Friday, July 17, 2026

start asking questions

 


The rarest thing anyone ever did for my thinking was to stop talking and start asking questions.

When someone asks you a question they genuinely don’t know the answer to, hold on to them for dear life. Then learn to do it for others around you.

 
READ IN APP
 
StockPhotoPro / Adobe Stock / Big Think
By Danny Kenny

“What do you want?” might be one of the hardest questions for humans to answer.

Not at the drive-thru or cafe — if you’re in line in front of me, you better have your order locked and loaded or I’ll be speaking to your parents, who I know raised you better.

My performance coach, Lauren, is constantly asking me various versions of “What do you want?” She fires short, seemingly simple questions from the hip, leaving me confused before I eventually ramble and stumble into something I didn’t even know I thought.

Lauren doesn’t know the answers when she asks “What does success look like?” or “What are you hoping for here?” Only I know that, somewhere inside. But she knows the questions create space. First, for me to think. And second, to decide what I want to do with these (often new) thoughts.

Count the people in your life who have ever asked you a question they genuinely did not know the answer to. If it’s a quiz with a right answer they were subtly and secretly steering you toward, that’s lawyering, and your friends typically don’t appreciate that (a lesson I learned the hard way). That means no “do you think...?” or “have you considered...?” That’s advice disguised as a question. A real question means someone didn’t know the answer and valued your perspective enough to look for your answer and be changed by it.

Those people are rare. Most of us can count them on one hand. Some of us can’t even do that.

Psychologist and MIT professor Edgar Schein called it Humble Inquiry: “the fine art of drawing someone out, of asking questions to which you do not already know the answer, of building a relationship based on curiosity and interest in the other person.” The coaching world has prized it forever, and it’s why many great leaders have adopted the mindset of “manager as coach.” It fosters genuine curiosity: You ask questions because you really want to hear someone else’s thoughts, not steer them to predetermined conclusions. Fortunately, this skill can be learned, and its impact spans the professional and personal realms.


Want to go deeper on asking great questions? Check out this Big Think Class featuring Angie McArthur, Natalie Nixon, Jonah Berger and more.


In many ways, the world isn’t built for it. We tend to reward the fast take, the strong opinion, the reply that wins the thread. Curiosity, in contrast, is slow. To ask a real question, you have to stop being the center of attention and cede the floor to someone else. Lauren just did it all day, as if it were obvious, but it was also a skill she worked to perfect. And because this is a skill, it means we can break it down into parts, and the parts can be practiced. Here are three to start with:

1. The best questions are short and sweet

Most of us, when we try to ask a good question, make it longer. We add context. We supply half the answer inside the question so the other person knows where we’re going. We say, “I’m wondering if maybe part of what’s happening here is that you feel like the team doesn’t fully—” and by the time we arrive at the question, we’ve removed curiosity and the person in front of us has visibly aged. Get to the point faster.

Lauren’s questions were almost rudely short. “What are you hoping I’ll say?” “And then what?” “What would you tell me?” “What’s changed?” A short question leaves the whole space open and hands the other person openness to fill. Long questions narrow the aperture piece by piece, often railroading someone toward the conclusion you want them to reach. Brevity refuses to play such games.

2. Ask the question. Then stop talking.

The first time Lauren asked me something hard, she asked it and then said nothing. Five seconds. Ten. That is an eternity. I could feel the silence like a physical pressure. She just waited. So I started blabbing to save us both, and eventually, my real answer surfaced. I was as surprised as anyone to discover it.

I exploit this tactic in my work standing in front of a workshop audience because people hate silence. Oh, they despise it. And in a 1:1 setting, that permission (and it is permission) is important because even if the answer is rushed, allowing someone to continue until they find the golden nugget underneath is a gift. When you don’t interrupt, you signal this is a space for you to explore, to find your own answers. Please, continue.

This is the part almost everyone gets wrong, and it’s why most “good questions” die. You can ask the perfect question, but if you rush to fill the pause, you let the other person off the hook with their first, most shallow answer. Depth requires time. The answer worth having is usually the second or third, and it only arrives if you tolerate the quiet. One of Lauren’s best skills (and something common across the best facilitators, coaches, and friends I encounter) is a refusal to save anyone from silence.

