I'm very reticent to commit to opinions.1 This comes from a general feeling that many people hold opinions without much evidence, and often for emotional reasons (ex. their ingroup values that opinion).
This means that I'm often quiet in conversations on topics I'm not super familiar with, as I don't think I know enough to back up any points I could make halfway decently.
But I want to have stronger opinions:
- I don't like feeling ignorant. I like understanding the world. And if you really understand something I think you'll naturally have strong (and nuanced) opinions.
- Forming true strong opinions feels like a core adult skill. I'm no longer satisfied with only learning about other's ideas.
And holding strong opinions has benefits!
Stating strong opinions sparks great discussion. I remember a dinner party I went to a few years ago that brought together folks who didn't really know each other as an experiment. The host was excellent at facilitating really good conversations, skipping past small talk and getting straight into things that people thought strongly about. I noticed that she stated really strong opinions, and mentioned this to her. She told me that this was deliberate, as stating a strong opinion emboldens people to respond in kind. This can lead to much more interesting conversation than waffling around. And if you're lucky (and open-minded) someone will help you update your opinion towards a better one.
If something is true, having a strong belief in it is better than a weak belief in it. We act according to our beliefs about the world, and if two people hold the same true belief, the one who holds the belief more strongly will probably gain more from it.
How to develop strong (and true) opinions about a topic? Here's what I think.
First, learn some initial facts about the topic. What are the main players, what terminology is used, etc.
Second, develop an opinion pretty quickly. Starting with imitation/combination of other's opinions, as well as pulling in opinions you have in related domains. I think it's perfectly reasonable to be convinced by someone else's take and adopt it as your own. I also think it makes sense to leverage other mental models you feel more confident in. For example, I have a general (perhaps cynical) belief that the world is inefficient in a lot of places, so when thinking about the supposed efficiency of markets I might be inclined to believe that poor incentives and externalities lead to inefficiency being somewhat commonplace.
I think it makes sense to have a relatively low bar to hold a strong opinion. The first class I took in college was an intro computer science course taught by an amazing professor (who definitely is known for their willingness to state strong opinions—if you went to Brown you know who I'm talking about). When asking questions, they would have us pre-commit to an answer before revealing their thoughts. This was great pedagogy, and there's research that shows that students who commit to an incorrect answer before learning the correct one update more strongly.
To commit to an opinion, write. While I think people should form strong opinions more quickly, I don't think people should hold opinions they don't understand. Before thinking deeply about something, it's likely that someone doesn't understand it as well as they think they do. To resolve this, writing seems to do just the trick. It's hard to write about something clearly without understanding it decently well. This is the main reason why I started writing blog posts. And notice that because the reason is to improve one's thinking, the proximal goal isn't to write good, original thoughts. This means you can write about your own take on other's thoughts (ex. this post - I noticed that I had the drive to form stronger opinions, and connected it with ideas I like) and that you should have a lower quality bar than you think.
Publishing your opinion will naturally reinforce your opinion. I found this out on accident after writing my opinion that self-kindness is instrumentally useful when trying to get yourself to do stuff in a post. Several times over the last month, I've caught myself beginning to feel guilty for not following through on a plan, and then a paragraph I wrote in that blog post pops into my head, reminding me of my supposed stated belief that it makes sense to view these instances not as a moral failure, but as a system bug. I found this super cool! I didn't anticipate this happening, but in hindsight it makes sense. Humans are pretty social and care about their reputation, so it makes sense we have machinery to make sure our behavior is consistent with statements we've publicly committed to.2 And being able to reinforce your opinion is great! Because humans are pretty emotional, and simply telling yourself you will start to hold X opinion strongly won't get you very far, this is super useful.
Talk about your opinion, and be willing to update it given evidence. Talking about an opinion is easier once you've written something. You've articulated it to the point that you should be able to bring it up in conversation or send it someone.
People will disagree with you sometimes. Many times, this will be because they don't understand what you're trying to say. This is probably your fault, and you should treat it as a signal on how to improve your writing. There will also be disagreements about the true substance of your opinion: about degrees, cases where your claim applies, or even about the perspective entirely. This is useful too. If you haven't considered these disagreements, then it's an opportunity to either update your belief (if you decide they're right) or strengthen/nuance your defense (if you decide they're wrong).
Being willing to update is hard. It's not the default action, which is to maintain the belief 3 or ignore information that doesn't confirm your opinion. I think I'm okay with this when given time to think about things, but am too emotionally attached to opinions and the feeling of "being right" to update fluidly in the moment. I hope to get better at this!
I'll use "opinion" and "belief" somewhat interchangeably. I chose to focus on "opinion" though because of the stronger colloquial connotation that you're arriving at it from a potentially flawed route and it feels less binary (you can have an opinion to different intensities, while beliefs often feel more binary). This is just my intuition so might be confusing.
Interestingly, even though I know that only a few friends have really read that post, the drive to think/act consistently with that belief was pretty strong.
I was originally going to write "the default action is to double-down," but while double-checking this I found that the phenomenon of doubling-down on a belief in the presence of contradictory information (known as the backfire effect) is more rare than I remembered from my psych classes, so I'll do my best to update this belief!