Yep. And it needs constant reinforcement from other teachers and students. The moment you let some racist or homophobic shit fly in your class is the moment kids start to think "this is an acceptable thing to say in our society."
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
"Reach out to/educate bigots" ~ to those who say this, you ever actually tried it?
- Thread starter NoName999
- Start date
Yep. And it needs constant reinforcement from other teachers and students. The moment you let some racist or homophobic shit fly in your class is the moment kids start to think "this is an acceptable thing to say in our society."
Exactly. Nearly every day I have to talk to a kid about words like "retarded", "faggot", and "gay". I only hear racist terms a few times a year, though, and I go off on those kids.
You can't educate the ignorant?
I should go home now, I guess.
Hell yeah! Really glad you came over to Era.
I still remember joining the Seasoned Gamers forum back in 2005 that we were both in. That seems like a different lifetime now.
I've found most people with bigoted views have gotten them through the course of life be it through media or the such. Most of them just don't think about anything so it just soaks in.
I've met many people who do or say dumb shit that just don't realize the issues it causes on a person or society.
There is a big middle ground to educate as much as people may just think you can't change em. The gay and retard examples of say the early 2000s have died off a lot. That's just from educating people.
I've met many people who do or say dumb shit that just don't realize the issues it causes on a person or society.
There is a big middle ground to educate as much as people may just think you can't change em. The gay and retard examples of say the early 2000s have died off a lot. That's just from educating people.
Of course you can change a bigot or racist. Nobody is born a bigot. It's not coded into their DNA and since they never started life as a bigot, it's possible to change their point of view.
Fancy sharing the alternative then to tacking the problem?
Fancy sharing the alternative then to tacking the problem?
Bigotry isn't the problem in matters of persuasion.
The first is a closed mind, or a strongly defined schema, one built into a person's identity either through hardcoded experiences or through teachings they were never invited to question.
In order to convince an ignorant person to change a core belief, there has to be something that could destabilize those thoughts while not completely breaking them all at once (e.g. realizing everything they knew was a lie and instantly, reflexively rejecting the notion, even if it's, well, conceptually true), to show that the principles they claim to stand for (like basic human decency or goodwill or civil rights) align with something they might have originally thought was counteractive to them.
On the other hand, if someone already knows the same things you do (in terms of being informed) but is primarily motivated by emotional hardheadedness, then you won't be able to fight them with words that they will already expect and anticipate -- the best way to convince them is to present unexpected methods. But this rarely succeeds, and very few people are fitted with the patience and energy to commit to this just to convince one person that maybe they could change what they think at least a little. And the odds are, they probably won't. They are driven by hate, malice, and not just nominally, but genuinely, too; these people are destructive and voluntarily contribute to the problem because they see it as the solution.
Some of these people, a small percent, are immune to change that anyone can methodically engineer. Some people have locked the door and tossed the key.
But at the end of the day, most people, open-minded or not, are definitively changed by one thing, something that's quick and potent and an injection to the veins, and works almost 100% of the time:
Personal experiences.
This is because it provides perspective; it allows a person to change without them having to do anything -- life basically throws it at them and they have to change, because they have new perceptions of something. And because everybody is essentially shaped by the patterns they see in their experiences; and until that pattern is broken, nothing will budge. Conflicting experiences will make room for that paradigm shift, and depending on how severely (and desperately) they cling to their ideologies, they may break down or they may grow.
But that's often beyond the capacity of face to face conversation.
The questions you should ask yourself if you're unsure about educating someone are 1) how much weight will my points/convincing hold, and 2) if that's worth the time, energy, and self-respect I have in my disposal.
