Behind the Premise

A word about Grant the Premise:

I use a method that I have titled “grant the premise” as a sort of rhetorical triage. Every day we are all assaulted by more ideas jostling for our attention than we can possibly vet fully. How does one quickly decide which ideas are worthy of further consideration and which may be safely discarded?

Grant the premise!

Take as a foundational assumption that everything the idea claims is absolutely true. If this idea is true, then what else would I expect to find? Look for consistency of thought. If I find consistency, then the idea is worthy of further consideration. If I find inconsistency, then the idea may be safely discarded.

Understand what this means: ultimately I am seeking to determine – quickly – whether YOU believe what you are urging me to believe! If YOU do not actually, really believe what you are telling me, then why should I bother believing it?

Illustration: years ago a friend wanted to convince me of “peak oil,” the idea that worldwide oil production had peaked and was forever in decline. Demand for oil, meanwhile, is inexorably rising. Chaos will result as price rises, necessitating a worldwide shift to alternative energy sources.

“Obviously then,” I replied in conversation, “you are buying up all the physical oil and oil futures you can get your hands on! If your theory is correct you will make a fortune!”

“Well, no,” he averred. He wanted government intervention to wean us off of oil.

“If correct,” I countered, “you realize there is nothing at all that government needs to do. As demand inexorably outstrips supply, the price of oil will climb inexorably, making alternative energy sources more and more attractive to develop. Natural market forces will accomplish exactly what you want to acxomplish!”

Nope! He urged government intervention to force a switch to alternative energy.

Ultimately I concluded, “Look: YOU don’t believe what you are telling me! Why should I believe it?”

And that is what I mean by “grant the premise.” As a means of sorting competing ideas into worthy and unworthy categories, first just grant the premise wholly, then look for consistency. If A is true, then B and C ought also to be true. If you find consistency, then the idea is worth further consideration. If you find inconsistency, then the idea may be safely discarded.

It is necessary to understand what this method is, and what it is not. It is merely a tool to discern whether the speaker really believes what he is telling you. Most of the time you will find he does not. Most people advocate ideas they themselves do not really believe, for reasons ranging from mere laziness to fully malicious intent. Most people are not fully honest, even to themselves, about what they truly believe.

Grant the Premise is not, however, a method of discerning the objective truth or falsehood of the matter under consideration. It is only capable of separating consistent thought from inconsistent; honest from dishonest. It is a method of triage to help decide which ideas are worthy of further attention.

Try it and see how you like it! To be effective, this method requires a certain measure of intellectual honesty on your own part. You must be willing to explore ideas you may not like. Grant the premise fully, honestly. Try it on and look around inside it, unblinking, to see what you may find. It may well be uncomfortable. You may find consistency in an idea you nonetheless do not like! Look around anyway. Remember that you are not yet assessing objective truth or falsehood, but only whether the idea under consideration is worth assessing for objective truth or falsehood.