[comment]: # (Compile this presentation with the command below) [comment]: # (mdslides docs.md --include dist) [comment]: # (...or by running the Makefile with "make") ### To talk about anything 1. [**Find a good tone** & get informed consent](#/1) 2. [**Pick a claim** & clarify](#/2) 3. [**Ask for confidence** on a scale & calibrate](#/3) 4. [**Identify main reason**](#/4) 5. [**Explore & assess** epi­stemology & reliability](#/5) 6. [**End on aporia**, a question, a good tone](#/6) 7. [Consider & prepare](#/7) 8. [Learn more & share](#/8) \ ↓[What is this?](#/0/1), →[Proceed](#/1) Note: * What is SE? * A way, th­rough civil con­ver­sa­tion, to help one reflect on the qua­lity of one's reasoning. * Epistemology? * The field of Philosophy focusing on **how we know what we know**. * Introducing.SE? * A **prac­tical in­tro­duc­tion** and over­view of Street Episte­mology (SE)

#### What is Introducing.SE? * This site is a *prac­tical in­tro­duc­tion* to [Street Episte­mology (SE)](#/0/2). * …optimized for your phone, with use­ful tips and reminders for practicing SE. * …a continuously improving resource for both new and seasoned SE practicioners. * …a way to [Share SE](#/8/2) with anyone interested. \ ↓[Learn more](#/0/2), →[Proceed](#/1)

#### What is Street Epistemology (SE)? * A way, th­rough civil con­ver­sa­tion, to help one reflect on the qua­lity of one's reasoning. * A way to have friendly dia­logue about con­ten­ti­ous topics. * A frame­work for ex­plo­ring ideas and beliefs. * A community that prac­tices SE in a frien­dly environment. * A way to introduce [Epistemology](#/0/3) into every­day conversations. \ ↓[Learn more](#/0/3), →[Proceed](#/1)

#### What is Epistemology? The field of Philosophy focusing on **how we know** what we know. \ *«How do we determine if some­thing is true?»* \ *«Which methods and tools can we employ to determine this?»* \ →[Proceed](#/1)

### 1. Find a good tone & get informed consent * Establish [**friendly rap­port**](#/1/1), and main­tain it. * [Tell them your intentions](#/1/2), so they may consent. * Avoid [topic rebuttal](#/1/3). * [Be tactful](#/1/4) in what you say. * [Be mindful](#/1/6) of their time. \ ↓[More](#/1/1), →[Proceed](#/2) Note: * Rapport * Keeping a **frien­dly tone is critical for success**. * Politeness * *Share, describe, be respectful, charitable*. * Topic rebuttal < Technique rebuttal * **Don't offer facts**. * Be **tactful** * Ask for **consent**

#### Establish rapport *Keeping a frien­dly tone is critical for success*. <br> * Show your genuine inte­rest by paying attention. * Withold judgement. * Indicate your under­stan­ding by re­flec­ting key points back. * Share what you have in common. \ *«Let's solve this mystery to­gether, shoulder to shoulder.»* \ ↓[More](#/1/2), →[Proceed](#/2)

#### Show politeness & intentions * Share [your intentions](#/7) upfront. * [Describe](#/0) or explain this method, and ask if they are open for exploring! * If they consent, show your curiosity. * Be respectful, be charitable. \ ↓[More](#/1/3), →[Proceed](#/2)

#### Avoid topic rebuttal * *Don't offer facts* (*topic rebut­tal*), un­less asked. Instead focus on the methods (*tech­nique rebuttal*). * *Stay cool* – Avoiding *topic rebut­tal* often re­quires practice. * *Practice* – [SE may at first be easier with strangers](#/8). * *Be patient* – You may need to have a few «soft» chats before pro­ce­eding with a con­ten­tious topic. \ ↓[More](#/1/3) →[Proceed](#/2)

#### Be tactful in what you say * ✅ *«Can you help me under­stand what you mean with…»* * ✅ *«Do I understand you correctly…»* * ✅ *«How do I explain to someone else…»* * ❌ *«Don't you think that…»* * ❌ *«Are you saying that…»* * ❌ *«How do you justify…»* \ ↓[More](#/1/5) →[Proceed](#/2)

#### Recording & timing * Recording? **Ask for their consent**. * Taking notes is a good alternative. * Embrace their pauses, allow them to think! * But also, respect their time. * Offer to set a timer if they are busy. \ →[Proceed](#/2)

