I read an interesting article this week in Psychology Today magazine about a concept called intellectual humility. At the core, this refers to one’s ability to assume that their beliefs may actually be wrong. It made me think back to a philosophy class that I took in college and what the teacher told us about Socrates. Socrates was an interesting philosopher because he is famous for admitting that he didn’t actually know anything. If I recall correctly, he embraced the idea that there was a wealth of information that he would never acquire, but that seeking wisdom meant he should always try to learn more. Maybe I’m not getting this entirely right…shouldn’t I be open to the idea that I’m wrong? I tend to think Socrates would like the research about intellectual humility.
Most of us would probably agree that right now there seems to be a shortage of folks willing to admit that they might be wrong. Political divides seem impossible to cross. In the article that I’m referencing today*, it is stated that there is a cultural push to get people out of the middle and pick a lane. We can’t even seem to agree on facts right now because it is hard to tell if our sources of information are reporting accurately. Rick Hoyle, from Duke University is interviewed for the article and encourages people to respect each other enough to engage with different positions and search together for the truth. The opposite of intellectual humility is intellectual arrogance, which traps us, and it blocks us from getting along and seeing clearly. When people are intellectually arrogant, they won’t consider that someone who holds an alternate belief may be receiving incorrect information, or that they have a good reason for why they think the way they do. Even more concerning, the intellectually arrogant person may not stop to consider that they might have received incorrect information since it lines up with what they had previously believed.
To cultivate intellectual humility, Grierson* encourages us to keep the following in mind:
We don’t know what we don’t know: People tend to overestimate how often they are right. In fact, the average person figures they are right 82% of the time. The math on this simply doesn’t add up because this should mean that there is very little conflict.
The intellectually humble person is curious. Certainty is about being right, curiosity is about cultivating understanding.
It is normal and appropriate to be humble and still have areas in which you feel so strongly that there isn’t room for debate. Not everything is a hill to die on, but some things should be, such as human rights issues or protection of children.
Remember that conflict isn’t the problem. Conflict is actually an opportunity for growth and understanding.
Proximity can help because actually being with others who have differing views can allow people to understand one another’s point of view.
Shrinking back from conflict and going along to get along isn’t intellectual humility. Remember, being open to the idea that you might be wrong doesn’t mean that you back down completely.
Truth requires collaborating. There is simply too much to learn for one person to be able to figure it all out. After all, my doctor is a smart person, but I don’t want him to design my house.
I’m not going to suggest that it is easy to adjust our thinking and all become intellectually humble, but I do believe that we are capable of doing so if we put in the work and effort. So many arguments could remain calm and respectful if they were simply approached from the standpoint of, “I guess I could be wrong, let’s see what they have to say.” I imagine it like this, there is an ocean of possible knowledge, and I’m only capable of swimming in a portion of it. If I’m curious about another area, I can swim there too, unless I make up my mind that I already know everything about it.
*Psychology Today Magazine, August 2023 issue. The Certainty Trap, by Bruce Grierson