کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) 

کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  

📱 پیج اینستاگرام: Luminous__english

DANCING TO THE SAME BEAT

Since the audience started out favoring preschool subsidies, there was more room for change in Harish’s direction—but he also had the

more difficult task of advocating for the unpopular position. He opened the audience’s mind by taking a page out of the playbook of expert negotiators.

Harish started by emphasizing common ground. When he took the stage for his rebuttal, he immediately drew attention to his and Debra’s areas of agreement. “So,” he began, “I think we disagree on far less than it may seem.” He called out their alignment on the problem of poverty—and on the validity of some of the studies—

before objecting to subsidies as a solution.

We won’t have much luck changing other people’s minds if we refuse to change ours. We can demonstrate openness by acknowledging where we agree with our critics and even what we’ve learned from them. Then, when we ask what views they might be willing to revise, we’re not hypocrites.

Convincing other people to think again isn’t just about making a good argument—it’s about establishing that we have the right motives in doing so. When we concede that someone else has made a good point, we signal that we’re not preachers, prosecutors, or politicians trying to advance an agenda. We’re scientists trying to get

to the truth. “Arguments are often far more combative and

adversarial than they need to be,” Harish told me. “You should be willing to listen to what someone else is saying and give them a lot of credit for it. It makes you sound like a reasonable person who is taking everything into account.”

Being reasonable literally means that we can be reasoned with, that we’re open to evolving our views in light of logic and data. So in

the debate with Harish, why did Debra neglect to do that—why did she overlook common ground?

It’s not because Debra is eight years old. It’s because she isn’t human.

Debra Jo Prectet is an anagram I invented. Her official name is Project Debater, and she’s a machine. More specifically, an artificial intelligence developed by IBM to do for debate what Watson did for chess.

They first dreamed the idea up in 2011 and started working intensively on it in 2014. Just a few years later, Project Debater had developed the remarkable ability to conduct an intelligent debate in public, complete with facts, coherent sentences, and even

counterarguments. Her knowledge corpus consists of 400 million articles, largely from credible newspapers and magazines, and her claim detection engine is designed to locate key arguments, identify their boundaries, and weigh the evidence. For any debate topic, she can instantaneously search her knowledge graph for relevant data points, mold them into a logical case, and deliver it clearly—even entertainingly—in a female voice within the time constraints. Her first words in the preschool subsidy debate were, “Greetings, Harish. I’ve heard you hold the world record in debate competition wins against humans, but I suspect you’ve never debated a machine.

Welcome to the future.”

📚هایلایت قسمت 71 کتاب Think Again

✅ favoring: supporting or preferring something, طرفداری کردن از

✅ preschool subsidies: financial support for early childhood education, یارانه‌های پیش‌دبستانی

✅ room for change: opportunity to make changes, فضای تغییر / امکان تغییر

✅ advocating for: supporting or arguing in favor of, دفاع کردن از / حمایت کردن از

✅ unpopular position: a viewpoint not widely supported, موضع غیرمحبوب

✅ open someone’s mind: make someone consider new ideas, باز کردن ذهن کسی / آماده کردن کسی برای پذیرش ایده‌ها

✅ take a page out of (someone’s) playbook: copy someone’s successful strategy, الگوبرداری از روش موفق کسی

✅ emphasizing common ground: highlighting shared opinions or beliefs, تأکید بر نقاط مشترک

✅ take the stage: go onto the stage, روی صحنه رفتن

✅ rebuttal: a response to counter an argument, پاسخ/رد کردن استدلال طرف مقابل

✅ draw attention to: make someone notice something, جلب توجه کردن به

✅ areas of agreement: points where people agree, حوزه‌های توافق

✅ alignment: agreement or harmony between views, هم‌راستایی / توافق

✅ validity: the quality of being logically or factually sound, اعتبار

✅ object to: express opposition to something, اعتراض کردن به / مخالفت کردن با

✅ acknowledging: admitting or recognizing, پذیرفتن / اذعان کردن

✅ willing to: ready or prepared to do something, مایل بودن به

✅ hypocrite: someone who pretends to have beliefs they don’t truly hold, دورو / منافق

✅ combative: ready to fight or argue, جنگجو / پرخاشگر

✅ adversarial: involving conflict or opposition, خصمانه / مقابله‌ای

✅ give credit for: recognize or appreciate someone’s effort, ارزش قائل شدن برای کسی

✅ reasonable person: a person who is logical and fair, فرد منطقی

✅ take everything into account: consider all factors, همه چیز را در نظر گرفتن

✅ neglect to do something: fail to do something important, انجام ندادن / غفلت کردن

✅ overlook: fail to notice or consider, نادیده گرفتن

✅ artificial intelligence (AI): computer systems able to perform tasks normally requiring human intelligence, هوش مصنوعی

✅ knowledge corpus: a structured set of knowledge or data, مجموعه دانش / پایگاه اطلاعاتی

✅ counterarguments: arguments opposing another argument, استدلال‌های مخالف

✅ instantaneously: immediately, فوراً

✅ mold into: shape or form into something, شکل دادن / تبدیل کردن

✅ within time constraints: inside the allowed time limit, در چارچوب زمانی تعیین‌شده

✅ hold the world record: have the highest achievement globally, رکورد جهانی داشتن

✅ I suspect: I think or believe something without certainty, حدس می‌زنم