### 2. Pick a claim & clarify * Find a [claim to explore](#/2/1). * What is [a good claim?](#/2/2) * [Clarify](#/2/3) terms. * Ask «why» questions to turn [normative claims](#/2/4) factual. * Avoid [«Safety Nets»](#/2/5). Note: * Find a claim * **Single, factual** * **Specific, important, positive** * Clarify terms * "True for me", qualify, use **their definition**, take notes * Normative caims * **Ask "whys" to turn into factual claim** * Safety Nets * "If it was not for my belief, I would drink myself to death"

#### Find a claim to explore * *«Do you have a topic you want to explore?»* * *«…you wish more people knew of?»* * *«…or agreed with?»* * Aim for a [**single topic**](#/2/2). * Re-phrase the topic as [a factual claim](#/2/4). * *«Would you mind if we explore this together?»* \ *No need to rush when considering claims!*

#### What is a good claim? * ✅ Claim is specific, clear & terse. * ✅ …Phrased as a positive: *«I believe…»* * ✅ …Relevant to us both: *«True for us»* * ✅ …Foundational or im­portant to them. * ❌ Not phrased as a nega­tive: ~~*«I don't believe…»*~~ * ⚠️ …Trivial or obvious. \ ⚠️ Stop if the claim is part of a [Safety Net](#/2/5)!

#### Clarifying terms * *«What do you mean when you say …?»* * In *your own* words, **repeat** what you hear. * Have them **confirm** if you under­stand correctly. * Identify, clarify & qualify confusing words. * Use *their* de­fini­tions! \ *Take notes!*

#### Normative vs. factual *Normative ought;<br> Factual is.* <br> * «Is» claims are often ea­sier to explore. * «Ought» claims often re­quire extra clari­fication. * Asking «why» can help you get closer to a fac­tual claim to explore! \ *«If everyone ag­reed with the [norma­tive claim], what would change in the world?»* \ *«…[how confident](#/3) are you this change would happen?»*

#### ⚠️ Avoid «Safety Net» claims A *Safety Net* is a belief that pre­vents an individual from doing harm to them­selves or others. \ *«My Belief helped me be­come sober, and without it I would probably drink myself to death.»* \ SE is not always the right tool to use, and **SE is not for therapy**. Please do no harm. Pick another claim!

### 3. Ask for con­fi­dence on a scale & calibrate * Ask for [confidence](#/3/1). * [Explore](#/3/2) their confidence. * [Pre-contemplative](#/3/3) or not? * [Nudging](#/3/4) confidence. Note: * Ask for confidence * Avoids polarization, **use a scale**, ask for up, down, what would change mind * how important is it to **believe in true things**? * Explore confidence * Evidence, why not other arguments? **why not extremes**? * OPTONAL: Pre-contemplative? * 0 or 100? trust? tribe? * If room for >100%, calibrate? postpone? is evidence important?

#### Ask for confidence *Use a scale to help reduce polarization.* <br> * *«How **confident** are you X is true?»* 0–100% * *«How important is it for you to believe in true things?»* 0–100% * *«Why is this the right number for you?»* * *«What would move you up just a bit?»* * *«What would move you down a little?»* * *«What could change your mind?»*

#### Explore their confidence * At 100%, *«Would any­thing increase your con­fidence even higher?»* * *«How would physical evidence change your con­fidence?»* * At 0%, *«What reasons do you think others have for being higher?»* * Above 0%, *«Why not lower?»* * Below 100%, *«Why not higher?»*

#### Pre-contemplative — or not? *«I am 100% confident, and nothing can change my mind»* <br> * 100% or 0% con­fidence may indicate they are pre-con­tem­pla­tive. * Build trust by exploring a «softer» topic first? * Is their confidence a shib­boleth of their tribe? \ *«Is there anything you can think of, or learn, that would lower your confidence?»* \ *«Under what conditions would this claim be false?»*

#### Nudging confidence *«Can you imagine some­thing that would make you even more confident?»* \ *«If there is still room to be­come more con­fi­dent, what would you re­cali­brate your cur­rent con­fi­dence to?»* \ *«If you value evidence, what evidence would change your mind?»* \ *«If your community changed their mind, would you also?»*

### 4. Identify main reason * What is [their most im­portant source](#/4/1), ex­peri­ence or reason? * Are there any other [under­lying reasons](#/4/2) sup­porting this? * [Many small reasons](#/4/3), or a few large? Note: * Asking for source/reason * **What makes it good?** better reason? * Underlying reasons * What if reason is unavailable, confidence change, yes: how? no: what else? switch topic? * Many small/few large reasons * Commonalities? influence how – adds/multiplies? take notes!

