My favorite
definition of open-mindedness comes from Milton Rokeach’s book, The Open and Closed Mind.
The
extent to which a person can receive, evaluate, and act on relevant information
on
its own intrinsic merits unencumbered by irrelevant factors in the situation
arising
from
within the person or from the outside.
Most of us are
convinced that we are open-minded (objective), and we accept this without
examination or critique. In reality, it seems to be another of those positive,
but often incorrect stories we have about ourselves. No matter what we think,
objectivity is often compromised by irrelevant
factors, particularly when we are under stress in a conflict situation. And because
many of these factors operate below conscious level, we can maintain our story
of objectivity without ever being aware of its falsity.
What are a few
examples of irrelevant factors?
Any big need,
such as to be right, to win, to be perfect, or to be loved.
Desiring the
approval of others.
Passion for or
against something.
Taking ourselves
too seriously.
Additionally,
there are many other irrelevant factors arising from our expectations, beliefs,
values, and preferences. Imagine I prefer relating to people who are outgoing,
but am engaged in a conflict discussion with someone who is not. Or, suppose I
believe that most people, given the opportunity, will try to take advantage of
you. These will surely compromise my objectivity. And among the worst compromisers
of open-mindedness may be a person’s political views. No matter how well-meaning
and sincere, the person’s emotional commitment to a position or view ruins even
the pretense of objectivity. But the problem is even more challenging. The
reality is that most of our normal, and often unhealthy, ways of interacting
with others are likely to be irrelevant factors.
Irrelevant
factors obstruct open-mindedness because they have nothing to do with the issue
under discussion. They are mostly self-serving efforts (if unconsciously used) to
help us avoid the rigor and discipline of objective thinking and interaction.
While they seem to protect us from challenges, all they really do is make
conflict situations worse. Lacking conscious awareness of the impact of
irrelevant factors, we blithely wreak havoc whenever our stress levels are up,
particularly in conflict settings.
Do we know of
even one person who really evaluates contrary information fairly, often to his
own disadvantage? Do we know anyone who readily gives up a cherished position
in the face of a stronger one!? If we down-to-the-bone honest, there are few. Why?
First, it takes great self-confidence and a powerful desire to be
intellectually honest no matter what the cost. Second, it requires that we give
up any attachments to our views and positions---they must be expendable at a
moment’s notice, joyfully. And third, perhaps hardest of all, it takes profound
personal control of our harmful behavior, an effort that takes substantial will
power and practice sustained often over years.
But not all
open-mindedness breakdowns are the result of us responding to irrelevant
factors or being unwilling or unable to examine contrary evidence fairly. Some
arise from the brain’s cognitive short-cuts we use without thinking and which
arose in part because they helped ensure early human survival. In the anchoring
bias we can be over-reliant on the first piece of information we see, often
discounting information we receive later. In the availability bias we
over-estimate the importance of information available to us without the
awareness of potentially valid conflicting information. And the confirmation
bias encourages us to accept only that information confirming our existing
beliefs or views.
Being unaware of
these short-cuts, we cannot help but be un-objective at times. That does not
totally excuse us, however. And neither does being unaware of irrelevant
factors. But if we really cannot see these elements operating, what should we
do? As in all troubling interactions, we must remain tightly focused and
completely respectful. We can pay close attention to our mirrors, those with
whom we disagree. Their verbal and non-verbal responses to us are invaluable
clues to how they perceive us. This enables us to do an after-the-fact analysis
of our thinking and responses to see if they were driven by factors we could
not see.
Interestingly,
whether we are objective is hardly our decision alone to make. It is a social
factor in the sense that others have judgment on our open-mindedness. No matter
what we claim, if others do not see us as objective, then we are out of luck.
That is why attention to how others respond to us in conflict situations is
critical. It is our main, and in some cases only, avenue to seeing and addressing
irrelevant factors.
