Opinions vs. assumptions
I came across a tweet earlier this year from Jason Fried that read: “I used to think everyone had an opinion, but now I think everyone has an assumption.”
I wondered aloud, “Aren’t opinions and assumptions the same thing?”
I popped open a tab to Dictionary.com and typed in “assumption.”
Scanning the definition, I came to this: Arrogance; presumption ... a belief on reasonable grounds or probable evidence.
What about opinion?
“A belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.”
Hmmm. I think I know what Jason was going for, but I think he got it backwards.
If I’m reading the definitions right, assumptions are based on reason and evidence, while opinions are more, dare I say, touchy-feely.
So I tweaked Jason’s tweet: We too often assume our opinions are evidence enough for a thought or idea to be true.
Let me explain...
When do you know you're wrong?
Subscribe to my newsletter, The Follow-Up
Sign up to receive monthly insights from me breaking down the features of inspiring communication
Astronomer Neil DeGrasse Tyson has said, “One of the great challenges in this world is knowing enough about a subject to think you’re right, but not enough about the subject to know you're wrong.”
This is what’s known as the Dunning-Kruger effect. We have a tendency to overestimate how much we know about a subject when we gain a little bit of knowledge about it. As we become more informed about the subject, we begin to lose confidence about what we know since we are exposed to just how much information and nuance are contained within the subject.
Finally, as we continue to gain more knowledge and information, we understand what we were wrong about previously, and are able to articulate with authority what is actually true about the subject.
However, even then, sometimes knowing you’re wrong isn’t enough to overcome biases and previously held opinions.
We now live in a world where the phrase “alternate facts” has seriously passed across someone’s lips. And this isn’t a political commentary, I’m simply addressing a larger societal issue.
While I'm on a definitions kick, a fact is defined as “something that actually exists; reality; truth.”
Alternate facts are, quite literally by the rule of definition, make-believe. To be alternate from reality and truth is to be fantasy and untrue.
But when we have an opinion and we never explore that opinion further and deeper to see if what we believe is actually true, our egos go into lock-down mode.
Our opinion becomes an assumption in our own minds; believing that our opinion is evidence of truth. We hunker down and defend our belief as if belief alone proves certainty.
Curiosity killed the ego
On episode 27 of The Follow-Up Question, ABC Chief National Correspondent Matt Gutman joined me to talk about his career in journalism and how curiosity is what drives him.
“I’ve had some of the most amazing scoops of my career just by talking to random people and learning things,” he said, adding that “Being nice to people has led to the greatest successes in my life.”
And that’s how we avoid the challenge Neil DeGrasse Tyson warned about ... thinking we know enough when we actually know too little.
We must get curious about what it is we believe to be true, and what someone else’s experience might tell us about the world around us. Dig in and ask questions. Be curious. Strive to learn more, even if the truth — the facts — don’t line up with our opinions.
Saying “I don't know, but I'm going to find out” is one of the strongest, most powerful things we can say.
It takes being curious about the world outside our ego-driven opinions, and to ask the question, “Do I know enough to make this assumption?”