#### Asking about reasons *«What makes this particular reason a good one for you?»* \ *«If you could learn of a better reason to support this belief, what would it look like?»*

#### Exploring underlying reasons * *«If this reason was un­avail­able to you, would it change your con­fi­dence?»* * *«…if so, how would it change?»* * *«…and if not, **what else** is keeping you at your con­fi­dence level?»* * [Switching topic](#/2) or focu­sing on [another reason](#/4) is fine! \ *«Claim 2 seems to be important for your belief in claim 1. Would you mind if we explore it instead?»*

#### Many small, or a few large? *Explore to under­stand their back­ground.* <br> * Are there any com­mon­al­i­ties between the reasons? * With many small, ask how each in­flu­en­ces their confidence. * Is this influence ad­ditive (may surpass 100%) or mul­tipli­ca­tive (may never reach 100%)? \ *Take notes!* \ *When you're done, restate & sum­marize their reason(s).*

### 5. Explore & assess epistemology & reliablility *Is our epistemology reliable? Let's assess.* <br> * This is [the key goal of SE](#/5/1)! * Explore [Epistemology](#/5/2). * Assess [Reliability](#/5/3). * Recognize [Unreliable reasons](#/5/5). Note: * Goal: **reliability**, **how** > why > what * Epistemology: **arrive**, rule out, soundness * Reliability: **Outsider test** * Consultant, double standard Conformity, status quo, selective skeptic * Fallacies * Appeal to authority, ignorance, tradition * Biases * Confirmation bias, availability heuristic, motivated reasoning * News, Publications * bias, misleading, fact check fails, naïve realism * C.R.A.A.P test

#### The key goal of SE *Explore the reliability of methods used when forming a belief.* \ ***How*** questions are bet­ter than *Why* & *What.* \ *«If our methods aren't reliable, should we be this confident?»*

#### Exploring Epistemology * *«How did you arrive at the reason?»* * *«How did you rule out other reasons that could explain the same?»* * *«What methods were used to determine the [sound­ness](https://iep.utm.edu/val-snd/) of this reason?»* * *«How can we de­termine if these methods are reliable?»* \ *«If a method or a reason is un­reli­able, how does this affect our as­sess­ment?»*

#### Assessing reliability I **The outsider test**<br> – *«Would some­one using your rea­sons, but coming from a different starting point reach the same conclusion?»* **The consultant test**<br> – *«How would you evaluate this claim if it was **not** your own?»* **The double standard test**<br> – *«Am I judging other pe­ople’s reasoning by a stan­dard I wouldn’t apply to myself?»* \ ([continued…](#/5/4))

#### Assessing reliability II **The conformity test**<br> – *«If other people no longer held this belief, to what extent would you still hold it?»* **The status quo bias test**<br> – *«If your current claim was not the status quo, would you still actively choose it?»* **The selective skeptic test**<br> – *«If the same reasoning sup­ported a dif­ferent or op­posing conclusion, how cre­dible would you judge it to be?»*

#### Recognizing unreliable reasons * ❌ [Informal fallacies](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies#Informal_fallacies), like *[Appeals to auth­ority](https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority)*, *[ig­no­rance](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance)* or *[tradition](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition).* * ❌ [Cognitive biases](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_bias#List_of_biases), like *[Con­fir­mation bias](https://yourbias.is/confirmation-bias)*, *[Av­ail­abi­lity heu­ris­tic](https://yourbias.is/the-availability-heuristic)* and *[Moti­vated reasoning](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivated_reasoning).* * ❌ News sources are [biased or misleading](https://adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/). * ❌ News sources that [fail fact checks](https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/). * ❌ Academic publi­ca­tions that don't pass [the C.R.A.A.P. test](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRAAP_test). \ *«If a text only offers thoughts I agree with, how can I know it is truthful?»*

### 6. End on aporia, a question, a good tone *The best endings offer food for thought!* <br> * Try [ending on aporia](#/6/1) or with a question. * Offer them some [reasons to return](#/6/2). \ *«I've never thought about that!»* Note: * Ending * With **aporia** or **question**, both **happy** * Returning * Necessary? look forward to it, **make one think**

#### Ending the conversation * Try to end on a posi­tive note, with *wonder* or *[aporia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aporia)*. * Success? – You have it when **both are happy** to have had the con­ver­sation. * If you can, offer to [con­tinue the chat later](#/6/2). * Maybe offer them a printed [Introducing.SE card](dist/media/introducing-se-card-2022-09-06.pdf)?

