My ego hates this ChatGPT trick, but that's why it works
Here's an idea from German-Brazilian scholar Carlos Fraenkel:
“Even if the beliefs we adopt in the course of our socialisation were indubitably true, we would still greatly benefit from defending them in a debate. If a true belief is not fully, frequently and fearlessly discussed, it will be held as a dead dogma, not a living truth.”
I used to be afraid of debates. They felt like annihilation. Not anymore. People see debates as something you win. So someone must lose. Fraenkel suggests:
A debate is not something to be won
A debate is something to be had
Debates exist to generate options. Not to prove one option is more right than the other. This helps us have healthier debates. But it's also a cool use for AI. Lots of ChatGPT use cases are about being proven right. "Give me examples of X”.
What if you could use it to prove you wrong? Say you have your strategic flow. It feels solid. Now do this:
Paste your flow to ChatGPT
Ask: does this make sense? What am i trying to say?
Then ask: where are the flaws? How can you prove me wrong?
Now it gets interesting. Strange. Uncomfortable. That’s the point. If debates are tools to generate options, AI tools help you do that 10x faster. A debate tool on steroids. So you feel more prepared. Have a stronger view. And better odds.
Not odds of 'winning'. Odds of solving a problem.
Which is the endgame.
Want more like this? You should subscribe to Salmon Theory, the weekly newsletter that helps 6k+ savvy strategists swim upstream.
