Openness to Change Begins with Self-Examination

Beginning with a personal conversation

In a conversation on social media, a woman who follows me said she had begun to change since she started listening to me. My reply concerned something I considered fundamental to that change: her openness to the possibility that some of her beliefs might be mistaken, and that someone else might have something true worth considering. She gave the words a chance and allowed herself room to reconsider. That small opening was where the idea for this article began.

The same idea can reach two people: one receives it as a possibility worth examining, while the other concentrates on defending what they know. Even our own reception of an idea may differ from one time to another. This raises a question about our relationship with our opinions: do we use them to understand life, or has preserving them become part of preserving our image of ourselves?

We live from a particular position, with particular experiences, within relationships and environments that have taught us what seems normal and acceptable. That experience is real, but does not encompass everyone's experiences. What seems easy to me may be costly for someone else, and a path I see clearly may not be available to them at all. Remembering this lets difference become an opening to broader knowledge.

This leads to four questions: why is it difficult to accept the possibility of being wrong? How do biases and group habits enter our judgments? What does seeing life from other people's positions mean? How can readiness to change become a practice that respects our values and circumstances?

We begin with the self, then extend our attention to relationships and society. The everyday scenes that follow are illustrative examples; the opening conversation, however, comes from the experience that prompted the idea.

1 Intellectual humility and room for self-examination

Researchers use Intellectual Humility to describe acknowledging that our beliefs can be mistaken. Mark Leary and colleagues examined this readiness across four studies. In one it was associated with curiosity, openness, and tolerance of ambiguity; in another it was associated with distinguishing the strength of arguments. These findings belong to specific research settings and support understanding humility as a way of dealing with knowledge. 1

I can be confident in an opinion while still naming the conditions that would make me reconsider it. If a judgment rests on information, more accurate information deserves consideration. If I chose an approach because it protects a relationship, then discover it strains that relationship, reassessing it is natural. Confidence can thus be corrected, and correction becomes part of respecting reason.

Imagine a father accustomed to deciding his son's daily details because he wants to protect him. As the son grows, some old forms of care may become restrictive. The father can consider his approach's effects without rejecting his love or disowning years of care. Care remains a value while its means change. This distinction allows behavior to be reviewed without putting the whole person on trial.

The issue also appears in “this is how I am.” It may honestly describe a habit, but becomes a constraint when used to end every attempt. “I am used to responding quickly when upset” leaves room for learning and identifies observable behavior. Making that behavior a final definition of the self makes any suggested adjustment feel like a demand to become someone else.

Reconsideration also concerns dignity. It is difficult to think freely while expecting every revision to be used against us: did you not say the opposite before? It helps to allow ourselves and others a clear sentence: this is what I understood before, and this is what makes me see it differently now. It explains change while remaining honest about past and present.

Humility is also required of the person offering an idea. Someone may benefit from my words and disagree with me elsewhere. Their ability to object deserves the same respect I gave their willingness to listen. If agreement with me becomes my condition for calling them open-minded, I will have narrowed the space I invite them into.

2 Confirmation bias and what we miss in ourselves

The tendency to seek or interpret evidence in ways favoring existing beliefs is called Confirmation Bias. Raymond Nickerson's research review described several forms, including giving supportive evidence greater weight and neglecting what might contradict an idea. This can happen without a conscious decision to manipulate facts. 2

Imagine judging a colleague as uncaring. A delayed reply confirms our judgment, while an offer of help becomes an exception. We may use the opposite standard for a colleague we like, remembering their initiatives and granting delays many excuses. This example offers a practical question: do I give an event equal weight when it involves someone I like and someone I disagree with?

On social media, we can review what we choose to read and share. We may quickly pass a strong objection because it bothers us, then linger over a weak statement agreeing with us. Seeing much support does not alone reveal the evidence's breadth; it may also reveal our selection of content. Inquiry therefore deserves a question whose answer we might dislike: what is the strongest reason to reconsider this opinion?

A complementary concept is the Bias Blind Spot. Emily Pronin, Daniel Lin, and Lee Ross found in their studies a tendency to notice bias in others more than in oneself. Knowing this concept does not certify freedom from it: we may readily use it to explain others' stubbornness and forget our own judgments. 3

Review begins with a question for me: what could change my judgment? If I cannot imagine any evidence, I may have closed examination before it starts. I can ask someone whose fairness I trust to review my argument, summarize their objection until they recognize that I understood it, then investigate weaknesses in my position as seriously as its strengths.

