Something You Should Know - SYSK Choice: Why Things Catch On & The Art and Science of Logic

Starting point is 00:00:00 The search for truth never ends. Introducing June's Journey, a hidden object mobile game with a captivating story. Connect with friends, explore the roaring 20s, and enjoy thrilling activities and challenges while supporting environmental causes. After seven years, the adventure continues with our immersive travels feature. Explore distant cultures and engage in exciting experiences. There's always something new to discover. Are you ready?

Starting point is 00:00:27 Download June's Journey now on Android or iOS. Today on Something You Should Know, is it okay to cook with hot tap water? The simple answer is no, and I'll explain why. Then, why do things catch on and become popular? One reason is something called social currency. For example... A couple years ago, Beyonce came out with a new album. No advertising.

Starting point is 00:00:49 Just put it online because she knew that her followers want to be the first person to tell their friends, if you know about something before everyone else does, it makes you look special, it makes you look in the know. And so you pass it on to get that social currency. Plus, how often should you change your oil? The answer is nothing close to every 3,000 miles. And Mr. Spock on Star Trek struggled with logic and emotions.

Starting point is 00:01:12 Are they incompatible with each other? No. Logic and emotions aren't in a strict dichotomy with each other. And I think it's very dangerous to believe that if you are emotional, then you are definitely not being logical. All this today on Something You Should Know. Metrolinks and Crosslinks are reminding everyone to be careful as Eglinton Crosstown LRT train testing is in progress. Please be alert as trains can pass at any time on the tracks.

Starting point is 00:01:47 Remember to follow all traffic signals. Be careful along our tracks and only make left turns where it's safe to do so. Be alert, be aware, and stay safe. Something you should know. Fascinating intel. The world's top experts. And practical advice you can use in your life. Today, something you should know. Fascinating intel, the world's top experts, and practical advice you can use in your life. Today, Something You Should Know with Mike Carruthers. Hello, welcome to Something You Should Know. Yeah, I've mentioned before how much I like to cook. I don't know why, I just, I've

Starting point is 00:02:19 always liked to cook. And I have been cooking a lot lately. And have you ever been in the kitchen ready to cook pasta and thought, well, one way to speed up this process is to start with hot tap water because then the water will boil faster since it's already hot out of the tap? Well, that turns out to be a pretty bad idea. According to the EPA, the heat in tap water can actually dissolve toxic metal in the plumbing, exposing you to lead. And exposure to lead can cause all kinds of health problems. Now, lead is rarely found in source water, but it can enter the water through corroded plumbing.

Starting point is 00:02:59 The EPA says that older homes are more likely to have lead pipes and fixtures, but even newer plumbing advertised as lead-free can still contain as much as 8% lead. So the best advice is to turn on the tap and let it run for a bit if it's been off for several hours. After the pipes have been flushed out, you're good to go, but stick with cold water for drinking and cooking, and only use hot water for washing. And that is something you should know. Have you ever wondered why some things catch on? Why does one restaurant become really popular while the one across the street fails? Why does one book hit the bestseller list when millions of other good books don't? Why do cat videos go viral?

Starting point is 00:03:48 Why do some movies and TV shows become big blockbusters and others don't? Of course, quality is a factor, but there's a lot more going on here. Jonah Berger set out to find out why things catch on. Jonah is a professor at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, and he is author of a book called Contagious, Why Things Catch On. Hi, Jonah. Welcome.

Starting point is 00:04:14 Thanks so much for having me. So it may not be possible to answer this because that's why you wrote a whole book to answer this question. But is there sort of a nutshell answer as to why things catch on? You know, we say see things catch on in all areas of our lives, from new products at the grocery store, movies at the multiplex, books, television shows, lots of different things catch on, ideas, viral videos. But when we try to understand why, we often think it's random, it's luck, it's chance. But it turns out there's a science behind it. Actually, if we understand the drivers of word of mouth,

Starting point is 00:04:48 of why people talk and share, that's a huge reason why things catch on. And it explains all sorts of products and ideas and behaviors across a range of domains. So talk about some interesting things that we might know of that have caught on and how they caught on and how, in retrospect, it worked and maybe what the takeaway is from that.

Starting point is 00:05:08 One of my favorites is this hot dog restaurant in New York City. So it's a place called Criff Dogs. You walk down a flight of stairs into this sort of subterranean hot dog restaurant. It has dozens of different hot dogs from a New York-style water dog with traditional, you know, just ketchup and mustard. They have a hot dog with green onion and pineapple. They have a hot dog with bacon and eggs and cheese. It's sort of like a breakfast hot dog. Every hot dog you can imagine. And tucked in the corner is this little phone booth. And if you have a minute, you walk inside this phone booth. It's quite small, but on the wall, there's a little rotary dial phone. And if

