature of these objections, they can be addressed, mitigated or minimized by some achievable means. The traffic and parking issues could be mitigated by restricting the building to senior housing, since it is known that seniors who live in apartments have low car ownership and usage. The zoning issue could be mitigated by rezoning the property, or rewriting the zoning code to accommodate senior housing.

However, if someone’s underlying opposition to the project rests on their belief that a 14-story building simply does not fit the image of the downtown, then there would be nothing in the way of facts that would change their opinion.
This exact scenario happened about 30 years ago, and we now have a 14-story and an eight-story senior residential apartment building directly off Todos Santos Square in the northwest corner at Grant and Salvio.

Knowing in advance the underlying basis of someone’s position – whether it is based on facts or beliefs – would help clarify the tipping point in their argument. That would allow one to address the actual basis of their position rather than wasting time arguing from one’s own point of view, all with the goal of getting them to change their position.

This approach also forces one to go through an exercise in separating emotional issues, i.e., beliefs, from factual, data-driven positions. In most cases, emotional, value-driven reasons based on a belief system are irrefutable. This is the case with many positions based on faith, e.g., “God said it. I believe it. End of discussion.” Another way of putting this is: “My mind’s made up. Don’t bother me with your facts.”

In these kinds of discussions, I have found that if you ask what it would take to change their mind, the immediate response is typically: “Like what?” Going down this road often leads to dead ends and accomplishes little, since not knowing the belief systems behind their arguments leaves you shooting in the dark and puts the other person on the defense.

I have found it better to simply leave the question hanging, with a comment like: “I cannot read your mind, and only you know what could change your mind.”

This is also something that is good to practice on oneself. When you have a strong opinion on something, determine through disciplined self-introspection whether your opinion is based on belief and emotion or on facts and data. Do not be afraid to recognize when an emotional or non-data component drives your view. Such views are not necessarily wrong.

But in the end, when it comes to irreconcilable differences in opinion, it is sometimes best to agree to disagree and not get bogged down in arguments when there is no chance to change anyone’s mind.

Please send comments to EdiBirsan@gmail.com or call 510-812-8180.