The second problem, as other posters have said, is rhetorical ethos. Some people have the power to make others see their way because those people value them. If they can be swayed by knowing someone like them and that they may love/respect is a part of or supports a group of people they were trained to marginalize and think lesser of, they will realize that, 'maybe these two things don't have to be mutually exclusive' and will eventually adapt their perspective around/because of that. This is an issue that comes down to the sort of shortsighted nature of the human psyche, which also irritates me for reasons of its own -- but the truth is that a lot of people are the way they are not just because of their own choices, but because of what they're exposed to. What they can positively relate to. What 'side' they think they should be 'on'. And if you can represent another side while also representing the best of their side, no matter how close or far, then if they aren't too strongly/desperately/indifferently attached they will listen; understand; and eventually, change.
The first is a closed mind, or a strongly defined schema, one built into a person's identity either through hardcoded experiences or through teachings they were never invited to question.
In order to convince an ignorant person to change a core belief, there has to be something that could destabilize those thoughts while not completely breaking them all at once (e.g. realizing everything they knew was a lie and instantly, reflexively rejecting the notion, even if it's, well, conceptually true), to show that the principles they claim to stand for (like basic human decency or goodwill or civil rights) align with something they might have originally thought was counteractive to them.
On the other hand, if someone already knows the same things you do (in terms of being informed) but is primarily motivated by emotional hardheadedness, then you won't be able to fight them with words that they will already expect and anticipate -- the best way to convince them is to present unexpected methods. But this rarely succeeds, and very few people are fitted with the patience and energy to commit to this just to convince one person that maybe they could change what they think at least a little. And the odds are, they probably won't. They are driven by hate, malice, and not just nominally, but genuinely, too; these people are destructive and voluntarily contribute to the problem because they see it as the solution.
Some of these people, a small percent, are immune to change that anyone can methodically engineer. Some people have locked the door and tossed the key.
But at the end of the day, most people, open-minded or not, are definitively changed by one thing, something that's quick and potent and an injection to the veins, and works almost 100% of the time:
Personal experiences.
This is because it provides perspective; it allows a person to change without them having to do anything -- life basically throws it at them and they have to change, because they have new perceptions of something. And because everybody is essentially shaped by the patterns they see in their experiences; and until that pattern is broken, nothing will budge. Conflicting experiences will make room for that paradigm shift, and depending on how severely (and desperately) they cling to their ideologies, they may break down or they may grow.
But that's often beyond the capacity of face to face conversation.
The questions you should ask yourself if you're unsure about educating someone are 1) how much weight will my points/convincing hold, and 2) if that's worth the time, energy, and self-respect I have in my disposal.
The second problem, as other posters have said, is rhetorical ethos. Some people have the power to make others see their way because those people value them. If they can be swayed by knowing someone like them and that they may love/respect is a part of or supports a group of people they were trained to marginalize and think lesser of, they will realize that, 'maybe these two things don't have to be mutually exclusive' and will eventually adapt their perspective around/because of that. This is an issue that comes down to the sort of shortsighted nature of the human psyche, which also irritates me for reasons of its own -- but the truth is that a lot of people are the way they are not just because of their own choices, but because of what they're exposed to. What they can positively relate to. What 'side' they think they should be 'on'. And if you can represent another side while also representing the best of their side, no matter how close or far, then if they aren't too strongly/desperately/indifferently attached they will listen; understand; and eventually, change.
Someone on a local Facebook group (specific to my town) was being homophobic so I called him out on it and he responded by calling me a "clueless little libtard cockwomble" and told me I should put my kids up for adoption.
We wouldn't be telling you not to bother if we hadn't tried it ourselves.
Seriously, it's a waste of time.
Seriously, it's a waste of time.
I would have cried laughing at that insult.
When people I know say awful things on facebook. I publicly ask them to get coffee or lunch. I do it exactly one time. If the meeting is good and they are open to change, I'll consider more (normally if they reach out). If it isn't, then I tell them that I find their facebook posts very hateful and unbecoming of who I knew them to be. I inject myself as the personal experience and hope that causes them to reflect. I then don't put any more energy into that conversation.
If I don't know them, I ignore them on social media. It's not the place for anything productive.
