10. Everyday Reasoning

This area is about making assessments, drawing conclusions, and forming views in everyday situations. Simply, reasoning is the ability to hold several pieces of information in mind and connect them in a way that helps us deal with an issue or situation. We can all think well, but that requires some effort. Reasoning can be seen as the fitness of the mind, which means that it can be strengthened through practice: the more you exercise your reasoning, the better you become at it. Furthermore, as physical exercise makes the body firmer and improves its shape, exercising reasoning capacity makes our thoughts sharper and more elegant. The main point here is on the reasoning process, although the starting and end points are briefly addressed, too. In fact, we will begin with the endpoint so that you don’t do that when reasoning.

The endpoint (a conclusion)

If you harbour a desired outcome before you start, you will consciously or unconsciously shape your reasoning to fit that conclusion, which is likely to distort it. For this reason, it is best not to think at all about which outcome is preferable. Let your reasoning lead you to a conclusion, and then decide what to do about it. You may, of course, have a hypothesis, a prediction, or an intuition, but if you are going to test it through reasoning, suspend or at least be tentative with it while going through the process.

The starting point (facts and assumptions)

Reasoning never starts in a vacuum. There is always a starting point that consists of facts or assumptions or – most often – some combination of the two. No matter how good your reasoning is, you are likely to end with a wrong conclusion if your starting point is not solid. So, if you don’t know all the facts, be careful not to treat assumptions as if they are facts. Staying with the unknown is better than getting facts wrong. To avoid fusing them in the heat of the moment, try to remember to briefly pause to ask, “What am I assuming here?” For example, let’s say you think that your friend forgot to call you – the fact is that they didn’t call. That they forgot is an assumption. Keeping those two separate can save you time and spare you unnecessary aggravation and mistakes.

The process

Broadly speaking, good everyday reasoning is objective (meaning fair and not biased) and accurate. Distancing is a skill that can help with the first, and zooming out can help with the second.

Distancing

If your thinking is about personal tastes or preferences that affect only you, being subjective is not a problem. But if your views and judgments concern others or may affect them, it is usually better to aim for objectivity. This supports social cohesion and provides common ground for living and doing things together. It is also fairer. How do you feel when others are not objective about you? It is worth remembering that when you are tempted not to be!

You may benefit from being objective even if others are not involved, because it reduces thinking distortions that often lead to undesirable consequences (that may not be immediately apparent). If taken too far, subjectivity can turn into bias, which is not sound thinking. Admittedly, it is not always easy to be objective, and we can’t entirely rely on the views of others either. Even large groups can be highly subjective (this is known as collective bias). Still, even if complete objectivity may be only an ideal, we can move closer to it with the right tool. This tool is distancing. It enables us to detach from both personal and collective biases.

Distancing means stepping back from the content of our thoughts so that it can be considered and assessed more accurately. This is what scientists and judges do to maintain objectivity. All it takes is to look at the situation from the outside rather than the inside – from the position of an observer instead of a participant. If you want to experience a situation, by all means engage with it fully, but if you need to think it through clearly, stepping back is better. But this is not always easy. Even judges and scientists sometimes struggle to keep that distance. Usually, this is not because they want to be biased, but because internal forces draw them back in. The most common are affective states (emotions, excitement, or moods), preferences or desires, and personal interests (potential or actual benefits, gains or losses). You can take these steps to reduce the influence of these forces and retain greater objectivity:

1. Acknowledge: brushing emotions, interests, preferences, or desires under the carpet only makes their influence harder to notice. Instead, recognise and acknowledge them. Be honest with yourself, and be as specific as you can (e.g. what exactly do you like or dislike about the person or situation?)
2. Bracket: try to loosen their grip (see Emotional Reactions and Excitement) and set them aside, at least temporarily.
3. Step outside: if you struggle, imagine the situation as a bush, for example, and yourself emerging from it. Or, imagine someone who has no stake in this situation or personal preferences and that you are them. Then, focus on the evidence (all that is available – no cherry-picking!)
4. Mind your language: to ensure they don’t sneak in, avoid language that incites emotion or preference (e.g. rather than “fantastic” or “terrible”, use “positive” or “challenging”).

Zooming out

As Daniel Kahneman (the only psychologist to win a Nobel Prize) pointed out, we have two thinking modes: fast and slow. You can see it yourself: count to a hundred; you will soon notice a faint and fast stream of thought in the background. The advantage of fast thinking is speed. However, it errs more easily, especially in complex situations. Here are the most common examples:

• Generalising from limited experience or too small a sample (e.g. misusing never, always, or all as in “He never does the dishes, it is always me!”, “All politicians are crooks”).
• Oversimplifying: as in black-and-white thinking (e.g. vilifying one side of a conflict and glorifying the other).
• Jumping to conclusions without considering all the evidence.
• Being dogmatic, refusing to consider alternatives and sticking to the view already held, no matter what.

We like to think to that what comes to mind first is right because it doesn’t require further effort, but this makes us easy prey to these fallacies. That is why it is worth checking for them, especially when the matter is important (you don’t want to break up with your partner for the wrong reasons!). So, ask yourself whether you are overgeneralising, oversimplifying, or jumping to conclusions, and consider the possibility that you might not be entirely right.

Zooming out, which engages the slow thinking mode, can help you avoid these fallacies altogether. It involves putting things in context and seeing a bigger picture, to include the following:

• Other instances: for example, if your partner did something that makes you think they are selfish, recall other situations to check if it is a fair judgment or if you are unduly generalising.
• Nuances: things may be more complex and have more shades than it seems at first glance. As they say, the devil is in the details. And, sometimes the angel may be in the details, too.
• We don’t always need to go into every detail, but taking complexity into account is sometimes crucial.
• Other explanations: don’t assume you know what you don’t, such as intentions behind actions – there may be reasons behind them that you are unaware of. If unsure, check all the evidence and weigh other possibilities before jumping to a conclusion. Or simply wait. No conclusion is better than a wrong one.
• Other perspectives: play ‘devil’s advocate’ – try deliberately to reason against the perspective you currently hold.

When there is no time for slow thinking, remember that the more you rush, the more likely you are to make a mistake. Take what fast thinking comes up with tentatively and check it later.

As with any skill, distancing and zooming out take practice, but their benefits become clear very soon.