But, on some occasions, it’s actually a very good and useful thing that people gossip. For instance, if someone in a community is genuinely very dangerous, it’s important that the evidence of this is spread throughout the community.

I propose that for healthy, valuable gossip, we use the phrase “Noble Gossip” to differentiate it from its sometimes viscous and often destructive counterpart (which I’ll call “Ignoble Gossip”).

Here is what I would say distinguishes Ignoble Gossip from Noble Gossip.

Ignoble Gossip tends to have these characteristics:

1) It involves spreading false information or information that’s unlikely to be true (without making it clear it’s unlikely to be true).

2) It isn’t clear where the information came from (e.g., “Did you know that X did Y to Z?” leaving out the fact that this is based on a 3rd hand report).

3) It involves vague accusations or vibes (e.g., “I’ve heard that person is toxic” or “I think he’s creepy”).

4) It is mean-spirited or has the goal of hurting people’s reputations (e.g., “everyone knows she’s a s**t and no self-respecting man would ever want to be with her”).

5) It involves schadenfreude or is for the purpose of entertainment (e.g., “Have you heard what happened to X? Serves him right. He’s finally getting what he deserves.”)

6) It includes information that others don’t have a right to know and that it is not societally valuable for others to know (e.g., “Have you heard the kind of depraved stuff they do in the bedroom?”)

7) It would be better handled by taking it up directly with the person who did the allegedly harmful action, but instead, it’s being spread around to others (e.g., “I can’t stand my roommate: they have the most annoying personal habits…but no I haven’t mentioned to them that any of the things they do bother me.”) [Hat tip to Helen Lurie for this point.]

Noble Gossip, on the other hand, tends to have these characteristics:

1) It involves spreading true information or information that’s at least reasonably likely to be true, and it makes it clear how much uncertainty there is in the information while taking very seriously the possibility the information is false or misleading or even that it was purposely spread in order to harm someone, and caveating the information appropriately (e.g., “the source that told me this is pretty reliable, so I’m 80% confident this happened”).

2) The source of the information is clear, or (when that isn’t possible for confidentiality reasons) it is made clear what sort of source it is (e.g., “I was told by a close friend of Z that X did Y to Z”).

3) It involves very specific claims about behavior, not vague categories or impressionistic evaluations (e.g., “Her husband told me that she did PQR but then lied to him right after, telling him she had never in her life done PQR”). The focus on observed behaviors (rather than intent or beliefs) is important because our assumptions about another person’s intent or beliefs are usually just speculations.

4) It has the goal of helping people become aware of information that is important and societally useful or personally protective (e.g., “Before you go into business together, I think you should know that his last business partner told me that he stole money from their business”).

5) It treats the topic seriously and with gravity without making light of people’s bad situations and moral failings (e.g., “His wife told me she was devasted when he did that.”)

6) It includes information that people have a right to know or that is important for people to know to help foster a healthy community or healthy and safe one-on-one relationships (“After I heard that you just went on a first date with him, I want to make sure you were aware that he was previously convicted of sexual assault and spent 3 years in prison for it”).

7) It’s not something that would be better to take up directly with the person who is being accused of harm (e.g., “And then they told me they would lie to my boss to get me fired if I didn’t give them what they wanted”).

One of the worst things about gossip is that it can spread false or misleading information, which can be very harmful. Sometimes false information is spread innocently due to a misunderstanding or mistaken inference, and sometimes false or exaggerated rumors are purposefully weaponized to hurt a person. One of the goals of the criteria I laid out for Noble Gossip is to reduce the chance the information being spread is false or misleading (by citing sources, caveating claims, expressing levels of confidence, being concrete about what exactly is being claimed, and taking seriously the possibility it is false).

Rather than taking either of two extreme positions on gossip (thinking of all gossip as bad or engaging in gossip indiscriminately), I suggest that we differentiate between these two very different types of gossip:

• Ignoble Gossip, which is largely bad and we should aim to avoid (much the way many people try to avoid other unvirtuous behaviors such as lying), and

• Noble Gossip, which we should engage in when doing so is likely to make society or social relationships better or safer.

Not all gossip is the same, and the negative reputation gossip has is only partially deserved. Noble Gossip helps keep people safe and helps communities thrive.

In fact, Noble Gossip is one of the few defenses that communities have against powerful bad actors who have managed to somehow create a positive reputation for themselves.