Starting point is 00:05:42 you stick your finger in the phone, you dial around in a circle like we used to many years ago, and you pick up the receiver, something really interesting happens. Someone else picks up the other line, and they ask you whether you have a reservation. And what I love about this, you say, reservation? I'm on a phone booth inside of a hot dog restaurant. What could I possibly have a reservation for? But if you're lucky, and they happen to have space, or a friend of yours made a reservation, the back of that phone booth will open and you'll be led into a secret bar called Please Don't Tell. Now, Please Don't Tell is really neat. They've never advertised yet every day they're full. 3 p.m. phone lines open up. By 3.30, all the seats are gone. You have to redial again and again and again trying to get through. And it's not like a competition, right? There are dozens of other

Starting point is 00:06:24 bars offering great drinks in New York City. So what led this bar to become so popular? And if you look at it, they did something really interesting. They made themselves a secret. Think about the last time someone told you something and they told you not to tell anyone else. And if you think about it, what's the first thing you then did with that information? And if you're like most people, you probably told someone else because having access to information that not everyone else has makes you look smart and makes you look in the know. It gives you what I'll call social currency. It's like the car we drive and just like the clothes we wear, the things we talk about and the things we share affect how other people see us. And so one reason people talk about something or they share it is

Starting point is 00:07:02 because it makes them look good. It reflects positively on them. So the basis for the popularity of this restaurant is that people tell people, and the reason they do is because it makes them look good. They're in the know about this secret place that nobody knows about, so they tell people about the secret, and that makes them look good. Definitely, and this idea of social currency happens all the time. You know, parents brag about their kids SAT scores. You know, people take selfies with celebrities that they see or pictures of themselves online on vacation.

Starting point is 00:07:36 We love to make ourselves look good. We love to share things. We pick the stuff from our lives that make us look good rather than bad. But what's really neat about that is it leads things that make the share to look good to be more likely to catch on. A couple years ago, Beyonce came out with a new album. No advertising. She just put it online because she knew that her followers want to be the first person to tell their friends that there was a new album out. If you know about something before everyone else does, it makes you look smart. It makes you look special. It makes you look in the know.

Starting point is 00:08:05 And so you pass it on to get that social currency. You know, listening to you, it sounds as if these are kind of quirky ways that things catch on that are kind of below the radar. Do things ever catch on from a more conventional approach, you know, traditional advertising, traditional marketing that we would think of? Or is it usually the stuff you're talking about? Word of mouth tends to be much more impactful than advertising. Some very nice research shows that a dollar spent on word of mouth goes 10 times as far as a dollar spent on

Starting point is 00:08:37 traditional advertising. And there are kind of two reasons why. The first, I think, is pretty intuitive, and that is trust, right? We tend not to trust ads because we know ads are trying to convince us of something. So if you think about a shampoo ad, for example, there's always a man or a woman with short or long, flowy hair. They use the shampoo, and then they get an attractive spouse. You've never seen a shampoo ad where the person doesn't get an attractive spouse. If it's a vacation destination, the kids always look like they're having fun. If it's a restaurant, the food is always tasty. But because those organizations are trying to convince us, because it's always good, it always says the product, the service, the idea is great, we don't know whether to trust it or not. But our friends will tell it to us straight. They'll say, hey, I love that restaurant, or hey, it wasn't really good, or hey, it was good for these type of people, but not these type of people. And so because of that, we're much more likely to trust our peers we're much more likely to trust word of mouth but the second really interesting aspect of word of mouth is i think is a little more

Starting point is 00:09:32 nuanced and and that's the targeting benefit if we think about it right uh ads often tell us about things we're not interested in right you watch television there's a lot of ads for things you're never going to buy you might not need a new. You might not be interested in a certain brand of shoes. You might never like traveling or not want to go to a particular destination. And so there are lots of ads that sort of don't really fit your interests. Whereas word of mouth tends to be really targeted to you. Sure, we know some people that talk about themselves and blab on at a party about things that don't interest us. But for the most part, people tend to shape what they say based on us. If you don't have a kid, no one's going to tell you about a website for baby clothes. If you don't like spicy food, no one's going to tell you

Starting point is 00:10:13 about an Indian restaurant with really spicy curries. They'll pick stuff to tell you that they think fits with you. And that's really the targeting benefit of word of mouth. You know, it happened to me actually a couple of years ago. I got a book in the mail. Academics often get books from publishers. They send them to us with the hopes that we'll assign them to students and they'll sell more copies in the process. But this time they didn't send us one book or me one book. They sent me two copies of the exact same book. I'm sitting there at my desk going, why the second copy? Somebody must have made a mistake. But there's a note in the back of the book that said, hey, Professor Berger, we think you'll like this book, but we think you'll also know someone else who will like

Starting point is 00:10:47 this book. Pass the second copy on to them. And that's really the targeting benefit of word of mouth, because I went out there and figured out who might like that book. And so because that word of mouth reaches more interested targets, I'm much more likely to be impactful because we trust it and because it's more relevant to our own interests. Talk about emotion and how that enters into this. We looked at emotion actually in a study we did a number of years ago. We were interested in what makes online content viral. So, you know, why do certain newspaper articles make the most emailed list? And so we worked with the New York Times. We got six months of articles, thousands of thousands of articles from their website. And we've done similar work with other

Starting point is 00:11:24 newspapers and other online outlets. And we analyze them on a variety of different dimensions. Sure enough, you know, more interesting or surprising articles got shared. But then we looked at emotion and we saw something quite interesting. More emotional content is more likely to be shared. But when you look at specific emotions, it's actually more complicated. You might think that people share positive things and avoid sharing negative ones. So we talked about the fact that people like to share things that make them look good. You get promoted, you talk about it. You get a celebrity, you talk about it.