Too true.
For some people that's all they have. Which is why I think it's ridiculous when you see posts on here telling people to break off their relationships with their family members who hold contrary viewpoints.
I mean, that's the other thing though. You don't "educate" people by doing what liberals typically do - which is yelling at them. That's also why it's easier if you're actually friends with them.
I ain't one to tell a nigga to stop talking to they family, but it's not like extraordinarily hard to stop talking to em unless you depend on them.
I've done it multiple times, but I really haven't had many opportunities recently. It was easier when I lived in Pennsyltucky and was surrounded by those types. You can have a lot of success with reasonably intelligent people actually, which are more common than we give society credit for. It takes time and definitely multiple conversations, and you have to approach it from a completely non-confrontational perspective in my experience.
The only way you can reach out to someone like that is if they were kids. Adults are a different story.
Back when I was a teenager (12-15 years old) my friends and I were not as open minded towards LGBT issues and such but then I found Neogaf and I learned about homosexuality not being a choice and it changed my views completely. When I look back at that time, I feel very ashamed of myself and I dread thinking what kind of person I would be. So reaching out can help but only when you are reaching out to young people. Old or mature people are much harder to be reached out to.
So no, reaching out to people is useless. You change their minds by combating their ideas to make them think.
Back when I was a teenager (12-15 years old) my friends and I were not as open minded towards LGBT issues and such but then I found Neogaf and I learned about homosexuality not being a choice and it changed my views completely. When I look back at that time, I feel very ashamed of myself and I dread thinking what kind of person I would be. So reaching out can help but only when you are reaching out to young people. Old or mature people are much harder to be reached out to.
So no, reaching out to people is useless. You change their minds by combating their ideas to make them think.
And while I certainly understand how you might feel that way based on your own experience with your family, I think its naive af to think it's that easy for everyone whether they're dependent or not.
This is really ridiculous hyperbole. Most people who complain about liberals "yelling" at them are just butt hurt that they got called out on saying something ignorant.
It's the same with the straighter/ more cis parts of Era. Privilege is privilege, and the reason a ton of people cry about the "hostility" of the trans community here
Yep. The other thing is that type of change even for those types tends to be a slow, gradual process. But any improvement is important. Social change happens slowly.
It's also usually exposure to diversity that promotes change, than some converation(s). A lot of people I'm thinking of where just ignorant as they grew up in very white/straight (at least publically)/christian areas) and when they moved or their are got some more diversity and they became friendly with people different than them there views at least softened, if not changed.
To the bigots living in diverse areas? Those are mostly lost causes as ignorance/lack of exposure isn't an excuse.
Hey can we not shit on Daryl Davis? The man did something incredibly brave and he got over 200 people to leave the klan. It's not his job to make sure that they become fully woke or whatever.
I have to have faith that people are redeemable.
Not bigots (usually) but a do a lot of discussion with those who hold absolutely insane anti-science views that I talk with all the time.
What people don't usually get is that people who fall on the extreme of the spectrum, that is to say racists, or antivaxxers oe whatever will never change their mind. Well, not never, but it is pretty rare unfortunately. But anyone who does educstion or debates or whatever knows that. You don't go put of your way for these people, because the number you'll actually convince vs. those they will stay stuck in their ways is miniscule.
What you do outreach for is for those who aren't racist, or aren't anti science who are confused by the arguments they see. Believe it or not there are convincing arguments to the common person that are made by the opopposing sides in a debate. Outreach needs to be made to show why these arguments are wrong so as to help the people watching from the sidelines.
What people don't usually get is that people who fall on the extreme of the spectrum, that is to say racists, or antivaxxers oe whatever will never change their mind. Well, not never, but it is pretty rare unfortunately. But anyone who does educstion or debates or whatever knows that. You don't go put of your way for these people, because the number you'll actually convince vs. those they will stay stuck in their ways is miniscule.