Not every firmly held opinion is bias. It may rest on strong evidence, and an objection may itself be weak. The aim is to apply comparable standards to both and let evidence work even when unsettling. Naming bias helps insofar as it sharpens questions; using it to label every opponent adds another unexamined judgment.

3 Why the familiar feels safer

We may recognize an alternative worth trying and still hesitate. Familiarity tells us what to expect: we know its methods, costs, and problems. Something new contains uncertainty. Sometimes deliberation is wise; sometimes we favor what exists merely because it exists, then seek reasons to stay with it.

Status Quo Bias explains this inclination to retain a current option. In decision-making experiments, William Samuelson and Richard Zeckhauser found an effect of presenting an option as the status quo. They also discussed rational reasons to stay, including switching costs and uncertainty; not all continuation is a mistake. 4

Consider someone complaining of an overcrowded day while refusing to review any familiar appointment or commitment. Some commitments may be necessary; others may preserve an image of being always available. Distinguishing an appointment's necessity from what attendance means to them can help. They may need time organization and also acceptance that not every expectation can be satisfied.

Related is Cognitive dissonance: inconsistency among related knowledge, beliefs, or behaviors that may motivate reducing the conflict. Festinger and Carlsmith's classic experiment examined attitude change after contrary behavior under specific conditions. This framework helps explain the possibility of rationalization, but does not establish an individual's motives from one situation. 5

Someone who sees themselves as a good listener and then hears that they interrupt often may experience painful conflict. They can ask about incidents and try changing, or immediately interpret the complaint as excessive sensitivity. These are illustrative possibilities. Practically, what matters is giving feedback time before protecting our image with a ready explanation.

Reviewing an old decision can also hurt because we invested time and effort. Yet the present question remains legitimate: does continuing this approach serve what I want now? We can respect past effort, learn from it, and choose a more suitable course. Recognizing past cost does not oblige us to add new cost.

Change sometimes brings real losses: a beloved habit, familiarity, or expectations relinquished. Acknowledging these gives hesitation human meaning and helps us consider compensating for or bearing them. Saying “just change” may compress inner and social work we have not yet understood.

4 The society within our choices

We learn ways of living from those around us. How is respect expressed? What does success look like? When is silence wisdom, and when is it read as weakness? Upbringing, relationships, and experience bring these meanings into life. We may retain some after examination and conviction, and others because they are our surroundings' shared language.

An important concept is Conformity: shifting judgment or behavior toward a group under its influence. Solomon Asch's line-length experiments showed some participants conforming to a mistaken majority while others retained independence. This specific task demonstrates possible social pressure without summarizing every reason for agreement or disagreement across society. 6

Someone may choose a field of study out of love or because it will earn family admiration; motives may coexist. A clarifying question is: if their respect were guaranteed, would I still want this option? It does not decide the matter but helps reveal fear, belonging, and conviction within desire.

Belonging is a legitimate human need, so conforming to one's surroundings cannot simply be reduced to cowardice. Difference can cost a relationship, job, or social standing. Anyone encouraging change should understand these costs and propose bearable steps. A group may also provide support and knowledge difficult to acquire alone. The question remains whether it can accommodate reconsideration without rejecting the person.

This distinction appears in family discussions of work. An older generation may view staying in one job as seriousness, while a younger one sees moving as an opening to learning. Both can begin with the values they want to protect: security, responsibility, and development. They can then examine circumstances and alternatives instead of labeling one rigid and the other reckless.

Openness also includes reviewing our definition of a successful life. One person prefers a wide social circle; another finds richness in a few deep relationships. One hopes to expand a business; another chooses more family time. Each choice's effects and responsibilities can be examined without assuming one life is a template for all.

Respect also requires attention to differing opportunities. Time for a hobby, changing jobs, or moving cities depends on time, resources, and commitments. Seeing these details slows judgment and improves our ability to offer something useful to the person before us, according to their own life.

5 Seeing life from other people's positions

John Stuart Mill offers a statement illuminating the value of knowing the opposing argument:

Facing a serious objection may deepen our understanding of an idea we hold. An opponent asks from an unfamiliar angle or notices an overlooked consequence. Knowledge becomes richer when we can describe their position as they understand it, then disagree on clear grounds.