Starting point is 00:11:53 But maybe if you get fired, you don't talk about it. If you're bummed out, you don't talk about it. And so we share positive things and avoid sharing negative ones. When we looked at the data, we saw something interesting. So sad things, people that made people more sad, were less likely to be shared. The more sad an article, more sad a video makes us, the less likely we are to share it. But not all negative emotions were like that. When we looked at anger or anxiety, anger or anxiety actually increased sharing. Even though anger is a negative emotion, it doesn't feel very good, it actually increases

Starting point is 00:12:22 our likelihood of sharing. And so one question is, well, what's different between anger and sadness? They're both negative emotions. Why does one decrease sharing and one increases sharing? And it turns out it's about the behavioral tendencies associated with these emotions. So think for a minute what you do when you're sad versus what you do when you're angry. When you're sad, you kind of power down a little bit, right? You want to curl up in a ball or be alone or watch your favorite movie or kind of power down. Or if you're angry, you're fired up. You want to yell at someone, you want to throw something, you want to take an action. And it turns out that this action, this activating aspect of emotions, what's called physiological

Starting point is 00:12:59 arousal, actually drives a lot of sharing. It's not about whether emotions are positive or negative, it's whether they power us up or they power us down. And so all sorts of high arousal emotions, from negative ones like anger and anxiety to positive ones like humor and excitement and inspiration, all of those things drive us to share. Whereas these power down emotions, things like sadness or contentment,

Starting point is 00:13:22 lead us to be less likely to share. And so often people say, well, why do folks share funny videos on YouTube? Because it makes them laugh. And why do they share angry political rants? Because they're pissed off. But actually, they're both exactly the same. Professor Jonah Berger is my guest. He teaches at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania,

Starting point is 00:13:40 and he is author of the book Contagious, Why Things Catch On. This winter, take a trip to Tampa on Porter Airlines. and he is author of the book Contagious, Why Things Catch On. This winter, take a trip to Tampa on Porter Airlines. Enjoy the warm Tampa Bay temperatures and warm Porter hospitality on your way there. All Porter fares include beer, wine, and snacks, and free fast-streaming Wi-Fi on planes with no middle seats. And your Tampa Bay vacation includes good times, relaxation, and great Gulf Coast weather. Visit FlyPorter.com and actually enjoy economy. This episode is brought to you by Melissa and Doug.

Starting point is 00:14:18 Wooden puzzles and building toys for problem solving and arts and crafts for creative thinking. Melissa and Doug makes toys that help kids take on the world because the way they play today shapes who they become tomorrow. Melissa and Doug, the play is pretend, the skills are real. Look for Melissa and Doug wherever you shop for toys. So Jonah, talk about the importance of practical value, because I think that's one of the things people might not readily think of when they think of why things get shared. Practical value is all about helping others. We don't just share things because we want to look good. We share things because we want to make other people better off. If you think about why we share Black Friday deals or why we share, you know, seven superfoods you should eat more of, or here are

Starting point is 00:15:05 six tips to interview better if you have a friend who's going on an important interview. We share this helpful information not just because it makes us look good, but because we want to help other people be better off. There's this great example I talk about in the book of this viral video that got 10 million views. That by itself is not surprising. Lots of videos get millions of views. What is surprising is the guy who made it is 80 years old. And the video is about one of the least exciting things we can think of. And that is corn. And so how does an 80 year old make a viral video about one of the least exciting things we could think of corn. And so it turns out he has a trick for eating corn better. When you eat corn, there are two issues, right? One, it gets stuck in your teeth. He can't solve that one. But the second is it has those annoying things called silks

Starting point is 00:15:49 along the side, right? Once you take off the husk, you can never get rid of all the silks. They stay on there and they're sort of annoying. And so he has a trick for getting rid of them. You toss a year of corn in the microwave for a couple minutes. You take it out. You hold the husk. You cut the bottom quarter inch off and out drops the husk, clean ears every time. Is this extremely remarkable? No. Is it highly emotional? Definitely not. But what it is, is pure, useful information. And so, one of the reasons we share is not just because it makes us look good, because it helps make others' lives better. Well, I think everybody, yeah, everybody can relate to that, because we like to know something that we can share with someone else that they would that before. And the idea very simply is sometimes we don't talk