That being said, even with regard to Noble Gossip we should be cautious interpreting and spreading information about other people. It’s easy to misinterpret events. Additionally, there are usually at least two sides to a story, and even if one side is more right than the other, each side will often conveniently leave out important information because it makes them look bad, and sometimes will exaggerate what they do say to make the other side look worse. 

There are also people who purposely spread gossip with the intention of inflicting harm (sometimes this is true information, but other times its information that’s been made up). So, for these reasons, we should spread social information with caution and care. And, when safety and confidentiality are not at stake, and we think that the information seems important, we should try to go to the original source to find out more reliable information and to hear different perspectives on what happened.

I believe that if the guidelines in this article were to be followed, people would end up, on average, gossiping quite a bit less. That’s because I think a lot of gossip is Ignoble Gossip. However, hopefully some of the Ignoble Gossip would be converted into Noble Gossip, which I would see as an improvement.

I think there is a tradeoff between:

(1) Too much gossip being exchanged, which clearly has a lot of harm (e.g., false information being spread, private information that nobody has a right to know/is not societly helpful to know being spread, information being weaponized by bad actors, etc.)

(2) Too little gossip being exchanged (which means that people have a less easy time protecting themselves from very harmful people, and communities have a much harder time detecting very harmful people and evicting them from the community)

However, not all gossip is created equal – some is societally valuable to spread, and some is societally harmful to spread. So just thinking about the amount of gossip, and not the type of gossip, misses something important. My hope with this post is to outline some important considerations regarding what sort of information tends to be societally valuable to spread (Noble Gossip) and what sort of information tends to be societally harmful to spread (Ignoble Gossip)

This piece was first written on January 28, 2024, and first appeared on my website on February 10, 2024.

Using the analogy of being trapped in an actual pit, the guide below sorts these eight pitfalls into three different kinds: Beliefs Traps, Social Traps, and Avoidance Traps & Desire Traps.

Psychological Traps

Belief Traps: pits of belief

These traps result from false or unacknowledged beliefs we have about the world, which hinder our ability to see a situation for what it is. 

(1) Truman Show You don’t realize (or have forgotten) that you’re stuck in a pit. As far as you’re concerned, this is just what normal life is like, so you don’t make any efforts to change your situation. 

• Example 1: You were raised in a cult from a young age. Everyone around you lives the same kind of life and has the same beliefs, so you don’t consider that there could be any other options.
• Example 2: Your partner has always abused you, just like your mom abused your dad. As far as you’re concerned, this kind of behavior is just what happens in intimate relationships.

(2) Mirage You could climb out of the pit, but you don’t believe you can. You’ve convinced yourself the walls are twice as high as they are or that you’re not strong enough to make it. Perhaps this belief is the product of “learned helplessness”: you tried and failed to get out of the pit in the past, so you’ve learned that it’s easier not to try.

• Example 1: You hate your job, but you’re convinced that if you quit, you’ll fail to get hired anywhere else. Because of this, you don’t try to change your situation even though you’re deeply unhappy.
• Example 2: You are convinced that it would be nearly impossible for you to find a romantic partner (due to many rejections you experienced early in life), so you don’t bother going on dates or trying to meet people you find attractive.

(3) Inevitability You’re convinced that if you get out of this pit, you’ll just end up in another one – one which could be even worse – so there’s no point in leaving. At least this pit is familiar to you. 

• Example 1: You’re depressed, and you know there are treatments out there that could help you, but you’re convinced that the world is just a bad, miserable place and that you’ll always find something to be unhappy about. Because of this, you don’t make any effort to tackle your depression.
• Example 2: You’re not happy with your current partner, but you’re convinced that any other relationship you could have would be just as bad. You conclude that it’s probably you that’s defective, not the relationship, and decide to stick with it.

 Social Traps: pits caused by social dynamics

These traps are the product of relationships with other people – relationships that might be actively unhealthy or relationships whose success we take too much responsibility for.

(4) Prison of Solidarity

You could leave the pit, but there’s someone stuck in there with you. If you think of leaving, you feel so guilty, or they get so sad when they find out that you abandon the plan.

• Example 1: Your roommate is severely depressed. It’s harming you, but you know that their life is improved by your presence, and you don’t want to move out for fear that they’ll be even more unhappy. 
• Example 2: You committed to completing a project with a friend, but it has been beset by expensive and time-consuming setbacks. It is seriously affecting the quality of your life, but you don’t want to leave your friend alone to deal with it.

(5) Coerced Confinement

You could climb out of the pit, but whenever you try, someone uses manipulation to rope you back in or threatens you with bad consequences if you leave.

