Motivated reasoning
Reasoning can be influenced by desired conclusions. Kunda's 1990 review examines how motivation shapes the retrieval and use of beliefs and reasoning strategies.
YOUR OPINION IS NOT YOUR PASSPORT.
A puzzle about changing your mind without losing dignity. We are still in the game. The move is not to defend your first thought forever. The move is to get better at thinking.
UNLOCK THE ROOMHolding a view can feel entangled with belonging, competence and personal history. But a claim is a proposal about the world—not a permanent description of its author. Here, dignity is a constraint: revise the claim without humiliating its holder.
INTERPRETATION: The equation is an original teaching metaphor, not an empirical law.
Fictional case file: a creative team believes its new launch failed because the audience disliked the idea. Examine what the evidence actually warrants. You can reconsider without grovelling.
Changing your mind is not always required. It is sometimes the most careful response to better evidence.
Reasoning can be influenced by desired conclusions. Kunda's 1990 review examines how motivation shapes the retrieval and use of beliefs and reasoning strategies.
Intellectual humility concerns awareness that one's beliefs may be mistaken. It does not mean treating all claims as equally supported or conceding to louder people.
Good revision can strengthen, narrow, qualify or retain a claim when evidence permits. Disagreement alone is not disproof.
The exercise simplifies a social interaction. High-stakes professional, ethical and interpersonal disagreements need more context than three puzzle locks can provide.
Choose a low-stakes belief. Write a piece of evidence that would make you narrow it, qualify it or abandon it. If no evidence could count, ask whether the belief is a testable claim or a personal value.
Worked example (fiction): “Remote workshops never work.” After learning that some participants reported useful collaboration, a careful revision becomes “Our first remote workshop didn't meet our goals; conditions may matter.”
Counterexample: A single enthusiastic comment is not strong evidence that a whole programme works. Do not mistake open-mindedness for credulity.
Method: An original, illustrative reasoning puzzle, not a psychological instrument, therapy, evaluation or validated test. The case data and outcomes are invented and labelled fictional. No personal answers are stored or sent. Scholarly literature informs the concepts, not any claim that playing this game changes behaviour.
A standalone illustrated Field Guide with cases, diagrams, a paper version of the puzzle, exercises and research caveats.
DOWNLOAD THE FIELD GUIDE ↓