61 pages • 2 hours read
I Never Thought of It That Way: How to Have Fearlessly Curious Conversations in Dangerously Divided Times
A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Summary
Background
Chapter Summaries & Analyses
Key Figures
Themes
Index of Terms
Important Quotes
Essay Topics
Tools
BetaPart 3Chapter Summaries & Analyses
Part 3: “People”
Part 3, Chapter 8 Summary: “Assumptions”
Guzmán examines how assumptions shape political and social divisions through the lens of an event called “Melting Mountains,” which brought together residents from two politically-opposed counties in 2017. The chapter opens by describing how Guzmán and her colleague Anika organized a meeting between residents of King County, Washington (predominantly Democratic) and Sherman County, Oregon (predominantly Republican).
The inspiration for this meeting emerged when Guzmán discovered that these two counties had voted in exact opposite proportions in the 2016 presidential election—74% for Hillary Clinton in King County and 74% for Donald Trump in Sherman County. Working with local contacts, particularly a retired agricultural extension agent named Sandy Macnab, Guzmán coordinated a day of structured conversations between residents of both counties.
During the event, participants engaged in exercises designed to foster understanding rather than debate. One participant, Laura Caspi, arrived questioning her own assumption that Trump voters must be “bad people.” Through conversations with Sherman County residents, she gained insight into how economic factors, such as agricultural regulations and healthcare costs, influenced their voting decisions. Another key moment occurred when a farmer named Darren Padget helped urban visitors understand the complexities of agricultural life and the challenges facing rural communities.
The chapter explores how the event revealed unexpected insights about assumption-making on both sides. Urban participants learned that their presumptions about rural voters’ motivations were often incorrect, while rural participants expressed appreciation for being truly seen and heard by city dwellers. However, Guzmán acknowledges the event’s limitations, noting that some participants, like Jordan Goldwarg, did not have the opportunity to fully express their identities or engage in deeper discussions about challenging topics.
Guzmán connects these experiences to broader observations about how assumptions function in society. She references a New York Times quiz that demonstrated how poorly people predicted others’ political affiliations based on the contents of their refrigerators, using this as evidence that people often make incorrect assumptions about others based on superficial information. She introduces the concept that people are “mysteries” rather than “puzzles,” suggesting that human complexity cannot be reduced to simple solutions or explanations.
The chapter concludes with Guzmán’s return visit to Sherman County in 2020, in which she reflects on how meaningful connections can challenge and reshape assumptions. Through her deepening friendship with Sandy McNabb, she demonstrates how sustained curiosity and willingness to question one’s assumptions can lead to genuine understanding across political and cultural divides.
Throughout this exploration, Guzmán argues that while assumptions are necessary tools for navigating a complex world, they become problematic when they harden into unchangeable beliefs. She advocates for treating assumptions as questions rather than answers, emphasizing the importance of remaining curious about others despite initial preconceptions.
Part 3, Chapter 9 Summary: “Reason”
Guzmán claims that rigid adherence to personal perspectives impedes meaningful dialogue, particularly in digital spaces. The chapter begins with her analysis of the Buddhist parable about blind individuals encountering different parts of an elephant: Each person insists their limited experience represents the complete truth, similar to how individuals cling to their partial understanding of complex issues.
Guzmán identifies several key barriers to productive discourse in online environments. First, she notes that digital communications strip away human elements like facial expressions and vocal tone, making it easier for users to forget the humanity behind opposing viewpoints. Second, she introduces the concept of “chaining”—the tendency to link a person’s initial statement to increasingly extreme positions without evidence. She illustrates this through a hypothetical scenario: When someone expresses concern about property damage during protests, observers might automatically assume this person opposes racial justice entirely, despite no direct evidence of such beliefs.
The author suggests practical strategies for more thoughtful engagement across ideological divides. Drawing on research by Jonathan Haidt and other social psychologists, she explains how people approach agreeable versus challenging ideas differently. When encountering ideas that align with existing beliefs, individuals ask themselves, “Can I believe it?” and evaluate evidence fairly. However, when facing challenging ideas, they shift to asking, “Must I believe it?”—a defensive stance requiring overwhelming proof before accepting new perspectives.
Understanding this tendency, Guzmán advocates for consciously resisting the impulse to dismiss challenging ideas. She demonstrates this approach through her personal experience reading an opinion piece about removing the Jefferson Memorial. While initially resistant to the idea, she found value in the author’s nuanced argument after deliberately maintaining an open mind.
Guzmán presents additional techniques for improving dialogue: Identifying repetitive arguments as signals of deeper concerns; transforming standard talking points into starting points for genuine discussion; and expressing authentic confusion as an opportunity for learning. She emphasizes that social media creates unique challenges for productive discourse, citing cultural commentator Angel Eduardo’s observation that these platforms represent the most difficult environment for meaningful exchange.
Guzmán encourages readers to move beyond mere repetition of popular memes or talking points. Instead, she advocates for explaining the personal reasoning behind shared content and actively seeking others’ perspectives on complex issues. She frames this approach as essential for breaking free from echo chambers and fostering genuine understanding across ideological boundaries.