But seeing through another's eyes takes more than imagining ourselves in their place. “If I were you, I would…” may carry my experience, resources, confidence, and opportunities into their position while leaving out what makes their circumstances different. I stand in their geographical place but remain in my psychological and social world. Their choices then seem strange because I never truly entered their conditions.

Perspective Getting helps here: requesting information explaining another's experience instead of only guessing. Tal Eyal, Mary Steffel, and Nicholas Epley studied accuracy in understanding others across experiments. Instructions to imagine another's perspective did not consistently improve accuracy, while direct conversation improved it in a final experiment. These results concern the study's tasks and do not remove imagination's possible emotional value. 8

Imagine a friend repeatedly declining outings. We may read this as coolness, while the meeting may be costly, exhausting, or affected by circumstances they have not shared. A calm question creates room for information: is the time unsuitable? Would you prefer another way to meet? They may disclose as much as suits them; our wish to understand gives no right to invade privacy.

In disagreement, separate fact, interpretation, and effect. The fact is an unanswered message. My interpretation is neglect. The emotional effect is that I felt upset. Acknowledging distress does not establish intention, and hearing circumstances does not erase my need for clearer communication. The picture can include two experiences and discussable responsibilities.

A simple listening approach is: tell me what mattered to you, then let me repeat my understanding for you to correct. We may discover the same word has different meanings: care means initiating contact to one person and respecting space to another. Knowing the difference does not solve every dispute, but clarifies where it lies.

Humanly, we can understand how someone reached a position while continuing to object. Understanding adds context without removing responsibility. Multiple perspectives do not make facts contradictory without standards: meanings or effects may differ, while verifiable events still require evidence.

The life I see is part of the life people live. Listening to a different experience offers a chance to see what my position concealed and review what I mistook for universal when it was bounded by my experience.

6 Making openness a practice of change

We age, responsibilities shift, and knowledge grows. A cherished value may remain while our way of serving it needs revision. Closeness to children takes different forms in childhood and adulthood. Commitment to work may eventually require learning or delegation where previously it required doing everything ourselves. This is what change as a continuing reality of life means here.

Renewal does not make every new thing better. I can try an approach and return to the old one with greater understanding of its value. What matters is choosing through reflection and suitable experience, and explaining why continuation or adjustment best suits my circumstances. Even leaving things unchanged can become a conscious decision after genuine review.

Practice begins by identifying one issue. Instead of a broad wish to change my life, I name a habit or judgment: I interrupt when disagreeing, reject new experiences before understanding them, or assume disagreement means indifference. Specificity brings the question closer to reality and permits small progress without waiting for total personality transformation.

Then I choose a limited trial. If I interrupt, I let the speaker finish and summarize before responding. If I reject another lifestyle, I read a serious account by someone living it or ask what they find in it. If my day is crowded, I review an adjustable commitment and observe the effect. These are suggested applications for reflection and trial, not a prescription guaranteeing identical outcomes.

Implementation Intentions help connect a wish with a specific situation: if this happens, I will do that. Peter Gollwitzer and Paschal Sheeran explain such plans as supporting the transition from goal intention to action. 9

A plan might be: if I want to interrupt an opposing view, I will write my objection and wait for the speaker to finish. Or: if I say “impossible,” I will name a specific obstacle and seek a small way to test it. A clear cue and action make practice memorable, while time, capacity, and review remain necessary.

After the trial, ask what actually happened. Did dialogue improve, or did I merely stay outwardly silent while preparing a response? Did I change my mind through understanding or to please someone? Such questions help adjust the trial instead of simply declaring greater openness.

Change also needs a bearable pace. Some habits require repetition and support; some decisions involve rights and commitments that passing enthusiasm cannot override. Returning to an old behavior once does not erase the entire attempt's value. Identify what hindered action, then redesign the step.

A companion to someone changing has an important role: notice attempts without demanding perfection and allow explanation and correction. If every stumble proves they will never change, their shared space for learning narrows. If every promise exempts responsibility, review loses meaning. The relationship benefits from a clear required action, attention to its effects, and honesty about what was achieved and remains.

In the light of the Quran and Islamic wisdom

When speaking of a “pattern of change” in life, clarify the intended meaning. Circumstances, ages, and roles change; there is moral responsibility for action and improvement; and there is religious text with its context and meaning. Consciously connecting these levels prevents reducing human experience to a slogan and gives change depth beyond passing enthusiasm.