What you do outreach for is for those who aren't racist, or aren't anti science who are confused by the arguments they see. Believe it or not there are convincing arguments to the common person that are made by the opopposing sides in a debate. Outreach needs to be made to show why these arguments are wrong so as to help the people watching from the sidelines.
What?
I said in my first post that there is a subset of people who will probably never change. But for those who are somewhere in between, calling them racists or bigots can backfire and simply push them away.
They may have left the klan but they still think black people are bad and beneath whites. They're still overtly racist and probably still visit Stormfront. They've only shed the outward appearance.
And Davis was more respectful to Klan members than BLM activists.
Here's the thing... people can change their minds, but you will rarely if ever "see" the light bulb moment. It's still worth pushing against bigotry and ignorance because you may be a small part of the wave that causes them to change direction. Don't do it for the satisfaction of "I told you so" or anything, do it because it's the right thing to do.
You can change some bigots.
Watch the documentary reality TV series called "Go Back to Where You Came From" on Netflix. A scholar on refugee issues invites a handful of Australian racist bigots to live 25 days with and like refugees, from living in the homes of illegal immigrants to going on a boat like theirs to having to live like they do in their home countries. Some hold on to their views but soften with "exceptions," some completely 180 their beliefs.
The key to this sort of bigotry is humanizing the "threat" in their mind into a person, a real human being. After living with refugees who tell them their rape stories and dead children and shipwrecks while serving them food and treating them like family, they realize the world isn't as simple as their dumbass minds thought.
In my own experience, the biggest bigot conflict I had was with my mother. I spent my whole life single and virgin, but bisexual. Then I met someone of the same sex whom I fell in love with and couldn't imagine life without. I told my mom I was dating a boy and she grieved and begged me to seek God and stop sinning for almost a year. Crying every night. She grew cold and our relationship was ruined. All because I loved a boy. She didn't care about him or who he was. I wrote a letter trying to tell her my feelings and she never opened it, to this day. She saw my bf as a threat to my salvation (we're Christians) and a threat to her dream of me having a nice Christian wife and giving her grandchildren. So I was walking disappointment for her. And she forbade me from mentioning his name or ever bringing him over or even discussing the issue. Ever.
He lived out of state and we dated long distance for a year. Finally he moved to my city and I moved out to live with him, although she thought I was just moving out to be with friends. My mom was so confused and offended and she grew even colder and more distant to me.
Finally around Thanksgiving she told me she didn't want to celebrate it, me know it's because she didn't want an excuse for me to bring my bf. I gave her an ultimatum and basically shamed her saying that Thanksgiving was always about friends or family and if I can't bring someone important to me to our Thanksgiving then don't even talk to me anymore. She eventually caved and let me invite him over. She got to finally meet him on Thanksgiving.
All this time I never admitted who this boy was, but she's not dumb. She knew. Eventually she found that my bf is a wonderful person and goes above and beyond to love and serve my family even though they don't like him. She started to grow fond of him. They became friends. They chat together now. And my mom may still disagree with the relationship out of personal reasons, but she officially let go and told me she's not going to interfere with my life anymore and that my bf is a special person. An icy shroud over her heart has melted. She's not totally pro gay marriage but she had to humanize my bf in order to think more clearly.
If you humanize the threat to bigots, there's room for them to think and feel. Otherwise, the target is just a threat to them they want to keep out. It's the fundamentals of prejudice.
Watch the documentary reality TV series called "Go Back to Where You Came From" on Netflix. A scholar on refugee issues invites a handful of Australian racist bigots to live 25 days with and like refugees, from living in the homes of illegal immigrants to going on a boat like theirs to having to live like they do in their home countries. Some hold on to their views but soften with "exceptions," some completely 180 their beliefs.
The key to this sort of bigotry is humanizing the "threat" in their mind into a person, a real human being. After living with refugees who tell them their rape stories and dead children and shipwrecks while serving them food and treating them like family, they realize the world isn't as simple as their dumbass minds thought.