Starting point is 00:16:48 about things that make us look good. We simply talk about things that are top of mind. So if I said peanut butter, for example, what word might you think of? Jelly. Jelly. Or if I said rum and you might think of? Coke. Coke. Yeah. So the first word is a trigger for the second. It makes us think about something even if it's not there. And there was a great example of this a couple of years ago. So some of your listeners might remember the insurance company Geico had this ad about hump day with a camel in it. So this annoying camel walked through an office going, what day is it today? What day is it? Everyone ignores him. He's a very annoying camel. Finally comes across this poor woman,

Starting point is 00:17:30 and she goes, it's hump day. And the camel gets very excited, and he goes, whoa. And the ad says, how happy are people who save money with Geico? Happier than a camel on hump day. Now, this video is a little bit funny. It's not that funny. It's a little bit funny, certainly. Yet it's one of the most shared videos from a couple of years ago. Not a car ad, not a beer ad, but an insurance ad. And so why do so many people share a boring thing like an insurance ad? Well, if you dig a little deeper, you see a really interesting pattern. There's a spike in shares and then it goes down and another spike and then it goes down and another spike and then it goes down.

Starting point is 00:18:00 But if you look closer, the spikes aren't random. They're actually seven days apart. And if you look even closer, you'll notice that they're every, well, Wednesday, or as it's colloquially known, hump day. So, you know, this video is equally good or bad, funny or not funny every day of the week, but Wednesday rolls around and provides a ready reminder, what a psychologist might call a trigger, to make people think about it and talk about it and share it. Because if something's top of mind, it's much more likely to be tip of tongue. And so we don't only share things we like, we share things because we're thinking about them. Often, particularly in face-to-face conversation, we don't share the funniest or most interesting thing that happened to us. We share just whatever's top of mind because we don't want to sit there in silence.

Starting point is 00:18:36 We want to fill in that conversational space. And so things that are top of mind or things that are cued by the environment are much more likely to be talked about. And so companies try to make their products top of mind, which, you know, essentially is what advertising is, is to keep the name and the brand in front of the public so they remember it. Certainly. So, you know, there's a great example I talk about in the book about Kit Kat. So, you know, a great candy bar that many of us love and associate with maybe Halloween. And so a few years ago, you know, people still liked KitKat, but for some reason they weren't buying it. Sales were down around 30%. And so KitKat was trying to figure out what to do. You know, oh, we should talk about how delicious it is. What should we do? And they ended up coming up

Starting point is 00:19:14 with a really interesting strategy. They linked KitKat to coffee. So they had a bunch of radio campaigns that said, you know, having a coffee break, have a KitKat. Thinking about coffee, think about KitKat. Coffee and KitKat, KitKat and coffee, best friends forever. And if you think about it, coffee is a perfect trigger for KitKat, right? Not only is there a lot of alliteration, but people drink coffee a lot, right? We drink, many people drink coffee multiple times a day, millions of people drink it. And so by linking yourself to a frequent trigger in the environment, you can come to mind more often and get people to talk about you more. And that's, in fact, what happened with KitKat, right?

Starting point is 00:19:48 After this campaign, sales went up over $50 million just because they linked themselves to a reminder in that environment. They didn't change how much people liked KitKat. They changed whether they thought about it or not. And I know another thing you talk about is stories, the importance of telling a story rather than just telling people facts and figures, because often goes in one ear and out the other. It makes us seem credible, but people can't remember it. Whereas people are much more likely to remember stories. A good story goes a long way. But if you think about it, certain stories are more effective than others, right? A good story carries a message or idea along for the ride. It's almost like a vessel or a carrier of information, right? If you think about The Boy Who Cried Wolf, yes, it's an interesting story, but at the end, you learn a moral, right? The moral is don't lie. Bad things happen if you lie. Lots of great stories have a moral. Lots of

Starting point is 00:20:55 religious texts use stories to communicate morals or ideas. And these are what I call a Trojan horse story. Yes, there's an engaging exterior, right? Yes, there's something that makes that story interesting. Otherwise, someone wouldn't tell it. But along the way, it brings an idea, a message, a brand. Because too often, people tell really engaging stories that they're funny. They make people laugh. But people can't remember the point, right? If you can't remember the point of the story, it's not going to help people change their

Starting point is 00:21:21 behavior. It's not going to encourage people to do what you want them to do. And so when we think about being good storytellers, right, stories are a great way to sell ideas. We just have to make sure they bring our message along with them. I couldn't really find a way to work this into the discussion in the flow of word of mouth and what makes things contagious and all, but part of what you talk about in the book that is word of mouth, or the example that you give that fascinated me, is why so many people who work in nail salons are Vietnamese. And word of mouth is the reason why. And it's a fascinating story, and I don't know if it's

Starting point is 00:22:00 true everywhere, but certainly here in California, you go by any nail salon and you look in the window and virtually everyone who works there looks Asian. And if you examine a little closer, you find out they are primarily from Vietnam. And why that is, is fascinating. So explain that. Word of mouth shapes everything. It shapes the products we buy. It shapes the nannies we hire, everything in our lives, including what jobs we get. And I was looking into writing this book, Contagious. I was looking around for interesting stories. And I came across this amazing thing that said basically two-thirds, if not three-fourths, of manicurists are Vietnamese.