• Example 1: Your spouse is abusive and threatens to spread terrible lies about you and turn all of your friends against you if you leave. Understandably, this threat keeps you from leaving, even though, in actuality, you would be better off if you left even if they go through with the threat.
• Example 2: You keep trying to quit the job you hate. Whenever you do, your boss makes you feel terrible, convincing you that you’re being ungrateful for everything the job has done for you and that you owe it to the company to stay.

Avoidance & Desire Traps: pits of fear, pain, and pleasure 

(6) Toothless Tiger

A tiger is lurking outside of the pit you’re stuck in – which you perceive as a terrible danger. Tigers are scary, so it makes sense that you’re afraid and haven’t climbed out. But what if it’s an old tiger with no teeth or claws? Now it’s your own fear that keeps you trapped in the pit.

• Example 1: You’re terrified of looking stupid or embarrassing yourself in social situations, so you avoid all interaction with other people instead of trying to face this fear. It ruins your life.
• Example 2: You’re terrified of failure, so you don’t try to do things unless it’s certain that you will succeed. This fear prevents you from accomplishing the things you find truly meaningful in life.

(7) Barbed Wire Barrier 

You could escape the pit, but it’s going to hurt a lot to climb out. You avoid the short-term pain, even though it means suffering much more serious pain in the future.

• Example 1: Neither you nor your spouse is happy in your marriage. But getting a divorce sounds stressful, humiliating, and painful. It would make everything much worse for a while. So you put off thinking about it.
• Example 2: You have a medical problem that could turn into something serious without treatment. It doesn’t bother you much right now, and the treatment is very unpleasant and would require a month of recovery. Because of this, you put off getting treatment despite the risk of complications growing.

(8) Addiction

While there are bad things about being in the pit, it also helps you cope better with some aspects of your life (even though other parts of your life suffer as a result). You can leave the pit, but you keep giving in to temptation and returning there. 

• Example 1: You’re addicted to alcohol, opiates, or pornography.
• Example 2: You know your partner is unhealthy for you, but you feel so insanely attracted to them. Every time you leave, you find yourself thinking of them all the time, and eventually, you end up calling them up. You always get back together.

Did you recognize any of these psychological traps from your own experience or from the experiences of people close to you? This article was written with brainstorming help from Kat Woods (who we’ve previously collaborated with on The Four States of Distress). 

This essay was first written on November 22, 2020, was published on the Clearer Thinking blog (with the help of the team) on November 28, 2020, and first appeared on this site on May 20, 2022.

The “Responsibility Mindset” is one of the most powerful perspectives I know of.

It’s the difference between:

1. “The ball wasn’t on my side of the court, so I didn’t go for it,” and
2. “Clearly, nobody else was going to be able to hit the ball in time, so I ran for it.”

1. “This party is boring,” and
2. “Who wants to dance with me? Let’s get this party started!”

1. “I can’t do my job because nobody is doing this thing I need,” and
2. “I haven’t been able to do my job because nobody is doing this thing I need – I’ll let my manager know why I am blocked.” (H/T Emily Dempsey)

1. “I am lonely, this sucks,” and
2. “I am lonely, this sucks, so I’m going to make an effort to meet more people, and I’m going to set up regularly repeating calls with my friends.”

1. “I was wronged, and I didn’t deserve it,” and
2. “I was wronged, and I didn’t deserve it, and I’m going to sever my ties with this harmful person if warranted, or make clear what I need from them going forward to feel good about maintaining a relationship.”

1. “This policy makes no sense; what a pain it is for everyone to deal with,” and
2. “This policy makes no sense; what a pain it is for everyone to deal with. I’m going to rally up a group to try to get it changed.”

There are, without a doubt, some people that take too much responsibility. Such people might blame themselves for problems that they didn’t cause or get cajoled into taking care of other people’s responsibilities (especially if they have trouble setting strong boundaries or have the unfortunate luck to interface with highly manipulative people).

What’s more, we certainly can’t take responsibility for everything: it would be overwhelming and unproductive. So we must prioritize.

But many of us (most of us?) could benefit from strategically adopting the Responsibility Mindset.

At its core, the Responsibility Mindset is about being the “master of your fate: the captain of your soul.”

It’s about recognizing that, if you have a goal, choosing to take responsibility (even though you don’t have to) will usually lead to better outcomes – even if you CAN rightly say “this isn’t my responsibility” or “this isn’t fair,” and even though the world WILL throw all kinds of difficulties at you, and even though there IS a tremendous amount of luck influencing our lives (for better and worse). You have to take the reins of the sleigh if you want to influence your destination (even though your hands hurt from the cold, and the reindeer have all gone insane).

