How Minds Change

What makes someone change their mind about a deeply held belief? Understanding this process can transform conversations and reshape relationships.

1. Belief Change Often Stems from Emotional Preparedness

Changing a belief isn't purely about evidence. People are more likely to shift their views when they're emotionally ready for change. This readiness often happens when they feel safe to question their beliefs and see alternative perspectives.

The story of Charlie Veitch underscores this point. A former 9/11 truther featured on a BBC documentary, Charlie had his conspiratorial beliefs challenged during a trip to meet experts, eyewitnesses, and even victims' families. But if facts alone prompted change, why didn't his peers in the show also shift their views? The key was Charlie’s emotional state. Already connecting with a different group, the "Truth Juice" community, Charlie felt secure questioning his former beliefs and adopting new ones that aligned with his evolving values.

The human brain fiercely protects beliefs connected to social identity. Beliefs are like psychological armor against feelings of isolation, and people fear “social death” when breaking away from their group. However, with a safety net like a new community, individuals can lower these defenses and feel free to explore ideas without fear of ostracism.

Examples

• Charlie Veitch shifted his 9/11 truther beliefs due to emotional security from a new social group.
• People often leave cults not because of facts but after forming external relationships that make them feel safe outside the cult.
• Neuroscientist studies show that shifts in personal groups precede belief changes, more than logic or evidence alone.

2. Beliefs Are Tied to Psychological and Social Safety

When our beliefs are challenged, our brain reacts as if we’re under physical attack. Neuroscientists Sarah Gimbel, Jonas Kaplan, and Sam Harris demonstrated this reaction by observing participants' brains during an experiment.

Participants in the study read counterarguments to both neutral and polarizing political statements. While neutral topics (like Edison’s contributions to the lightbulb) didn’t trigger much resistance, politically charged ones led to fight-or-flight responses. This happens because the brain treats challenges to group-related beliefs as threats to psychological safety, ultimately favoring “us vs. them” dynamics.

Deeply ingrained beliefs fulfill our need to belong to social groups. Feeling connected to others often matters more than being correct. Sociologist Brooke Harrington explains this phenomenon well, noting that “social death is more frightening than physical death.” People resist beliefs that could isolate them, even when the facts counteract their stance.

Examples

• Participants in MRI scanners showed fight-or-flight activation when political beliefs were challenged.
• Individuals prioritize in-group loyalty over truth when faced with group-related debates.
• People defend beliefs even when facts contradict them, fearing social alienation.

3. Understanding Comes After Belief, Not Before It

People don’t reason their way into beliefs; they feel their way into them. Emotion often leads individuals to accept ideas, and only afterward do they rationalize their stance.

Steve Deline and the Leadership LAB confirmed this through over 15,000 doorstep conversations about social issues like same-sex marriage. They learned that debates full of facts rarely change minds. Instead, open and empathetic dialogue helps people reflect on why they cling to certain opinions.

By connecting on a personal level and understanding emotions tied to beliefs, the LAB influenced at least 10% of individuals they conversed with to soften or change their views — an impressive result in political research. Why? When people feel truly heard, they become more open to reexamining their thought processes.

Examples

• Deep canvassing revealed emotional narratives behind opposing LGBTQ+ rights rather than purely logical objections.
• People often rewrite their “personal biographies” after they’ve accepted an emotion-driven belief.
• The Leadership LAB showed that storytelling and vulnerability supersede factual lectures in fostering change.

4. Social Identities Anchor Beliefs

Beliefs tether us to specific groups, and groups offer reassurance during times of uncertainty. But when groups no longer satisfy a person’s needs, beliefs can start to shift.

The reason cult members, conspiracy theorists, or activists often change their perspective is due not to contradicting evidence but to shifts in their relationship within their group. When friction or disillusionment outweighs belonging, individuals become more receptive to questioning former convictions.

Social identity research reveals this dynamic. Studies show that individuals are willing to endure factual errors to protect group bonds. Yet, the reverse holds true: new alliances or communities offer the chance to explore contradictions and build trust elsewhere.