In my own experience, the biggest bigot conflict I had was with my mother. I spent my whole life single and virgin, but bisexual. Then I met someone of the same sex whom I fell in love with and couldn't imagine life without. I told my mom I was dating a boy and she grieved and begged me to seek God and stop sinning for almost a year. Crying every night. She grew cold and our relationship was ruined. All because I loved a boy. She didn't care about him or who he was. I wrote a letter trying to tell her my feelings and she never opened it, to this day. She saw my bf as a threat to my salvation (we're Christians) and a threat to her dream of me having a nice Christian wife and giving her grandchildren. So I was walking disappointment for her. And she forbade me from mentioning his name or ever bringing him over or even discussing the issue. Ever.
He lived out of state and we dated long distance for a year. Finally he moved to my city and I moved out to live with him, although she thought I was just moving out to be with friends. My mom was so confused and offended and she grew even colder and more distant to me.
Finally around Thanksgiving she told me she didn't want to celebrate it, me know it's because she didn't want an excuse for me to bring my bf. I gave her an ultimatum and basically shamed her saying that Thanksgiving was always about friends or family and if I can't bring someone important to me to our Thanksgiving then don't even talk to me anymore. She eventually caved and let me invite him over. She got to finally meet him on Thanksgiving.
All this time I never admitted who this boy was, but she's not dumb. She knew. Eventually she found that my bf is a wonderful person and goes above and beyond to love and serve my family even though they don't like him. She started to grow fond of him. They became friends. They chat together now. And my mom may still disagree with the relationship out of personal reasons, but she officially let go and told me she's not going to interfere with my life anymore and that my bf is a special person. An icy shroud over her heart has melted. She's not totally pro gay marriage but she had to humanize my bf in order to think more clearly.
If you humanize the threat to bigots, there's room for them to think and feel. Otherwise, the target is just a threat to them they want to keep out. It's the fundamentals of prejudice.
Not bigots that are essentially trenched down in their opinion but definitely to people that are ignorant and don't have exposure to different races, ethnicities. I've done this in my work and travels to rural areas in the U.S. Most people have preconceived notions of me based on my ethnicity (Asian-American). For the most part, they aren't trying to be offensive and lambasting them is counterproductive and they will dig in even further in their biases. Like others have mentioned, if you can plant a seed of open-mindedness, that can potentially bear fruit down the line to be more accepting of differences.
That is kind of a stance that I have had in the past to try and appeal to reason seeing as I live in a pretty uh.. melanin deficient neighborhood and often have to interact with people who believe ridiculous ideologies and don't understand that their beliefs are harmful. Yeah I gave up. I tried.
I do it to a degree. Probably doesn't stick or change someone. I do it most while playing basketball, where you hear a lot of people call each other gay, faggot, or use other sexually/gender negative phrases. I don't stop everything and throw the ball down or walk off the court, but usually I go up to the person whose saying it a lot and say, "Hey, I know you don't mean it the wrong way, but do you mind not calling [me, other person, etc] a faggot? I've got a lot of gay people who are close to me and the word bothers me." I don't do it publicly, I usually do it quietly after the game or during downtime 1 on 1, alone, without friends because that's when defense mechanisms kick in. I Will tell you like 98% of the time it works that day / that game. When they go back with their friends or whatever they probably go back to use it again, but honestly, the overwhelming majority of people say they're sorry they didn't mean it that way and stop. I've had only ... like maybe 1 person react negatively to me asking someone that, and that was a guy who just wasn't going to be receptive to it that day.
The reason I do it is because I was on the receiving end of that conversation when I was a kid. Back when I was 16 or 17 I used to play basketball, and I used to constantly say "nigga this" and "nigga that," because I thought it was ok for me to do that. One day, a brown friend of mine came up to me and said the same thing to me... he said something like, "Hey, I know you don't mean it in a negative way, but that's a hurtful word to me." And I stopped saying it when playing basketball, and then basically stopped saying it around friends, stopped even thinking in that way. I was really embarrassed for myself at the time, this was almost 20 years ago but that still sticks out and I'm still grateful that the person walked up and told me that. He did it in a really cool way, privately to me, and it honestly made a difference to me.