Starting point is 00:22:45 And basically what happened is initially there was a couple people who were Vietnamese that became manicurists. There's a famous story of Tippi Hedren, a famous actress who kind of helped them get careers in that area. And then they told their friends who told their friends who told their friends who told their friends. And suddenly now a whole industry is driven heavily by a certain ethnic group. And this is true in lots of areas of life, right? Word of mouth shapes almost everything we do. If we understand the science behind it, we have a lot better idea of why things become popular. That's really interesting. Jonah Berger has been my guest. He is a professor at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. And his book, which has been out for a while and still sells

Starting point is 00:23:21 very well because people really like this topic. The book is Contagious, Why Things Catch On. There's a link to his book in the show notes. Thanks for being here, Jonah. Awesome. From the kitchen to the laundry room, your home deserves the best. Give it the upgrade it deserves at Best Buy's Ultimate Appliance Event. Save up to $1,000 on two or more major appliances. Shop now, in-store, or online at BestBuy.ca. Exclusions apply. This is an ad for better help.

Starting point is 00:23:53 Welcome to the world. Please read your personal owner's manual thoroughly. In it, you'll find simple instructions for how to interact with your fellow human beings and how to find happiness and peace of mind. Thank you and have a nice life. Unfortunately, life doesn't come with an owner's manual. That's why there's BetterHelp Online Therapy. Connect with a credentialed therapist by phone, video, or online chat.

Starting point is 00:24:15 Visit BetterHelp.com to learn more. That's BetterHelp.com. On Star Trek, part of what made Mr. Spock an interesting character, a big part of it, was that he was half Vulcan and half human. Vulcans are logical and without emotion, and humans are full of emotions. The implication is that logic and emotion don't go together very well. That's why Mr. Spock was always in conflict. But is this really true?

Starting point is 00:24:48 Can't you be logical and emotional? And just how well do we use logic? What does it mean to be logical when you're talking about something? It's an interesting topic, and here to discuss how you can understand and use logic better in your life is Eugenia Chang. She is the scientist in residence at the School of the Art Institute in Chicago. She has studied logic and is author of the book, The Art of Logic in an Illogical World.

Starting point is 00:25:17 Hi, Eugenia. Hi, thanks for having me on. So what does it mean to be logical? What is logic? I think that logic is a process of deducing things from other things that really have to follow. And so it's not guesswork, it's not evidence, it's not feelings, it's not opinions, it's things that really have to follow from each other. And it's at the absolute central root of how mathematics constructs arguments. If this, then that. That's right. Now we have to be careful about that because in normal life, we say if and then in situations that aren't necessarily logical.

Starting point is 00:25:58 For example, we might say, if you walk my dog, I'll pay you $20, which isn't a logical statement. It's a promise. And we could also make them as a threat. Like if you don't eat your broccoli, then I'm going to put you in timeout for 10 minutes. That's a threat. That's not logic. And then there's also if you don't, if you miss two classes, then you'll fail this course, which is also not logic. That's rules. And so it can be confusing because in normal life, we're not quite as precise as we are in mathematics. Something I've always wondered about is, is logic science or is it art? Is it two plus two equals four and that's how we make our argument? Or is it all about interpretation and building a logical

Starting point is 00:26:45 argument that supports your theory? Interesting question. Now, I don't feel the need to draw a boundary between science and art. And I think that we have constructed a lot of artificial boundaries between subject areas and between disciplines just to probably for bureaucratic reasons but they're not really there and one of the things that I do as scientist in residence at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago is I work towards eliminating the boundaries between science and art and showing that yes there are some things that are really really there are some things that are really, really science and some things that are really, really art. But at some point, they're all part of the same thing, which is that we're all trying to understand the world around us. And there are different ways of doing

Starting point is 00:27:34 so. And my students and I decided during one interesting discussion in class, we decided that science is sort of about understanding the world, and that art is sort of about understanding the world and that art is sort of about interpreting the world but in order to interpret the world you kind of need to understand it and in order to understand it you kind of need to interpret it so it's really two different slightly different emphases on the same idea which is how can we make sense of the world around us maybe another way to ask the question, because in math and in science, you know, if you have a formula, then x equals seven.

Starting point is 00:28:11 It doesn't equal anything but seven, and there's only that way to get there. In logic... Well, well, sort of, but not necessarily, because everything is always only true in context. And that's a really important thing in mathematics, that x equals 7, maybe if you solve that equation in one world of numbers, but maybe in some other world of numbers, x won't equal 7 at all. And do you think, it's just my observation and maybe my experience, that it's easier to see the logic or the illogic in what somebody else says than it is in what you say. It's hard to find the flaws in your own argument. It's easier to find them in the argument of others. That's an interesting question. I mean, I think that most of us like to think that we're right all the time, because that's why we say things. We don't deliberately, most of us anyway,

