Being in the business of influencing others, I read this
book with great interest. Gardner suggests seven agents (or levers) of mind
change: The more levers that are pulled, the more likely one’s idea
will influence others. The tools that communicate ideas are: concepts, stories,
theories, and skills. Finally, there are six realms in which changes of mind take
place. Minds are both flexible and rigid. Gardner uses children as
an example of the mind-changing paradox: “Children think about the world in
ways that are fundamentally different from those exhibited by adults… And yet,
apparently without the need for formal tuition, youngsters come to change their
minds in fundamental ways. Moreover, and strikingly, these new ways are
accompanied by total conviction. Indeed, most older children will refuse to
believe that they had ever fallen prey to the earlier misconception—at
least until confronted with a video of their earlier response” (51). Changing one’s mind is significant to long-term change: “Behaviorists
would have us think that the most powerful incentives for alterations in
behavior are shifting contingencies of reward and punishment… Yet changes
brought about chiefly through varying the patterns of reinforcement are
superficial ones; they can be reversed as quickly and seamlessly as they have
been brought on” (58). Gardner provides a wonderful example of how the greatest
mind-changers have both redefined a common story and personally embodied their
message. This combination is powerful. Of course, Jesus could also be added to this group!
One can think of these ordered arenas as an inverted
pyramid:
Large-scale changes involving the diverse population of a region or an entire
nation
Large-scale changes involving a more uniform or homogeneous group
Changes brought about through works of art or science
Changes within formal instructional settings
Intimate forms of mind changing
Changing one’s own mind (63)Gandhi, Mandela, and Monnet did not, however, take the
easy way out. They did not just tell a simple, familiar story more effectively.
Rather, they took on a far more daunting task: to develop a new story, tell it
well, embody it in their lives, and help others understand why it deserves to
triumph over the simpler counterstory. Moreover, they drew continually and
imaginatively on several other levers of mind change: reason, multiple modes of
representation, and resonance with the experiences of those whom they sought to
influence. At the same time, they attempted to mollify the resistances that
they encountered; they took advantage of real world events; and they marshaled
whatever resources they had at their disposal… They took a more complex, less
familiar story, a story that was more “inclusive,” and succeeded in giving that
story life in institutions that continued beyond their own moments in the
limelight. (88-89)

Leave a comment