You likely believe that precise knowledge is valuable and that maintaining strong beliefs shows integrity. Yet social scientist and Wharton professor Adam Grant disagrees and argues that reconsideration, or the ability to reconsider your views, is much more valuable than knowledge or loyalty to your beliefs.
Grant’s research shows that knowledge and expertise can confine you to narrow ways of thinking that limit your potential. He argues that instead of pursuing expertise, you should practice and pursue reconsideration because it opens new doors of learning and self-awareness. As we will explore in this guide, reconsideration is a teachable skill that you can develop, share with others, and apply to your life and work.
How Expertise Can Make Your Beliefs Less Rational
You might be surprised by Grant’s assertion that expertise is an overrated quality. Many believe that expertise makes you rational and level-headed, but in The Intelligence Trap, David Robson says that “expert” decisions are more likely to be based on emotion than rationale—in other words, your expertise stops you from making informed decisions based on evidence.
The reason for this, argues Robson, is that when you consider yourself an expert on an issue, you don’t feel the need to gather evidence, seek out new information, or engage in careful analysis to support your decisions. Instead, you’re more inclined to rely on your pre-existing knowledge and make decisions based on how you are feeling in the moment.
Reconsideration is the ability to question, investigate, and analyze your opinions and beliefs. Grant says that reconsideration is a crucial skill for critical thinking that can apply to many aspects of your life. In this section, we'll explain why reconsideration is so important, why most people don't do it, and how you can engage in it.
(Shortform note: Reconsideration has become an important part of post-Covid recovery for many organizations. Leaders have had to reconsider many assumptions about their business practices, especially assumptions regarding remote work. Before the pandemic, many organizations assumed employees needed to be present in the office to be productive and efficient. Studies have shown, however, that workers can be equally productive when working remotely—convincing many business leaders to reconsider their remote work policies.)
Grant says that there are many benefits to reconsideration that positively affect your interactions with others, your sense of humility, and your openness to new ideas.
There are three ways that your interactions improve when you stay open to questioning and analyzing your ideas:
(Shortform note: Although Grant argues that questioning your beliefs makes for more positive interactions with others and exposes you to different perspectives, some social research argues that we’re actually hardwired to seek the company of people who think like us. This suggests that while reconsideration can certainly promote more open-minded conversations with others, it may not have the effect of improving your relationships if your conversations tend to focus on where your ideas differ.)
Grant writes that there are two ways in which reconsideration can help you develop a better sense of self-awareness and humility:
(Shortform note: Grant writes that having an accurate understanding of your own biases and blind spots is key to developing humility. This is an important skill for anyone to have, but it’s especially important for those in leadership positions. Humility is essential to effective leadership because it communicates that you can see beyond yourself and admit that you don’t have all the answers. This helps others relate to you and encourages them to step forward and contribute their knowledge.)
Grant writes that reconsideration can help you become more open to new ideas in two primary ways:
(Shortform note: Studies show that, in addition to simply making you more comfortable with being wrong, being open to new ideas has neurological benefits that can make you more perceptive and mentally flexible. When you are open-minded, your brain gets better at integrating new information, leading to enhanced creativity.)
Despite its benefits, you may find it challenging to practice reconsideration because beliefs and opinions aren't just ideas—they're a foundational way of identifying yourself and distinguishing yourself from others. Any challenge during an argument can threaten your core sense of identity.
(Shortform note: There is a neurochemical basis for the “threat” you feel when someone threatens your identity. When you identify with a belief, you often also identify with those who share your belief—for example, your support for a certain political candidate often translates into a sense of group belonging with other supporters. In Thank You For Arguing, Jay Heinrichs explains that this sense of group belonging gives you a burst of oxytocin, the hormone responsible for human bonding. When your identity is challenged, your oxytocin spikes in response to the “threat” to your group—prompting a defensive response of aggression and anger.)
Grant notes that feeling threatened in this way often triggers one of three defensive mindsets:
Negative Behaviors or Frameworks for Understanding Behavior?
In his book, Grant cites an essay by Phil Tetlock as the basis for the three behaviors he describes. Grant describes these behaviors as negative—however, Tetlock’s original essay doesn’t describe these defensive behaviors as good or bad; they are a natural result of humans dealing with the pressures of seeking group belonging. Tetlock believes that because these behaviors are common defensive responses, they provide helpful frameworks for examining human behavior.
You become self-righteous when you want to convince yourself that the group you belong to is grounded in good values and practices.
You become argumentative when you see others seek to join your group without following agreed-upon social practices. For example, you are part of a social group that wears pink on Wednesdays. When you see someone not wearing pink who tries to join your group, you argue against her inclusion because she doesn’t adhere to the group’s defining principle.
You become inwardly persuasive in situations when you must reconcile your multiple social identities. For example, you are a vegetarian, but you eat meat at your grandmother’s house because you have a close relationship with her. You persuade yourself that your behavior is acceptable—because while it contradicts one of your social identities, it also allows you to maintain another important identity.
Tetlock’s frameworks offer insight into the function of your behaviors. When combined with Grant’s approach, they can help you assess why you feel so defensive when your beliefs are challenged. When challenged, first identify your emotions (as Grant suggests) by asking the following questions: Am I behaving persuasively, argumentatively, or self-righteously? Do I believe what I’m saying, or am I being reactionary and defensive?
Next, reflect on the function of these emotions (as Tetlock suggests) by asking yourself: What is the function of these behaviors? Are they a result of my need for social acceptance?
Grant notes that outwardly defensive behaviors often coincide with an inward thought process that reinforces your beliefs and closes you off to reconsideration. In this guide, we call this process the Conviction-Assumption Process (Grant uses the term Overconfidence Cycle) and it operates in the following sequence:
| Conviction-Assumption Process |
| Arrogance—“I know a lot about this topic.”
↓ |
| Certainty—“I am sure I am right about this topic.”
↓ |
| Interpretation of information based on what you expect to find (also known as confirmation bias)—What we expect or want to happen influences how we interpret information. “This information confirms what I already thought!”
↓ |
| Confirmation of your initial views—“I knew I was right.”
(You conclude that your initial views were correct, perpetuating the process.) ↑ |