I can honestly also say at the bar that when I get into a political discussion with someone who might be a Trump supporter or conservative-leaning, I pull them over closer to my side pretty regularly, or at least we'll have a conversation with each other. My wife and I live in a city that went about 70/30 Clinton:Trump, but we live near the surrounding towns that were more 55/45 or even 50/50 (a handful of towns went Trump, but they're further out)... So the bars I usually go to that aren't in the city tend to be on the outskirts and have a broader ideological split. I'm a good bar talker, though, and easily talk to people from different ideologies. Political topics come up because I'll be parked at the bar next to a few other people post-work and like the 6PM news will come on and inevitably some political topic will come up and we'll all start talking. Now, I live in a liberal part of the country, and so they're not dyed in the wool KKK members of course, but usually all of these groups that radicalize people play on their fears and ignorance, and assuaging their fears is one of the better ways to deradicalize them. I've got a lot of thoughts on this, but probably not enough time to write about it.
The reason I do it is because I was on the receiving end of that conversation when I was a kid. Back when I was 16 or 17 I used to play basketball, and I used to constantly say "nigga this" and "nigga that," because I thought it was ok for me to do that. One day, a brown friend of mine came up to me and said the same thing to me... he said something like, "Hey, I know you don't mean it in a negative way, but that's a hurtful word to me." And I stopped saying it when playing basketball, and then basically stopped saying it around friends, stopped even thinking in that way. I was really embarrassed for myself at the time, this was almost 20 years ago but that still sticks out and I'm still grateful that the person walked up and told me that. He did it in a really cool way, privately to me, and it honestly made a difference to me.
I can honestly also say at the bar that when I get into a political discussion with someone who might be a Trump supporter or conservative-leaning, I pull them over closer to my side pretty regularly, or at least we'll have a conversation with each other. My wife and I live in a city that went about 70/30 Clinton:Trump, but we live near the surrounding towns that were more 55/45 or even 50/50 (a handful of towns went Trump, but they're further out)... So the bars I usually go to that aren't in the city tend to be on the outskirts and have a broader ideological split. I'm a good bar talker, though, and easily talk to people from different ideologies. Political topics come up because I'll be parked at the bar next to a few other people post-work and like the 6PM news will come on and inevitably some political topic will come up and we'll all start talking. Now, I live in a liberal part of the country, and so they're not dyed in the wool KKK members of course, but usually all of these groups that radicalize people play on their fears and ignorance, and assuaging their fears is one of the better ways to deradicalize them. I've got a lot of thoughts on this, but probably not enough time to write about it.
Last edited:
I have never succeeded at changing "friends" but I have found some success in chipping away at some toxic family member beliefs.
It's a long process unlearning what they've learned because they will resist facts, logic, and whatever you have.
It's a long process unlearning what they've learned because they will resist facts, logic, and whatever you have.
Nah, it's completely accurate. I've seen and been part of so many discussions... Then it's always on the part of the person who people are saying is wrong to educate themselves. Many modern concepts come from actual education in sociology. It's completely unsurprising that most people would be ignorant. But it's met with pure flames. Most of the time
The problem comes when the bigot does not believe they are ignorant. They are the "educated" bigot that receives all their news from Fox News, socialize with other racists and bigots, and have their worldview reaffirmed everyday when they go online and self indulge in propaganda.
They believe you are the ignorant one.