…It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul.

– Invictus by William Ernest Henley

When Henley was a teenager, his leg required amputation due to complications from tuberculosis. In the early 1870s, after seeking treatment for problems with his other leg, he was told that it would also require amputation. He instead chose to go to Edinburgh to enlist the services of the distinguished English surgeon Joseph Lister, who was able to save Henley’s remaining leg after multiple surgical interventions on the foot. Henley spent three years in hospital (1873–75) recovering, during which time he was moved to write the verses that became the poem “Invictus.” (Source: Wikipedia)

Can you justifiably believe that you may be able to really change the world?

There’s a certain seeming absurdity in believing you can change the world. And by “change the world,” I don’t mean playing a small (though still meaningful) cumulative role in bringing about change as part of a group of many thousands of people, each contributing incrementally. I mean, causing a large and important positive change to occur (and not merely by dumb luck) that would not have occurred (or that would have occurred much more slowly) had you not put in the effort.

The irony is that just believing you can change the world makes you, I think, significantly more likely to actually succeed at it, for at least four reasons:

(1) If you believe you can do it, you’re probably much more likely to TRY AT ALL compared to if you don’t, since the idea doesn’t seem automatically stupid or doomed to fail.

(2) When trying to create change, you’re likely to encounter numerous problems and obstacles, and if you really believing you can make change, you may be less likely to give up when these problems occur (e.g., if your first, second, and third attempts at a solution don’t work). Creating significant change probably requires smashing your way through, or skillfully dodging, EVERY ONE of these obstacles. In that vein, it’s amazing to see how often successful startups had times when they looked like they were going to fail, and if the founders had given up, they probably would have.

(3) When you really believe you can do something, others are more likely to believe it too, meaning it becomes easier to persuade others to help you or join you in your mission.

(4) If you really believe you can make change, you may feel more of a moral obligation to actually try really hard to do so. For instance, if you think you can actually ease the suffering of a million people with effort, isn’t it very important that you try hard to do so? On the other hand, if it were something you’re not capable of (or you convinced yourself of that anyway), then you wouldn’t be (or feel) obligated to solve the problem.

BOOTSTRAPPING BELIEFS

Hence, believing you can change the world is what I’ll call a “bootstrapping belief” (in the sense that it is a self-starting process). Your belief in it causes that very same belief to become truer. Another example of a bootstrapping belief might be a belief that the placebo effect has a strong effect on you. The more you believe it, the more effective the placebo effect may actually be, just by virtue of you having that belief

Yet, even with its bootstrapping nature, there is still a certain absurdity in believing you can change the world.

If you believe all that, and you’re truly willing and able to put in the effort, then maybe (with some luck) you really can.

If you don’t already believe “I may be able to really change the world,” maybe you can find yourself able to rationally endorse “I may be able to really change the world” with these extra conditions added. And if you already believe you can change the world, maybe adding these conditions to your belief will make it substantially more likely to be true.

Of course, being able to “change the world” is not binary. The amount of impact you can have is a continuous variable from “not at all” to “massive,” and the probability that you can change the world (in any particular way) is a continuous variable between 0 and 1. What I’m suggesting is that, compared to the statement “I can change the world,” the statement “I can change the world [given certain conditions]” should have a higher probability of being true.

Now suppose, for a moment, that you have no choice but to do the thing. That is, everything you care about in the world will be destroyed if you do not achieve it in X months. Here, X could be 1 if it’s a very small thing, or X could be 100 if it’s a much larger thing.

Under those circumstances, do you STILL believe you would fail to achieve it?

I think this sort of thought experiment can help us distinguish between things that we don’t believe we are capable of merely because we aren’t motivated enough versus things that we ACTUALLY believe are impossible for us.

And I think it’s important to distinguish between these two cases, because if something is in the first category, we may actually be able to get ourselves to succeed just by finding ways to increase our motivation!

I also suspect that for many people, a number of the things that they view as being impossible for them would be more likely to seem possible in the face of carrying out this thought experiment. In other words, it is easy to confuse “I’m not motivated enough to try really hard” with “I’m incapable.”

As an example: suppose that you believe you are just inherently bad at math and that no matter how hard you try, you couldn’t understand calculus. Well, what if the fate of the world rested on you understanding calculus in six months? Under those circumstances, I think you would very likely find a way to learn it, with plenty of time to spare.

This piece was first written on April 26, 2018, and was first released on this site on October 1, 2021.