3. Ask what, not why

I used to think why? was the deep question. It has the shape of insight. But it tends to trigger defensiveness (it’s a weird thing of the human brain) sending the other person hunting for a justification. Why did you do that? is rarely a fun question to face. Lauren almost never asks me why, because if I’m asked why, my brain is clever enough to come up with an excuse or a reason that sounds good but tends not to be the true reason. “I bought it because it was on a once-in-a-lifetime sale” was really “it’s pretty, and I wanted it.” We don’t have clean access to the inner workings of our own motives.

In contrast, what questions are open enough to surface unexamined assumptions. “What made that feel true at the time?” “What do you want to do next?” What questions provide space and permission to examine the thinking underneath the hood, which is the only kind that ever changes anything.


If you’re skeptical of coaching (and you should be a little skeptical), remember all I’m asking you to buy here is the idea that a good question moves someone further than good advice. People are best persuaded by their own arguments, not yours. Telling someone what to do, how to be, or who to be does not work in the long run.

The clinical foundation of this in psychology is motivational interviewing. What predicts whether someone changes isn’t how good your argument was. It’s the balance of what they say out loud. Push people into voicing their reasons against change, and they dig in harder. It’s called “sustain talk,” and it’s one of the better predictors that someone stays put exactly in the same situation. Good questions tilt the balance the other way, toward the person building their own case for change, and meta-analyses of the method find that balance is what tracks with what people actually do.

There’s a sideways benefit too. Alison Wood Brooks and her colleagues at Harvard find that people who ask more questions, especially follow-ups, are better liked and learn more, and that almost all of us badly under-ask. There is a difference between being interesting and being interested. People tend to favor those around them who are interested. Questions are your vehicle to that particular destination.

Two final things worth holding onto here.

Number one. When you find someone who asks you the real questions and lets silence sit, be they a coach, a friend, a boss, whoever it is... hold on to them. They are rarer than you think.

Number two. You can be this person. It is the most undervalued thing you can offer the people you lead and the people you love. They don’t need your answers. They are rarely asking for your take and your best impression of Stephen A Smith. Giving the people in your life the space to hear themselves think and the patience to let them choose what happens next is a gift. It costs you nothing but a willingness to ask and then shut up. Most people never pay that price.

Who in your life asks you short questions and gives you the space to answer? And if the answer is no one, how could you become that person for the people you lead and the ones you go home to?

Leave a comment


Danny Kenny is a behavioral scientist, a writer, and an Associate VP at InspireCorps, where he designs leadership programs and coaches executives at the intersection of performance, meaning, and wisdom. You can find Danny on LinkedIn, Substack, and his website.

Work Wise lands in your inbox every week. Let’s get to work.

Check out more of Big Think’s content:
Big Think | Mini Philosophy | Starts With A Bang | Big Think Books

 
Share
 
 
Like
Comment
Restack
 

© 2026 Big Think Business
548 Market Street PMB 72296, San Francisco, CA 94104
Unsubscribe

Get the appStart writing






coalition math

 coalition math

Caixa de entrada
Resuma este email

Clay | ReadSowell.com
Anular subscrição

18:16 (há 9 minutos)


Well, it's happening again. The Right is fighting with itself. The democratic socialists are stacking wins, taking over entire cities, and Trump's base is going to war with itself, splitting into factions. Right now, we have the Rubio faction going to war with the JD Vance faction.

The knives came out for Vance after his recent Joe Rogan appearance. Great priorities, everyone!

You know what the funny thing is? I don't see any of this reflected in the administration itself. Rubio and Vance, by all accounts, are friends who get along great. Vance has publicly called Rubio "my best friend in the administration" and "my closest friend". Rubio told Vanity Fair "If JD Vance runs for president, he's going to be our nominee, and I'll be one of the first people to support him."

But if you look all over Twitter and social media you might not get this impression. It's warfare. I'm keeping my eye on it, and I'm taking notes.

I'm not going to pick sides. I have my own view on who is right and who is wrong here, but that's not important. What's important is the coalition against the progressives who are trying to take over everything, forever.

There are people within this coalition who disgust me. There will be people in this coalition who disgust you. There are people who are disgusted by Trump but voted for him anyway. These are the people who can do coalition math. They aren't losertarians trying to find the ideal candidate who thinks like them. They are realists who would rather win with people who disgust them than lose with people who agree with them.

Use your head. Pick your battles. Vance is not your enemy. Rubio is not your enemy.

