“He might have had a reason. She may have misunderstood him. We don't know what happened before that.”
Fair points. So what should they do now?
“Well, it's complicated.”
The conversation has developed nuance and lost its exit.
Taking several perspectives seriously can be wise. But keeping every possible answer on the table forever isn't automatically deep thinking.
Understanding a reason isn't the same as excusing an action
Imagine a reality-show contestant breaks a promise. One viewer says, “What a terrible person.” That's too quick. Another says, “We can never judge anyone.” That's not much more useful.
A better response makes two things true at once: the contestant may have felt cornered, and breaking the promise still hurt someone.
Psychologists studying integrative complexity distinguish recognizing different viewpoints from connecting them. That research doesn't provide a personality test for who counts as a “deep person,” but the distinction is useful: collecting angles is only the beginning.
A provisional answer beats a permanent shrug
Suppose friends are choosing a weekend trip. Weather, price, travel time and everyone's preferences pull in different directions.
“We could argue forever” is one option. “Let's book A, and switch to B if the weather turns” is another.
The second choice admits uncertainty without being paralyzed by it. Intellectual humility—recognizing that your knowledge might be incomplete—doesn't require speaking in question marks all day.
You can make a decision without making it sacred. When the facts change, change the plan.
A quick test for impressive-sounding fog
“The universe is the timeless dialogue of infinite possibility.”
Sounds profound. What does it mean, exactly?
Experiments on pseudo-profound statements show that impressive wording can sometimes earn a “deep” rating even when it conveys little identifiable meaning.
So ask: Why do you think that? What would someone on the other side say? What evidence would change your mind?
A thoughtful explanation becomes clearer under those questions. Empty grandness usually produces more mist.
Digging deeper should produce something worth bringing back. Otherwise, you may just be running a fog machine at the entrance.
Deep thinking is being able to choose while remaining willing to revise.
References (3)
- Integrative complexity literature review: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10546895/
- Review of intellectual humility: https://www.nature.com/articles/s44159-022-00081-9
- Pennycook et al. (2015), On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500006999
