Stopping the Family Blow Up Around the Dinner Table!
By James Murray
Thunder Bay – OPINION – It’s Thanksgiving weekend in the United States which means turkey, football, Black Friday sales, and that one family member who always acts like they’re on Twitter at the table.
It could be Uncle Billy’s warning about stricter immigration laws or Aunt Sally’s thoughts on war crimes in Gaza. Someone might talk about the Epstein files, the latest “deep state” scandal, or say that your news source is just propaganda.
The holidays are starting to feel more and more like the comment section on Facebook, Twitter, or on news websites that allow comments for a lot of both the American and Canadian families who will be getting together later in December.
The food is warm, but the room gets colder every time someone clears their throat and says, “Well, the real problem is…”
So, do we have to do this every year?
I’m not sure. A lot of new research shows that there is a surprisingly easy way to calm things down: not by giving up on politics, but by changing the way we talk about it.
Psychologists believe that curiosity is the answer.
The Big Mistake That Makes Us So Mad About Politics
For a long time, political scientists and psychologists have been watching a trend: partisanship is no longer just about what you believe; it has become a part of who you are. We are not just fans of a party; we are that party, just like we are fans of the Leafs or members of a certain group.
There are some bad things about that identity:
- We believe that most people on “our side” agree on most things;
- We believe that “their side” is not only wrong, but also bad or evil;
- We don’t say anything that would make us seem like we don’t care about our team.
Researchers at George Mason University and UC Santa Barbara recently looked into this.
They found that both Democrats and Republicans think their party members’ ideas are much more rigid and similar than they really are. In other words, we all think that our own side is more united than it really is.
You are less likely to:
Think about what you think;
Listen to what someone who disagrees with you says;
Take the chance that you might be the only one in your group.
The study then went a step further and found an important detail: People who were more curious were 25–30% more likely to see disagreement within their own party and were also more willing to talk to the other side.
People who were interested were better at seeing, “Actually, not everyone on my team thinks the same way.” That little bit of difference seems to make people less strict and more open.
Can we “turn on” curiosity, even if we don’t have it naturally?
The same group of researchers wanted to know if you could make someone more curious, like turning up a dimmer switch. It’s interesting how they did it:
First, they told them that a lot of people in their own party are more open-minded and humble than most people think.
Then, the people who took part wrote a letter with tips on how to talk to someone who has a different political opinion, even if it sounds rude.
No one got the letters. The goal was for the writers to learn how to be more open and curious.
This short workout has effects that can be measured:
People were more sure that their own party cares about other people’s points of view.
They became more interested in politics, though not by much.
According to Todd Kashdan, the GMU psychologist who did the study, being too partisan gives us a false sense of our own “tribe.”
We think everyone is the same, which makes us more rigid and afraid to break the rules. Letting people know that it’s okay to be the “odd one out” actually makes room for other ways of thinking.
This isn’t just for the lab. It shows us how to set the table for dinner:
If you can convince yourself that “my side” is more diverse than you think, it’s not as scary to say “I’m not sure” or “I see that differently.” And that makes you want to learn more, even about people you don’t agree with.
The Strength of Switching “Why?” to “How?”
This is where the science really starts to work. Kashdan and others say that when we want to calm things down, the worst thing we can say is what most people naturally say: “Why do you believe that?””
“Why” questions feel like a test. They make people defensive and make them say things they’ve already said.
Kashdan says to ask “how” instead. “Okay, I hear you.” How do you think that would work in real life?
“What would happen in our town if that policy passed?”
That little change does a couple of things:
It needs more than just slogans.
It lets both of you ask questions like, “What is fracking?” or “What does DEI really mean?”
It makes the conversation feel more like a group effort to solve a problem than a courtroom cross-examination.
The tone is the most important thing. When you say “How would that work?” with a smile, it can sound like a trap. But if you say honestly, “I really don’t know this as well as you; walk me through it,” it usually makes people think more deeply and less angrily.
Curiosity spreads
Spencer Harrison, an organizational behaviour professor at INSEAD, has been studying how curiosity spreads from one person to the next. He and his coworkers have found that people are almost twice as likely to answer when you ask a question and explain why you’re asking it, whether it’s in a lab test, on social media, or in a normal conversation.
He calls it a “mirroring effect.”
When I come in hot and say, “Explain yourself!” you get upset.
If I come in and say, “I’m interested in this because I’m worried about “X”; can you help me understand how you see it?” your brain will usually be just as curious.
Over time, the goal isn’t to agree on everything (that’s not possible), but to find the one small thing you both agree on. You might not agree with 80% of what your cousin says about Gaza, but you both care a lot about the lives of regular people. You may not agree on immigration policy, but you both want your neighbourhood to be safe and the economy to be stable.