Part 3, Chapter 10 Summary: “Opinion”
Guzmán explores how individuals form and maintain their opinions, challenging common assumptions about belief formation. The chapter opens with her attendance at a 2018 panel discussion in Seattle, where philosopher David Smith presented a transformative idea: People do not actively choose their opinions but rather develop them naturally through life experiences. This insight prompted Guzmán to question both the effectiveness of debate and the ethics of harshly judging others for their beliefs.
Smith emphasized two crucial questions: Whether individuals can accept being wrong about something without knowing what they’re wrong about; and whether they value truth more than their personal beliefs. These inquiries highlight the importance of intellectual humility in discourse. Guzmán examines the futility of trying to “win” arguments, particularly online, citing Elizabeth G. Saunders’s observation that online victories typically result in alienation rather than persuasion.
The text distinguishes between holding people accountable for their political opinions and harboring hatred toward them for those beliefs. Guzmán illustrates the deep-rooted nature of beliefs by comparing political convictions to her husband’s unwavering devotion to Star Wars. She also uses Smith’s personal journey from fundamentalist Christianity to a different belief system as a case study, showing how his gradual transformation occurred through university experiences and ultimately led him to decline a tenure-track position when he could no longer affirm its required theology.
The narrative includes Braver Angels ambassador John Wood Jr.’s story of religious transformation through his relationship with his future wife, Triawna. His shift from skepticism to Christianity demonstrates how personal connections can influence belief systems. The chapter concludes with practical strategies for productive cross-ideological discussions, including presenting opinions as current rather than fixed viewpoints, acknowledging areas of agreement, and maintaining humility by admitting uncertainty.
Guzmán emphasizes that opinion change occurs gradually and cannot be forced through confrontation. She advocates for an approach that prioritizes understanding over persuasion, suggesting that this method proves more effective at influencing perspectives. The author concludes that meaningful exchanges across ideological differences require patience, respect, and recognition of each person’s unique journey in forming their beliefs.
Part 3 Analysis
In Part 3 of I Never Thought of It That Way, Guzmán continues to explore human connection and understanding across ideological divides, presenting both theoretical frameworks and practical applications for meaningful dialogue. The theme of The Importance of Bridging Divides is reflected in Guzmán’s account of the “Melting Mountains” event, which brought together residents from politically-opposed counties. The event’s success in fostering meaningful dialogue demonstrates how physical presence and structured interaction can overcome political barriers: “Having a real talk with real people, instead of all the angry yelling on Facebook” (107) proved transformative for participants on both sides.
Historical and cultural context plays a crucial role in the text’s analysis, particularly in examining how geographic and economic divisions shape political perspectives. For example, the author notes how rural communities’ experiences with regulations like the Waters of the United States rule influenced their political choices, demonstrating how policy impacts translate into voting behavior. She stresses how studies have found that people often misunderstand the motivations or reasoning behind their ideological opponent’s voting habits. In bringing people from different political persuasions together in genuine conversation and exchange, erroneous assumptions are replaced with a more nuanced understanding.
Curiosity as a Tool for Understanding serves as a central philosophical framework throughout these chapters. The author develops this theme through the metaphor of “planting seeds”—suggesting that curious engagement allows new ideas to take root and potentially grow into changed perspectives over time: “When you hear something that begins to work on your current set of beliefs, when that seed gets planted in your mind, you won’t know what it will grow into” (143). This approach stands in deliberate contrast to conventional debate tactics aimed at immediate persuasion.
Questioning Assumptions Rather Than Changing Minds continues to be a practical methodology throughout the text. Guzmán challenges the traditional approach to political dialogue by introducing David Smith’s philosophical perspective that people do not choose their opinions but rather develop them naturally through life experiences. This insight fundamentally shifts the focus from trying to change others’ minds to understanding how their views emerged from their lived experiences.
The analytical framework Guzmán employs draws heavily on social psychology, particularly Jonathan Haidt’s elephant-and-rider metaphor for understanding moral reasoning: “[T]he intuitive mind is like a big, strong elephant, and the reasoning mind is like its tiny human rider” (122). This framework helps explain why pure logical argumentation often fails to bridge ideological divides, while personal connection and understanding can succeed where reason alone cannot.
Throughout these chapters, Guzmán’s voice continues to maintain a delicate balance between journalistic objectivity and personal engagement. The author’s own moments of realization serve not as mere anecdotes but as demonstrations of the very principles being discussed, particularly regarding the examination of assumptions and the value of curiosity in understanding others.
This section of the book ultimately presents a practical philosophy for political dialogue that prioritizes understanding over conversion, curiosity over conviction, and connection over conquest. The author’s approach suggests that meaningful political discourse requires not just different tactics, but a fundamentally different understanding of human opinion formation and change.
Unlock all 61 pages of this Study GuidePlus, gain access to 8,800+ more expert-written Study Guides.
Including features: