James Öz, an expert on historical social movements, discusses how diverse advocacy groups cite previous successes to justify their strategies for social change. He reveals the paradox of believing that all methods are effective while often adhering to biases. The conversation emphasizes the importance of humility and skepticism in advocacy, urging listeners to adopt an exploratory mindset. Öz also addresses the role of motivated reasoning, advocating for critical self-evaluation to better engage with opposing perspectives.
09:11
forum Ask episode
web_stories AI Snips
view_agenda Chapters
menu_book Books
auto_awesome Transcript
info_circle Episode notes
insights INSIGHT
Multiple Valid Paths to Change
Different advocacy groups successfully use diverse strategies for social change.
Historical case studies can justify almost any plausible theory about how social change occurs.
insights INSIGHT
Beware Confirmation Bias
Confirmation bias leads activists to cherry-pick examples that support their beliefs.
We should be skeptical of claims endorsing any single most effective social change strategy.
volunteer_activism ADVICE
Adopt a Scout Mindset
Adopt a scout mindset to seek truth, not defend preconceptions.
Treat all studies with equal rigor regardless of their findings.
Get the Snipd Podcast app to discover more snips from this episode
Dans "The Scout Mindset", Julia Galef explore la différence entre deux approches mentales : le "Mindset du Soldat", axé sur la défense de ses croyances, et le "Mindset du Scout", qui privilégie la recherche de la vérité, même si cela remet en question ses propres convictions. L'auteure argumente que le Mindset du Scout est essentiel pour une prise de décision rationnelle et efficace. Le livre propose des outils et des techniques pour cultiver ce Mindset, en encourageant l'ouverture d'esprit, la remise en question et l'acceptation de l'incertitude. Galef utilise des exemples concrets et des anecdotes pour illustrer ses points, rendant le livre accessible à un large public. L'ouvrage est une invitation à adopter une approche plus objective et plus rigoureuse dans la formation de ses opinions et dans la prise de décisions.
[Cross-posted from my Substack here]
If you spend time with people trying to change the world, you’ll come to an interesting conundrum: Various advocacy groups reference previous successful social movements as to why their chosen strategy is the most important one. Yet, these groups often follow wildly different strategies from each other to achieve social change. So, which one of them is right?
The answer is all of them and none of them.
This is because many people use research and historical movements to justify their pre-existing beliefs about how social change happens. Simply, you can find a case study to fit most plausible theories of how social change happens. For example, the groups might say:
Repeated nonviolent disruption is the key to social change, citing the Freedom Riders from the civil rights Movement or Act Up! from the gay rights movement.
Technological progress is what drives improvements [...]
The original text contained 1 footnote which was omitted from this narration.
EA Forum Podcast (Curated & popular) 