I work on an oil rig in a deep red state. I try to educate bigots all the time, because they're everywhere here. Just yesterday I talked with a new coworker for two hours about his shitty libertarian "the strong must control the weak, and those who are unsuccessful are always simply weak, such is the natural order" belief system. Anyway, I changed one mind so far. He went from telling me black people only have themselves to blame for their situation and need to just pull themselves up by their bootstraps to seeming to believe, as far as I can tell, that society has also fucked black people after I explained redlining, black names on job applications, and pointed out that oppression of black people in the recent past extends into the here and now when people who grow up in a social class tend to stay in that class (in simpler terms, because the guy was very poorly educated and not much of a big-picture/abstract thinker). Whew, that's quite a run-on sentence.
I'm pretty sure these kinds of often deeply held beliefs are far more commonly changed over a long period of time rather than in an instant, though, so your request for a complete 180 (and a TRUE 180, you must read their mind to make sure they weren't still racist!!) is a pretty high bar. I think it's worth doing even if they just end up moderating their view over time as a result. Frankly though OP it sounds like you're the pissy one, demanding receipts but refusing to believe any receipts posted AND presuming everyone walking the walk is only doing so selfishly. Seems like the only ways I come out of this interaction without you hating me is to ignore you or lie to you, but hey, keep carrying that chip on your shoulder. Must have felt really good posting that.
I'm pretty sure these kinds of often deeply held beliefs are far more commonly changed over a long period of time rather than in an instant, though, so your request for a complete 180 (and a TRUE 180, you must read their mind to make sure they weren't still racist!!) is a pretty high bar. I think it's worth doing even if they just end up moderating their view over time as a result. Frankly though OP it sounds like you're the pissy one, demanding receipts but refusing to believe any receipts posted AND presuming everyone walking the walk is only doing so selfishly. Seems like the only ways I come out of this interaction without you hating me is to ignore you or lie to you, but hey, keep carrying that chip on your shoulder. Must have felt really good posting that.
Online, I do it all the time. Not necessarily for the one I'm directing my comments toward, but for the person behind them; the silent one in the background going "yeah, what this guy says makes a lot of sense!" and would continue to say and believe such things until they're as outspoken and as stupid as the first had they not just been barraged with a difference in opinion that's actually backed up by facts, logic, and sources for said information.
The mission is to get the ones who aren't fully indoctrinated yet. Those are the one's who're going to change not just themselves, but their immediate circles.
The mission is to get the ones who aren't fully indoctrinated yet. Those are the one's who're going to change not just themselves, but their immediate circles.
I went to check for you—and maybe I'm just too tired right now, as I've been awake for nearly 24 hours—but the book I originally learned the Socratic method from seems to lack citations specifically to the peer-reviewed cult exiting literature it claims to draw from.
There is the ICSA which has resources for family assistance with cults, but as far as I can tell the Cultic Studies Journal it provides articles from isn't on the Master Journal List which makes me suspicious of it's claim to peer-review.
The book does cite some peer-reviewed articles on Socratic pedagogy however.
The book I'm referring to is A Manual for Creating Atheists by Peter Boghossian. The author is an assistant professor of philosophy at Portland State University. His academic contributions include applying the Socratic method on prison inmates to teach critical thinking and moral reasoning.
Though the focus of the book is directed at religion specifically, I find that the instructions can be applied to any epistemic source—in my case, that's usually Fox News.
I don't know if I'd recommend the book for this though; mostly because of the anti-theistic nature of the book (and also because I think some of Boghossian's political views are embarrassing), but I do find myself referring back to it for it's section on intervention and strategies.
I'm sorry. I feel a little disappointed now. I wasn't as scientifically literate back when I was first lent the book, and I didn't know how to check journal authenticity.
I do have the eBook if that still interests you, but I could probably just outline that specific chapter also.
I'm fairly certain there's better material out there on Socratic reasoning though. It's just a nice primer, I suppose.
It doesn't work, I tried.
They might listen for a few seconds but then their brains reject everything you just said with "but" or "what about"
It's pointless
They might listen for a few seconds but then their brains reject everything you just said with "but" or "what about"
It's pointless