Starting point is 00:29:13 don't deliberately say things that we know to be wrong. I mean, some people do. But many of us only say things that we think are right. And then from our point of view, the things that other people are saying might obviously be wrong. And I think it's really important. And one of the things I stress in my book is that it's important to find what's right in what other people say, not just find what's wrong. And then by the same token, it's important to understand what could be viewed as wrong in what we say, so that we don't just think of ourselves as being right. And I impose a discipline on myself, where I read comments online on articles, some people say never read the comments. And I always read the comments until I feel ill about what people are saying. Because I think it's really important to remain aware of

Starting point is 00:30:08 viewpoints that are very different from my own so that I can remember to challenge my own viewpoints and see if I really think that. And I think that an important aspect of a rational person is that they're open to changing their mind if they get new information or new ideas. Can you use, well, I guess you can attempt to use, can you use logic to make any argument? I mean, in some extremely redundant way, I'm thinking like a mathematician here, in some very redundant way, yes, because if you take the conclusion as an axiom, then it is in fact logical. For example, some people say, I don't believe in same-sex marriage because I believe that marriage

Starting point is 00:30:51 should be between a man and a woman. And all they've really done there is say the same thing twice. And so they've really taken their conclusion as a fundamental belief and declared that to be their reasoning. Now, that is not illogical. It definitely is logical, but it's not very usefully logical or helpful or getting anywhere and so maybe really the answer is can every point of view be unpacked to some very basic beliefs via a chain of deductions and i think the answer to that is yes so i said at the beginning of this segment that that one of the reasons mr spock and star trek was so interesting was because of this inner conflict between logic and emotion with the implication being that there is a conflict that that they are oil and water that they don't mix do you believe that do you believe that that in order to be logical you must be devoid of emotion? No. And or rather, I think that logic

Starting point is 00:32:07 and emotions aren't in a strict dichotomy with each other, just like art and science aren't. And I think that the idea that art and science are completely different from one another is very similar to the idea that logic and emotions are very different from one another. And although they are different, they can both be used at the same time. And I think it's very dangerous and quite widespread to believe that if you are emotional, then you are definitely not being logical. And I think that's very unfortunate, especially because it tends to be, I mean, this is not always the case, but I would say as a general trend, it tends to be applied I mean, this is not always the case, but I would say as a general trend, it tends to be applied to women because women tend to express their emotions and feel

Starting point is 00:32:50 their emotions more strongly. And then other people, often men, but not always, will accuse them of being not logical just because they're being emotional. And I know that I am very emotional. I feel my emotions very strongly and very quickly. But I also know that I'm extremely logical. I am a professional research mathematician, and my whole profession depends on my use of logic. And I know that I use both at the same time, even when I'm doing mathematics. For example, when we're doing research in math, we don't just take logical steps to see where that would get us, because it probably wouldn't get us anywhere. What we do is we develop an intuition and a feeling about what we think is true. And then we try and prove it once we've decided that something feels like it's going to be true. I think that this should be the

Starting point is 00:33:35 case in life as well. But if we feel something very, very strongly, the surface of that feeling is emotions. But there's probably some reason for it deep down, such as if you feel some very strong fear of something that looks irrational to some other people. It might really stem down to some childhood experiences that have stayed with you, for example. Just like I am very afraid of dogs, and most people think that this is ridiculous, because most people really like dogs. But I think it stems from my childhood experience of dogs and a lack of familiarity with them. And so I don't think that it is irrational. You can understand it if you understand my life experiences. And I think that that's true of almost all, I'd like to say all, but I'm a very careful mathematician. So I'm going to say almost all just in case. But I think that's true of almost all of people's emotional responses, that we need emotions because emotions work faster than

Starting point is 00:34:37 logic. But we can often then find the logic behind how we reacted to something. Can you talk about some of your favorite examples in the modern world of how logic has been used brilliantly, how logic is abused and used poorly? I don't want to be just theoretical here. I want to talk about some real-life examples of how logic works in the real world. So one fantastic example of logic being used badly happened last week when a male physics professor at CERN gave a talk claiming that women simply are worse at physics than men. And his logical justification for that was that women's research papers are cited less than men's research papers. And he said, the amount of citation tells you how good some work is. And therefore, that proves that women are worse at physics than men. And that sounds logical,

Starting point is 00:35:41 but there is another possibility, which is that there is some embedded sexism so that people cite men's work more because they assume that men's work is better. And so it could go in both directions. That was an example of some faulty logic. And then a couple of days later, of course, a female person won the Nobel Prize in physics. So that was very satisfying, I thought. Another example that happened last week was the announcement that same-sex partner visas would no longer be available. I think it was for the UN, people working for the UN, that same-sex partner visas would no longer be allowed for unmarried same-sex couples. And this is very difficult for people from some countries where same-sex