Ask yourself. How would Charlie be acting in this situation? Would he be sabotaging Vance over this Joe Rogan interview? Or... would he be working tirelessly to maintain the coalition?

One last thing... the winning 2028 coalition ticket is obvious now... isn't it?

Vance/Rubio 2028

stay close,

~ Clay

p.s. Do you agree with my analysis? Disagree? Let me know.

p.p.s. This email was inspired by a founding member of my private group. Shout out to him! Come and join us on the inside. Doors open.

Unsubscribe | Update your profile | 600 1st Ave, Ste 330 PMB 92768, Seattle, WA 98104-2246




Thursday, July 16, 2026

a simple question // and + 1

 



a simple question

Caixa de entrada
Resuma este email

Clay | ReadSowell.com
Anular subscrição

00:49 (há 14 horas)
para mim
Esta mensagem está em inglês

A couple of days ago, I talked a little bit about one of my favorite authors, Michael Malice.

I mentioned some of his pithy quotes that have really helped me understand how people operate and think politically.

He has another tool I've found quite useful. It's a simple test to see if someone is left-wing or right-wing.

It's a simple yes-or-no question. It works best if you ask someone in a live conversation, where they don't have time to pause and think. The idea is that you have to answer it right away... and through that answer we can determine if you are left-wing or right-wing with 100% accuracy.

Are you ready? Here's the question:

Are some people better than others? Yes or no.

....

Okay... have your answer?

Now, let's find out what you are...

If you answered Yes with no qualifications... Congratulations, you are right-wing! If you answered with no, or went off on a speech... you are left-wing.

Here's the reasoning: Reality has a hierarchy, whether you admit it or not. Are some people better at hockey than others? Yes. Are some people better looking than others? Yes. Are some people better people than others? No matter how you slice it, some people are better than others.

A proper right-winger has no problem acknowledging this reality. A left-winger, on the other hand, feels the need to give a speech about equality.

They do this because they think that's what you're SUPPOSED to believe. And they're right, according to the progressive orthodoxy.

But the truth is, they're just setting up their own hierarchy. The man who says no one is better isn't being humble. He thinks he's better than you for saying it. It's a moral hierarchy that they construct for themselves, where they get to be at the top.

That's the logic.

What do you think? Is it a good test?

stay close,

~ Clay

p.s. I'm working relentlessly on my upcoming Charlie Kirk piece. That's all I'll be doing until it's done. Just wanted you to know that.

Unsubscribe | Update your profile | 600 1st Ave, Ste 330 PMB 92768, Seattle, WA 98104-2246







1 de 64

are some people better than others?

Caixa de entrada
Resuma este email

Clay | ReadSowell.com
Anular subscrição

15:02 (há 46 minutos)
para mim
Esta mensagem está em inglês

Last night, I sent you guys a yes-or-no question. A test that I learned from Michael Malice.

"Are some people better than others?"

I didn't expect such a huge response, but I got it. The question really fired you guys up. I received more replies than I am able to handle. I read every single one of them, and am still reading them as they come in. If I didn't respond to you, I'm sorry; I just had too many, but know that I read what you wrote and appreciate the feedback.

But there was a recurring theme among your replies. Those of you who answered with a flat yes thought it was a great question and very revealing. Those of you who answered with a No, or a speech about equality and God... well, you were more uncomfortable with it. You didn't think it was a very good question; you gave me a lot of reasons as to why, but one of them stood out above all.

Almost everyone who disagreed with me said some version of the same thing... 'In the eyes of God, no one is better than anyone else.'

For me personally, I struggle with the question, but if you ask me to answer right away with a yes or no... My answer is yes. A flat yes is closer to what I intuitively believe than a flat no. That's just the truth. But I'd also be lying if I didn't tell you that I struggle with that answer as I reflect on it afterwards.

Here's a follow-up question I want to leave you with...

How do you think a progressive would answer that question? Do you think they would have a similar answer to you, or a different one?

stay close,

~ Clay

p.s. I'll be head down, working relentlessly on the Charlie Kirk piece until it's done. If you want to fuel the work while I write, send me a tip or join my membership. I can't tell you how much it lifts my spirits when I'm deep into a heavy piece and a tip or a new subscription comes in. It means the world to know you've got my back. You are what keeps this whole project alive.

Unsubscribe | Update your profile | 600 1st Ave, Ste 330 PMB 92768, Seattle, WA 98104-2246