I want to highlight the use of the above approach to argument for resolving mundane conflicts as a Bayesian.
Step 1: Run your Turing Test on the conflict. (This does need to run on both sides, It is your own missing info we will focus on)
Step 2: Compare your results to their actual model. Highlight the individual differences.
Step 3: Item by item quiz them for info on the differences.
Why chose this?
What alternatives did you consider?
Why not take those alternatives?
*The goal is is to identify their goals, values and beliefs that created their model.
Step 4: Repeat until your Turing Test matches their model.
Step 5: Update your model with the newly acquired info.
Step 6: Admire the mutually beneficial solution to the conflict. (Convincing them this is the mutually beneficial solution is outside the scope of this seven step program.)
Step 7: Profit.
A step by step checklist on how to decide which widget to use in the new product line, or where to go for supper.
I want to highlight the use of the above approach to argument for resolving mundane conflicts as a Bayesian.
Step 1: Run your Turing Test on the conflict. (This does need to run on both sides, It is your own missing info we will focus on) Step 2: Compare your results to their actual model. Highlight the individual differences. Step 3: Item by item quiz them for info on the differences. Why chose this? What alternatives did you consider? Why not take those alternatives? *The goal is is to identify their goals, values and beliefs that created their model. Step 4: Repeat until your Turing Test matches their model. Step 5: Update your model with the newly acquired info. Step 6: Admire the mutually beneficial solution to the conflict. (Convincing them this is the mutually beneficial solution is outside the scope of this seven step program.) Step 7: Profit.
A step by step checklist on how to decide which widget to use in the new product line, or where to go for supper.