Starting point is 00:36:35 marriage isn't even allowed. So they have no chance. They're not even allowed to get married, so they will have no chance of getting the visas. And the argument that I read said that this was to be consistent and egalitarian with opposite sex couples, because opposite sex couples have to be married in order to get a partner visa. And previously, same-sex couples did not have to be. And so the argument was, this is to make it egalitarian. But we can see that this is faulty logic, because there are other ways that you could make it egalitarian, which is the other way around, allowing opposite sex couples to get visas if they're unmarried as well. And so when some general principle is claimed that isn't actually general, especially if that principle then causes great disadvantage to a certain group of people, in this case, gay people, then the principle has prejudice embedded in it, even though it sounds like a logical principle. And we can tell that it's not an entirely logical principle if it doesn't work in the generality that it was claimed. In this case, it was claimed

Starting point is 00:37:52 that it was in order to be egalitarian, but there could have been other ways. So then to be logical, you would have to justify why you were choosing that method of being egalitarian instead of the other method. How about an example of, in your view, of logic being used well? Oh, good question. There are so many examples of logic being used badly. I could give an example of how someone used logic to convince me to change my mind about something quite dramatic. And that is to do with whether voting in elections should be compulsory or not. So in Australia, it is compulsory. And here, obviously, it's not compulsory. And I previously, like many people thought it should not be compulsory, because

Starting point is 00:38:37 voting should be a right, it's not an obligation. And we can't force people to vote. And then someone explained to me a different principle, which is about false positives and false negatives. So we can think about who votes and we can think about the false positive, which is forcing people to vote when they don't want to vote, as opposed to the false negative, which is preventing people from voting

Starting point is 00:39:04 when they have the right to vote. And someone pointed out to me that the point of compulsory voting is to stop the disenfranchisement of some voters who either feel disengaged from politics, so don't think it's worth it, think their vote won't count, or that they are unable to get enough time off to go and vote, or they can't get transportation to go and vote, or their votes are being suppressed because of rules around what ID you need in order to get to vote. And for example, I read the other day somewhere in Texas has declared that only a driver's license is allowed as a form of ID for voting. And also that all the places you can get a driving license, one of them closed, which meant that some people from a certain place would have to go 50 miles to get a driving license.

Starting point is 00:39:56 And if they don't have a car and there's no public transportation, they simply have no way of getting there, which means that they can't vote. Whereas in a system where voting is compulsory, then everyone has to be given a way to go and vote. And so I've now changed my mind. And I believe in that despite my initial objection, because I think that the issue of false positives and false negatives outweigh my objection about the fact that voting should be a right and not an obligation. And as someone pointed out to me, if you don't want to vote for anyone, you can still show up and abstain on your ballot. Lastly, are there any major flaws that you see people use when they try to use logic? People kind of misconstrue how it works? Yes, I think that one of them is related to what I just said about thinking that you're using a logical principle when it doesn't count as logical if you're not applying it

Starting point is 00:40:55 in all cases. So for example, some people criticize certain female politicians for saying that they're dishonest. But they don't criticize the male politicians for being dishonest. I mean, let's face it, probably all politicians are dishonest at some level about some things. And if they don't also criticize the male politicians for the same thing, then they're not using the general principle of criticizing someone for being dishonest. And that means that we should ask ourselves whether it's actually because they're a female person, not a male person. And something similar is true about allegations of sexual harassment, where some people say that we should hold people innocent until they're proved guilty. But in fact, they're only really applying that to

Starting point is 00:41:40 the accused person. They're not also applying that to the accuser, who should also be held innocent, innocent of false accusation, that is. And if we try and hold them both innocent at the same time, then we are likely to run into a contradiction, because it's very unlikely that they can both be innocent. And so we have to find some other principle to get ourselves out of that contradiction. In general, as you talk to people and walk around and listen to people talk, are people generally fairly logical? I mean, on a scale of one to ten, where are we? I would say no. And I think that we've got into a situation where everyone largely believes that their opinion is valid and that there are some people who don't think that they have to challenge their opinion or get

Starting point is 00:42:32 any evidence and they don't believe experts and they don't believe scientists but then on the other hand there are other people who think that they're better than that when they're not necessarily better than that and they just believe something else without really challenging it. And even scientists and mathematicians who are very, very good at logic in their research are prone to making mistakes when they're talking about real life situations, such as this male professor talking about women just being worse at physics. And other examples I've heard where male scientists say things like, I know that women are different from men because I have two daughters and they're really different from me. And that's an absolutely minuscule sample size that a scientist would never use in their actual research. But somehow when dealing with real life

Starting point is 00:43:21 situations, emotions tend to take over. And what I think is that if we pit logic against emotions in a battle, then logic is never going to win because emotions are stronger and they're faster. And so what we need to do is try and use logic and emotions together so that instead of trying to change people's emotions using logic, we somehow tap into those emotions, just in the same way that people do with advertising and viral videos and memes. It's unfortunate that those things are quite so manipulative. But if we can find a way to convince people emotionally of something that we think is logical, then I think that we'll have a much better chance, as opposed to if we just let logic

Starting point is 00:44:07 and emotions fight with each other. Well, and wasn't that the whole premise of that character in Star Trek, Mr. Spock, who was half human, so he struggled with his logic and his emotions, and they often did not agree? Yes. And I think when logic and emotions don't agree, some people say you should just get rid of your emotions because the logic is correct. And I think when logic and emotions don't agree, some people say you should just get rid of your emotions because the logic is correct. But I don't think that's right because I think emotions are always true. And I find it much more interesting to examine why some logic and some emotions don't agree. And it can be very interesting. For example, I used to be very afraid of flying despite all the statistics.