#### Reasons to return Some conversations may require several sessions. \ Give your conversation partner reasons to look forward to them! \ *«That was a good ques­tion. You're making me think!»*

### 7. Consider & prepare * Consider [your intentions](#/7/1). * Adopt a [learner's attitude](#/7/2). * Be aware of [their expectations](#/7/3). * Do any necessary [prac­tical preparations](#/7/4). Note: * Intentions or goal * Learn or change mind? share! * Learner's attitude * curiosity, open-minded, focus, connect ideas * Their expectations * AVOID: Scripted, interview, **leading**, messaging, embarrass, cornered * Practical * Note-taking equipment, friend, recorder, timer, cards

#### Consider your intentions *Before engaging in SE, decide­for­yourself…* <br> * What's your goal? To learn, em­path­ize or help them change their mind? * Are you also open to learn and change your own mind? * Decide, and consider sharing your intentions upfront. * As you proceed, expect your goals and intentions to show.

#### Adopt a learner's attitude *Find a way to be…* <br> * … **Self-directed** – ask about what you find curious or confusing. * … **Open-minded** – there's always something to learn! * … **Single-minded** – focus on one topic until you grasp it. * and **Thorough** – don't just acknowledge, but try to *connect ideas*.

#### Expectation awareness *Expect them to dislike…* <br> * ❌ *scripted* con­versations. * ❌ …«interviewing». * ❌ …leading questions. * ❌ …overt «messaging». * ❌ …being em­barrassed. * ❌ …made to feel cornered.

#### Practical preparations *Depending on your situation, you may also…* <br> * Bring something to take notes with. * Bring a friend! Let them listen in without par­ti­ci­pating, so they later can offer feedback. * Optionally, bring an audio recorder for your own reviewing or for sharing. * Optionally, bring a timer. * Print some [cards](dist/media/introducing-se-card-2022-09-06.pdf) to give away!

### 8. Learn more & share * Practice, learn and im­prove with a friendly community! * Find SE practitioners on [Discord](https://discord.gg/sKap3zM) & [elsewhere](https://streetepistemology.com/community). * SE videos, blogs, books, tutorials and more on [streetepistemology.com](https://streetepistemology.com/). * Share your ex­peri­ences with the Street Epi­ste­mology community, so we can improve together! * …And when you meet someone that may benefit from SE, [share this site](#/8/2)! Note: * Books * **How Minds Change** by David McRaney * **How to Have Impossible Conversations** by Peter Boghossian and James Lindsay * **The Scout Mindset** by Julia Galef * **Mental Immunity** by Andy Norman

#### Other SE resources Looking for another take on Street Epistemology? <br> * Check out the [Street Epistemology Basics](https://streetepistemology.com/blog/street-epistemology-the-basics). * Prefer videos? Check out LiveWell.Coach's [SE Tutorial](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKr_phSSzes&list=PLEBCyAR7MPxk6fRihp-Op9UN2Tw_qI6FJ) on YouTube. * Also, there's an awesome [SE poster](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QNgN7HyzWE2AYm5VxaaRy9lqKQ6Y-zUm/view?usp=sharing)!

[](https://streetepistemology.com) #### Street Epistemology [](https://introducing.se) #### Introducing.SE

#### License <p xmlns:cc="http://creativecommons.org/ns#" xmlns:dct="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"><a property="dct:title" rel="cc:attributionURL" href="https://introducing.se">Introducing.SE</a> & content, by <a rel="cc:attributionURL dct:creator" property="cc:attributionName" href="https://chaos.social/@sjn">Salve J. Nilsen</a> & others, is licensed <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/?ref=chooser-v1" target="_blank" rel="license noopener noreferrer" style="display:inline-block;">CC-BY-SA-4.0 International <img style="height:22px!important;margin-left:3px;vertical-align:text-bottom;" src="dist/icons/cc.svg?ref=chooser-v1"><img style="height:22px!important;margin-left:3px;vertical-align:text-bottom;" src="dist/icons/by.svg?ref=chooser-v1"><img style="height:22px!important;margin-left:3px;vertical-align:text-bottom;" src="dist/icons/sa.svg?ref=chooser-v1"></a></p> <br> #### Contributing 🚧 This site is a work in pro­gress. Please help us improve it! \ Source code, content, attributions and issue tracker is on [Github](https://github.com/sjn/introducing-se/). \ [🔙 *to start*](#)

#### Some talks are *hard* Imagine a topic – *poli­tical*, *ideo­logi­cal*, *ethi­cal* or maybe even *con­fusing*, *con­tent­ious* or *harmful*. \ Do you offer critique? Facts? De­ri­sion? A pas­sio­nate plea to change their mind? Or do you just avoid it all, distancing yourself? \ If you have to engage, you can do it in an effective and respectful way, with [Street Epistemology](#/0/2).