The Quranic text

Meaning in the commentary: Al-Saadi explains changes in a people's circumstances in the context of changes within them from gratitude and obedience to their opposites, also mentioning movement from disobedience to obedience. This moral and faith context has its place. The verse should not become a commercial formula promising everyone a specific worldly outcome simply by changing thoughts.

Reflection drawn from it: We recall responsibility for what we can improve within ourselves and our actions. Someone seeking a more respectful relationship can review speech; someone seeking broader understanding can review sources of knowledge. But this does not make every pain a consequence of personal failing or make individuals solely responsible for social conditions and others' actions. Taking practical steps goes alongside recognizing limits of power.

Inner improvement may need visible action confirming it. Admitting hasty judgment deepens when I return and ask; admitting wrongdoing toward someone requires correcting what I can. Change then links understanding and action: reviewing beliefs and examining behavior's effects on people.

The Quranic text

Meaning in the commentary: Al-Saadi connects listening with distinguishing what should be chosen from what should be avoided and explains the standing of the words of Allah and His Messenger in this context.

Reflection drawn from it: Openness here combines good listening and good choosing. We receive words, examine argument and meaning, then accept responsibility for what we adopt. Many opinions alone are insufficient, and listening that does not permit understanding remains incomplete. We seek an attentive mind and a heart that does not consider itself above learning.

The prophetic hadith

Meaning: The hadith explains arrogance as rejecting truth and despising people, while distinguishing it from liking a good appearance.

Reflection drawn from it: Useful correction may come from someone less experienced, younger, or from another background. Reconsideration requires examining their words without making their standing in my eyes sufficient reason for rejection. Conversely, I do not use the hadith to judge opponents' hidden motives; I begin by asking how superiority affects my own listening.

An objection worth considering: Does frequent reconsideration weaken conviction?

A reader may object that life needs decisions and steadiness, and opening every opinion to revision leaves us wavering with the latest words heard. This is valid if openness becomes endless reconsideration without standards. We cannot rebuild everything we know before every action or make human differences a reason to suspend responsibility.

We can address this by distinguishing kinds of issues. Personal taste permits many options; factual claims need evidence; ethical values involve responsibility to protect them. Different favorite foods need no resolution, while claims about a specific event require verification. Flexibility in dialogue does not remove rejection of humiliation.

We can also define a reason or time to review. I choose on present knowledge and reconsider when consequential information appears or a basic condition changes. In a small everyday trial, I specify what to observe and when to evaluate. I can act without claiming infallibility and adjust course without making each day a fresh start from nothing.

Another important objection is that calls for change can become pressure. Someone may demand greater openness while meaning surrender of privacy or the right to refuse. Clearly name what is requested and why. Openness is not measured by willingness to please us, and accepting harm is no test of maturity.

Boundaries themselves benefit from clarity. I can hear a different view and say, after understanding, that I disagree. I can postpone exhausting discussion or ask for a more respectful way to continue. These choices keep dialogue human and prevent learning from becoming a permanent demand to concede.

The standard combining steadiness and reconsideration is the reason supporting us. Staying because an argument remains strong differs from staying because acknowledgment embarrasses me. Changing because I understood something new differs from changing out of fear of others' anger. Honestly distinguishing these motives within us may take time.

More room for life

I return to the opening conversation. What I wanted to tell the follower was that her readiness to reconsider is fundamental to the path she opened for herself. It is good to preserve that readiness even after finding someone whose words we trust: asking, examining, agreeing or disagreeing according to understanding, while retaining responsibility for our life.

We need not wake tomorrow with overturned convictions or a life resembling someone else's. New room may begin with withholding judgment until understanding, trying to alter a habit, wording an apology clearly, or asking a question instead of using a familiar explanation. Then we see what we learned and what deserves continuation.

We may discover that some cherished beliefs deserve to remain, some need adjustment, and other parts of life are wider than imagined. In each case we have given ourselves a chance to choose with better knowledge and granted others the right to have their experiences understood within their circumstances.

This opportunity begins when we can say: perhaps I have not seen the whole picture. Perhaps someone else can add to my understanding. I will listen, ask, and then choose responsibly.

Questions for reflection

1. Which opinion do I defend because I examined it, and which do I retain because I am used to it being mine?
2. What information or experience could make me revisit an important judgment?
3. Whom do I think I understand without having asked about their circumstances and what their experience means?
4. What value do I want to preserve, and what method could I change to serve it better?
5. What small trial could I carry out, and what sign would I use to evaluate its effect?