That 20% overlap won’t fix politics around the world, but it could save Christmas and keep the relationship going.
Curiosity as a “Super-Virtue”
People used to think that curiosity was a fixed trait of a person’s personality. Some people are naturally curious, while others are not. New research is making that idea less certain.
According to research by Madeleine Gross at UCSB, making small, repetitive changes to your behaviour may make people more interested over time. For instance, you could take a break during the day to ask someone about something you see.
Seeing or doing something you already know from a new angle.
On purpose breaking a daily routine (taking a different route, trying a new recipe).
People who took part in these “curiosity training” experiments didn’t just feel more interested for a short time; the effect lasted. It seemed that faking interest gradually made them more interested.
In general, more curiosity is linked to:
A: Better memory and learning
B: More creativity and strength
C: A stronger sense of purpose and more meaningful connections
and D: Healthier aging and a lower risk of cognitive decline
Some experts even call it a “super-virtue.”
The Hard Part: Wanting to Know About Politics
Why aren’t more people interested in politics if curiosity is good for us?
Politics touches on something deep inside us. According to Jacqueline Gottlieb, a neurologist at Columbia University, partisanship looks like tribal survival. Your brain sees getting kicked out of the group as a big threat.
We say things like, “Those people are monsters; there’s no reason to be interested in them.”
“If I say I’m not sure, people will think I’m weak or untrustworthy.”
Studies on dehumanization show that this happens to people on both sides. Researchers looked at the 2020 U.S. election and found that Democrats, who usually score higher on openness, sometimes showed more dehumanizing hatred toward Republicans than the other way around.
But here’s the good news:
When partisans are shown that they don’t know how much the other side hates or dehumanizes them, both Republicans and Democrats are less likely to do the same thing back.
In other words, clearing up that confusion makes the edges soft enough for curiosity to get in.
What This Means Around the Holiday Table in Northwestern Ontario?
This story is about Thanksgiving in the U.S., but the same things happen in living rooms from Thunder Bay to Fort Frances to Marathon at Christmas and Easter:
- Disagreements about Ukraine and Gaza
- Fights over carbon taxes, mining developments, and pipelines
- Fights over protests by convoys, vaccines, or Indigenous land rights
Families in northwestern Ontario have the same problems when they switch from online to offline as families in the United States do. The tools for inquiry are also the same.
You don’t have to stop believing in what you believe. You don’t have to pretend that everything is “both sides.” The study shows that you should be humble enough to:
-
- Understand that your “team” isn’t as strong as you think it is.
- Understand that the slogans you use might not mean that you know as much as they say.
- Be ready to ask questions that aren’t really traps.
At that point, the conversation goes from “putting on a show for your side” to really learning something.
A holiday curiosity experiment that could save dinner
This is a helpful template based on what you found that you can use in your own home, no matter where you live in Minnesota or McKellar:
Prior to the family gathering, send a quick email or message to a younger friend or family member telling them how to talk to someone they don’t agree with politically.
Add at least one “how” question they could ask, like “How do you think that would work in our town?” Remember that this letter is mostly for you. You are thinking about a different script.
As they talked, instead of “Why do you think that?” say “How do you think that will work?”
Next, explain why you want to know: “I’m asking because I’m worried about X,” or “I’m really torn about this and want to know how you feel about it.”
Even if it’s only 20% of what’s on the table, try to find one small thing that you both agree on.
Later on: Pay attention to what you didn’t know as well as you thought. Jot it down and check it out later.
Consider this: Did being curious affect how the conversation felt, even if it didn’t change anyone’s mind?
One meal won’t bring a divided country back together. Anger will still be favoured by algorithms on social media and in political media. Some people are so loyal to their tribe that they feel like they are betraying them if they suggest anything different.
But being curious can change us. And that’s not a small thing.
Don’t just judge; be interested
People sometimes think that the line “Be curious, not judgmental” comes from Walt Whitman, but the show Ted Lasso made it famous. The origin of the phrase is ambiguous, yet the science supports the concept.
Curiosity lets us be serious about ethics without being angry all the time, have strong opinions without making fun of people who disagree, and be tough on facts but nice to people.
So, this Christmas season, whether you’re getting ready for Uncle Billy’s rant or Aunt Sally’s long speech, try this short experiment:
You should ask more questions that start with “how” than “why.”
Tell the truth about why you want to know.
Give yourself some room to think, “I could be wrong about this.”
You probably won’t be able to change anyone’s mind about who to vote for. But you might be able to save the night and get some of your humanity back at the same time.