Examples

• Former cult members typically leave only after creating connections outside the cult.
• Conspiracy theorists who switch sides describe moments when their original communities felt untrustworthy.
• People identify with political labels or movements until personal priorities (like family needs) override group ties.

5. Empathy Can Change Minds More Than Evidence

Empathy lays the groundwork for transforming beliefs. Deep canvassing and street epistemology show that listening and understanding, rather than debating, create real shifts.

By approaching conversations without judgment, listeners encourage people to articulate their beliefs from a vulnerable and personal perspective. Instead of fighting evidence with counterevidence, empathetic dialogue focuses on unraveling thought processes at their roots.

These methods work because people often need emotional support to leave behind past beliefs. The acceptance of another person facilitates questioning while maintaining dignity for the person being challenged.

Examples

• Deep canvassers influence opinions by sharing personal vulnerabilities with voters.
• Politicians who model empathy in debates often influence public opinion.
• Family disputes about political topics often cool when both parties focus on feelings rather than facts.

6. Questioning Definitions Clarifies Discussions

Miscommunication happens when people use the same words to mean different things. Street epistemology highlights how clarifying definitions can diffuse confusion.

During debates, people often rely on shared terms that they interpret differently. Take "freedom" or "equality" — essential concepts but open to interpretation by liberals versus conservatives. Clarifying meanings bridges gaps and ensures genuine understanding.

By asking what specific terms mean to individuals, you prevent arguments fueled by unclear expectations. This small step can lead to powerful breakthroughs over time.

Examples

• Debates about “government” often fail when participants define it differently and talk past each other.
• Disagreements over morality often dissolve when parties clarify the principles underpinning their stances.
• Climate change debates improve when both sides define “evidence” clearly.

7. Open-Ended Inquiry Encourages Deeper Thinking

Instead of telling someone they’re wrong, asking how they arrived at a belief encourages self-reflection. This non-confrontational approach fosters genuine curiosity.

Anthony Magnabosco, creator of street epistemology, uses probing questions during conversations to help people think about their reasoning. By exploring “why” and “how” someone feels confident in their beliefs, he helps individuals assess their logic independently.

Open-ended questions don’t provoke defensive reactions but instead empower individuals. This process feels more like a conversation than a threat, reducing resistance to new perspectives.

Examples

• Asking flat-Earth believers, “What would change your mind?” fosters productive discussions.
• Vegan advocates prompt others to reconsider eating habits by asking values-based questions.
• Science communicators help skeptics reassess misconceptions without blunt confrontation.

8. Confidence Metrics Unpack Belief Intensity

A powerful tool in street epistemology is asking people how confident they feel — on a scale of 0 to 100 — about their assertions. This small act helps uncover the assumptions underpinning their beliefs.

When people quantify their thoughts, they confront any ambiguity or doubt hiding in their reasoning. It opens the door to meaningful exploration without the intensity of a direct challenge.

By asking, "Why not 100%?" facilitators gently probe motivations, leaving the person in control of their thought journey.

Examples

• Vaccine skeptics start reconsidering doubts when asked to assign a confidence score.
• Political views soften after individuals engage with uncertainty through confidence-rating questions.
• Confidence assessments reveal whether beliefs are rooted in emotion or evidence.

9. Consistent Conversations Solidify Change

Sometimes one conversation isn’t enough. Follow-ups help build trust, deepen reflection, and prevent people from defaulting to their prior beliefs.

Street epistemology emphasizes ongoing dialogue. Suggesting another discussion reinforces the collaborative rather than combative tone. Over time, these discussions accumulate impact.

People don’t like being forced into drastic shifts — revisiting ideas respectfully provides more meaningful results.

Examples

• Climate activists see progress by staging open-ended forums regularly.
• Family members influence each other politically by having multiple respectful conversations.
• Therapy-like settings encourage long-term attitude shifts through repeated sessions.

Takeaways

1. Foster empathy in conversations by listening without judgment, which helps people open up about their beliefs.
2. Use open-ended questions to guide people through reflecting on their reasoning, avoiding confrontations or direct challenges.
3. Build understanding by clarifying definitions and assumptions, ensuring clear communication and mutual respect.