I am a big fan of slow opinion. I can see, in the rashness of the internet, how my friends angrily condemn some facts.... that end up being mere fabrications. And hey now we're in the deepfake era, it's so much easier to fool people.
Slow opinion is akin to the scientific method. You need to gather multiple lines of evidence.
However, I find it difficult to impart the importance of this mindset onto other people.
My buddhist meditation practice, giving space for my mind to come up with its own silliness, and the buddha's advice to never claim you are 100% correct (in the Canki Sutta, for instance) favour that mindset in me, but I find that people struggle with this. Probably because to be a slow opionist you need to gather more evidence, you need to have a scientific and detached way of looking into things, and that takes time and resources that people may not have had access to in their past.
Thanks for this link. I can see how parts of the framework and some of the sources mentioned there can support my efforts trying to help build a more nuanced and resilient movement. I do hope this means that the writer no longer will proclaim that “resistance, whatever it takes, is beautiful" in the context of particular events which were part resistance, but also included the raping of women, and burning mothers, children and old people alive. I don’t expect anyone to fully live up to what they preach, but the gap between that (public) stance, and the humble careful tone of this text is hard to ignore.
Maybe a framework, despite its value and our need for it, is still too dichotomous and could lead to very dangerous places? Still, it’s a good text (at least the parts that feel more original), I guess reminders of slow, humble thinking can come from unexpected places.
Apologies for not being clearer: my reply refers to the text that is linked in the comment above (in Matt Ball's reply).
Despite partly also addressing similar issues, the sandcastles text attempted to offer a framework to help navigate uncertainty (Yes, a framework within accepting the need for more uncertain thinking. Seems a bit contradictory, but for the same reasons you mentioned in your wonderful writing, I can appreciate the attempt, and understand the motivation behind it).
It was important for me to point out that realty provided a harsh indication that such frameworks also evidently lead to troubled arguments: the writer of the sandcastles text, celebrating violence against helpless victims as beautiful, in a blunt example of what the well-written text warns us about.
The partial and shorten quote I've added is his, along with a youtube link to the full proclamation.
Thank you for your great work and for leading by example in such difficult times
Thank you for this Tobias! This is a gentle reminder to check my own assumptions (there are many). :) Something came to mind as I was reading your article... in a recent training I took on non-violent communication, the trainer defined judgements as "tragic expressions of unmet needs". Tragic in that the judgements probably don't lead to the fulfilment of whatever need is underneath. Considering this, I was wondering... how then could we empower ourselves and others more to facilitate a slow opinion? What unmet needs might there be and how could we better address those?
I've always loved that definition, and the emphasis on needs in NVC.
Re getting people to be slower in forming an opinion, I'm sure looking at unmet needs can be helpful, but it seems like a more intense, slow route that many interactions won't provide the opportunity for. What I sometimes do is challenge people and ask a few questions that show they haven't considered everything, and make them hesitate a bit more that way ("what if they meant this?" "have you thought about the possibility that..." etc)
One of the most liberating ideas for me was when I realized I did not have to have an opinion on everything, and that for the opinions I do have, I do have to share it everywhere. Most of our opinions are pretty worthless in our life, or at least we aren't going to take action on our opinions, so why bother? Save your energy for the things that do matter.
i agree, and on the other hand, maybe people who don't feel the need to have an opionion on something, might, by default, have a wiser-than-average opinion and it would be good to put it out there, to counterbalance all the crappy opinions
(as you see, i'm slow opinion about slow opinion :)
I am a big fan of slow opinion. I can see, in the rashness of the internet, how my friends angrily condemn some facts.... that end up being mere fabrications. And hey now we're in the deepfake era, it's so much easier to fool people.
Slow opinion is akin to the scientific method. You need to gather multiple lines of evidence.
However, I find it difficult to impart the importance of this mindset onto other people.
My buddhist meditation practice, giving space for my mind to come up with its own silliness, and the buddha's advice to never claim you are 100% correct (in the Canki Sutta, for instance) favour that mindset in me, but I find that people struggle with this. Probably because to be a slow opionist you need to gather more evidence, you need to have a scientific and detached way of looking into things, and that takes time and resources that people may not have had access to in their past.
Maybe I haven't tried strategically enough :)
Great piece, Tobias. I think this is a good companion to Aidan's latest, https://sandcastlesblog.substack.com/p/animal-activists-moral-uncertainty
Thanks for this link. I can see how parts of the framework and some of the sources mentioned there can support my efforts trying to help build a more nuanced and resilient movement. I do hope this means that the writer no longer will proclaim that “resistance, whatever it takes, is beautiful" in the context of particular events which were part resistance, but also included the raping of women, and burning mothers, children and old people alive. I don’t expect anyone to fully live up to what they preach, but the gap between that (public) stance, and the humble careful tone of this text is hard to ignore.
Maybe a framework, despite its value and our need for it, is still too dichotomous and could lead to very dangerous places? Still, it’s a good text (at least the parts that feel more original), I guess reminders of slow, humble thinking can come from unexpected places.
(source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=993KsNUkvJs&t=203s)
this is indeed the balance to strike. I'm aware of the challenges
(re that quote "resistance, whatever it takes, is beautiful"... were you referring to something i wrote? i don't recognize it)
Apologies for not being clearer: my reply refers to the text that is linked in the comment above (in Matt Ball's reply).
Despite partly also addressing similar issues, the sandcastles text attempted to offer a framework to help navigate uncertainty (Yes, a framework within accepting the need for more uncertain thinking. Seems a bit contradictory, but for the same reasons you mentioned in your wonderful writing, I can appreciate the attempt, and understand the motivation behind it).
It was important for me to point out that realty provided a harsh indication that such frameworks also evidently lead to troubled arguments: the writer of the sandcastles text, celebrating violence against helpless victims as beautiful, in a blunt example of what the well-written text warns us about.
The partial and shorten quote I've added is his, along with a youtube link to the full proclamation.
Thank you for your great work and for leading by example in such difficult times
Argh he managed to say it in about 5% as many words though 😭
Be curious, not furious, pls
Thank you for this Tobias! This is a gentle reminder to check my own assumptions (there are many). :) Something came to mind as I was reading your article... in a recent training I took on non-violent communication, the trainer defined judgements as "tragic expressions of unmet needs". Tragic in that the judgements probably don't lead to the fulfilment of whatever need is underneath. Considering this, I was wondering... how then could we empower ourselves and others more to facilitate a slow opinion? What unmet needs might there be and how could we better address those?
I've always loved that definition, and the emphasis on needs in NVC.
Re getting people to be slower in forming an opinion, I'm sure looking at unmet needs can be helpful, but it seems like a more intense, slow route that many interactions won't provide the opportunity for. What I sometimes do is challenge people and ask a few questions that show they haven't considered everything, and make them hesitate a bit more that way ("what if they meant this?" "have you thought about the possibility that..." etc)
One of the most liberating ideas for me was when I realized I did not have to have an opinion on everything, and that for the opinions I do have, I do have to share it everywhere. Most of our opinions are pretty worthless in our life, or at least we aren't going to take action on our opinions, so why bother? Save your energy for the things that do matter.
i agree, and on the other hand, maybe people who don't feel the need to have an opionion on something, might, by default, have a wiser-than-average opinion and it would be good to put it out there, to counterbalance all the crappy opinions
(as you see, i'm slow opinion about slow opinion :)
Well written! The closely parallels Julia Galef’s book The Scout Mindset, which I highly recommend.