Starting point is 00:44:46 And I knew the statistics say that flying is much safer than traveling in a car, for example. And people told me this over and over again. And I was still completely afraid of flying. And so instead of trying to squash my emotions, which doesn't work, I examined very closely why I was afraid of flying. And it was simply that the act of takeoff is so isolated in its, it's just there, there's takeoff, it's a moment, that it just caused me to think about the possibility of dying in a plane crash. And that terrified me. And so I realized that what I needed to do was distract myself during takeoff rather than anything else.

Starting point is 00:45:25 And that was how I overcame my fear of flying. It does seem especially today that people use logic or attempt to use logic in large part to prove somebody's wrong. That it's not to make a case, but it's to show how wrong you are. Yeah, I think that having an argument where you're trying to show the other person is wrong is almost always pointless, actually. And I wish that we could all have arguments where we're trying to understand things more rather than trying to win. The kind of argument where you're really seeking to understand why the other person thinks the things they do. And hopefully they can also try to understand why you think things you

Starting point is 00:46:02 do. And then we can find senses in which we agree as well as senses in which we disagree. And I think that will be much more productive than the kind where we're just trying to, everyone's trying to show that everyone else is wrong. Well, great. And you've been highly logical. So thank you. Eugenia Chang has been my guest. She is the scientist in residence at the School of the Art Institute in Chicago,

Starting point is 00:46:25 and her book is The Art of Logic in an Illogical World, and you will find a link to her book in the show notes. Thanks, Eugenia. Thank you very much. True or false? If you want your car to last, you should change your oil every 3,000 miles. The answer is false. In fact, Edmunds.com says we are wasting millions of dollars on unnecessary oil changes and disposing of millions of gallons of old contaminated waste oil into the environment. The 3,000 mile change your oil rule is really a marketing tactic to get you to bring your car into the shop more often. In fact, in an article in the trade industry publication National Oil and Lube News,

Starting point is 00:47:13 they state, Here's the truth. Your car's owner's manual tells you when to change your oil. Go by that. On average, it's about every 7,800 miles. The 3,000 mile rule was

Starting point is 00:47:35 once accurate, but oil and car technology have rendered it completely obsolete. There is no car manufacturer today who recommends oil be changed every 3,000 miles, not a single one. Porsche recommends you change the oil in their cars every 20,000 miles. Just because the last oil change place you went to put a little sticker on your windshield telling you to come back in 3,000 miles, which is another very effective

Starting point is 00:48:06 marketing tactic, don't. Your car doesn't need it. And that is something you should know. Reviews are always appreciated wherever you listen to this podcast, Apple Podcasts, TuneIn, Spotify, Google Play. Please take a moment and leave a review. I'm Micah Ruthers. Thanks for listening today to Something You Should Know. and engage and, you know, possibly enrage you. And don't blame me. We dive deep into listeners' questions, offering advice that's funny, relatable, and real. Whether you're dealing with relationship drama or you just need a friend's perspective, we've got you.

Starting point is 00:48:53 Then switch gears with But Am I Wrong?, which is for listeners who didn't take our advice and want to know if they are the villains in the situation. Plus, we share our hot takes on current events and present situations that we might even be wrong in our lives. Spoiler alert, we are actually quite literally never wrong. But wait, there's more. Check out See You Next Tuesday, where we reveal the juicy results from our listener polls from But Am I Wrong? And don't miss Fisting Friday, where we catch up, chat about pop culture, TV and movies. It's the perfect way to kick off your weekend. So if you're looking for a podcast that feels like a chat with your besties,

Starting point is 00:49:26 listen to Don't Blame Me, But Am I Wrong on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. New episodes every Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday. Hi, I'm Jennifer, a co-founder of the Go Kid Go Network. At Go Kid Go, putting kids first is at the heart of every show that we produce. That's why we're so excited to introduce a brand new show to our network called The Search for the Silver Lightning, a fantasy adventure series about a spirited young girl named Isla who time travels to the mythical land of Camelot. During her journey, Isla meets new friends, including King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table,

Starting point is 00:50:01 and learns valuable life lessons with every quest, sword fight, and dragon ride. Positive and uplifting stories remind us all about the importance of kindness, friendship, honesty, and positivity. Join me and an all-star cast of actors, including Liam Neeson, Emily Blunt, Kristen Bell, Chris Hemsworth, among many others, in welcoming the Search for the Silver Lining podcast

Starting point is 00:50:21 to the Go Kid Go Network by listening today. Look for the Search for the Silver Lining on Spotify, Apple, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Something You Should Know - SYSK Choice: Why Things Catch On & The Art and Science of Logic

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.