Get Your Weekly Digest

Receive the best podcast summaries and insights delivered to your inbox every week.

We respect your privacy. Unsubscribe anytime.

Freakonomics Radio

A Question-Asker Becomes a Question-Answerer

with Stephen J. Dubner

Published October 17, 2025
View Show Notes

About This Episode

In this feed-drop conversation from Design Matters, Stephen J. Dubner talks with Debbie Millman about his life, from a turbulent religious upbringing and early encouragement from a beloved teacher to his time in a rock band and eventual career as a writer and podcaster. They explore how inhabiting two faith traditions shaped his views on identity and belief, the power of curiosity, the making and impact of Freakonomics, his struggles with hero worship and anonymity, and his evolving thinking on creativity, confidence, and the human side of economics.

Topics Covered

Personal narrative Curiosity Religion and spirituality Identity Personal Development Music career Sports fandom Horse market transparency Social media and online platforms Reading and literature

Disclaimer: We provide independent summaries of podcasts and are not affiliated with or endorsed in any way by any podcast or creator. All podcast names and content are the property of their respective owners. The views and opinions expressed within the podcasts belong solely to the original hosts and guests and do not reflect the views or positions of Summapod.

Quick Takeaways

  • A fourth-grade teacher submitting Dubner's poem to Highlights without telling him became a formative moment that validated his identity as a writer.
  • Growing up with Jewish parents who converted to Catholicism led Dubner to deeply examine questions of identity, belonging, and belief, ultimately returning to Judaism himself.
  • Dubner emphasizes curiosity as a core lifelong engine, arguing that adults often have it suppressed by schooling and parenting but can reclaim it through genuine questioning.
  • His attempt to reconnect with childhood hero Franco Harris taught him the difference between fantasy and reality in parasocial relationships and the value in seeing heroes as human.
  • Leaving a signed rock band for a more anonymous, stable life pushed Dubner toward writing and podcasting and shaped his ambivalent relationship with fame and television.
  • He argues that creative people must "swing their own swing," developing a personal voice and taste instead of imitating great work, even at the risk of audience rejection.
  • Working with psychologist Angela Duckworth helped Dubner see the brain as a muscle that can be trained to redirect attention after setbacks rather than ruminating.
  • Dubner sees Freakonomics as storytelling with data that encouraged journalism and economics alike to combine rigorous empirical work with a focus on real people.

Podcast Notes

Introduction: A question-asker becomes a question-answerer

Dubner on his preference for asking questions

Identifies himself as naturally in the group of people who like to ask questions more than answer them[1:07]
Says asking questions is both his profession and one of his favorite activities[1:07]
Notes that occasionally he ends up on the answering side, which can be fun too[1:24]

Context for the Design Matters conversation

Explains that the episode is a conversation with Debbie Millman, host of the podcast Design Matters[1:35]
Mentions upcoming anniversaries: 20 years since he and Steve Levitt published Freakonomics and 15 years since he launched Freakonomics Radio[1:45]
Briefly mentions a new project: a TV talk show with the working title "Better in Person" that will be discussed more in the future[1:57]
Introduces the episode as him answering Debbie Millman's questions on Design Matters and notes he had never spoken with her before but liked her a great deal[2:31]

Design Matters introduction and Dubner's early writing

Debbie Millman introduces Design Matters and Stephen J. Dubner

Design Matters is framed as a show where Debbie talks with creative people about what they do, how they became who they are, and what they are thinking about and working on[3:06]
She introduces Stephen J. Dubner as an award-winning journalist, bestselling author, and co-creator of Freakonomics[3:22]
Notes that Freakonomics became a cultural phenomenon, changed how many people think about how the world works, and expanded into sequels, films, and popular podcasts including Freakonomics Radio[3:32]
Says Dubner has built an empire of smart, surprising storytelling that reveals "the hidden side of everything" and invites questioning what we think we know[3:56]

First publication in Highlights magazine

Debbie mentions he published his first piece of writing at age 11 and asks about it[4:16]
Dubner explains that in sixth grade, during a rough year when his father had died, his former fourth-grade teacher Mrs. Peterson visited his class[4:57]
• He disliked his sixth-grade teacher and was anxious when Mrs. Peterson arrived saying she had something to say about him
Mrs. Peterson held up a copy of Highlights magazine and announced that a poem Dubner had written in fourth grade, "The Possum", had been published[5:17]
• She had submitted the poem without his knowledge to the magazine's young writers section
Describes seeing his byline as extremely exciting and emotionally moving, especially given his difficult year[4:47]
• The byline read "Steve Dubner, Delaney, Jensen, New York, age nine," even though he was 11 by publication time
Says that moment was a huge vote of confidence from a teacher and he still keeps that original copy of Highlights on the coffee table in his office[5:17]

Power of a good teacher and brief teaching career

Dubner reflects that his story shows the power of a good teacher and that most people who accomplish a lot have benefited from an extraordinary teacher[6:08]
He once planned to be a teacher himself after leaving a first career in music[6:13]
• After playing in a band, he went to graduate school at Columbia studying writing and received a teaching fellowship
Taught freshman English in a course called Logic and Rhetoric, which he loved, noting the students were brilliant and often had better prior education than he did[7:37]
Realized after a year that he didn't want to be a professor because he wanted to focus on his own writing rather than selflessly dedicating himself to students[6:49]
• Says a really great teacher has to be quite selfless, like Mrs. Peterson, whereas he would resent having to stop working on his novel to go teach

Family background, birthday rituals, and religious identity

Unusual birthday cake ritual and chicken coop threat

Debbie recounts an article he wrote describing a birthday custom where the birthday child had to eat cake in silence or face a bizarre punishment involving molasses, chicken feed, and hens pecking their feet[9:17]
Dubner confirms the silent cake-eating custom was real and that family and friends would try to provoke the birthday person into speaking[9:17]
Says the molasses-and-chicken-feed punishment was certainly used as a threat, but he is not sure if it was ever actually carried out, especially on his older siblings[8:53]
As the youngest, he inherited a mix of wonderful and absurd family history and remembers being scared by the threat partly because the chicken coop was one of his chore territories[8:58]
• Describes being afraid even of the hens and especially of a mean, ornery rooster he had to face while collecting eggs each morning
Although born and raised on a farm in upstate New York, he describes himself as a city boy at heart who felt at ease once he moved to New York City in his twenties[10:30]

Parents' conversion from Judaism to Catholicism and his first book

Debbie summarizes his 1996 New York Times essay "Choosing My Religion" about his parents, both born into Jewish families in Brooklyn who independently converted to Roman Catholicism before meeting[10:41]
Asked what initially motivated their conversion, Dubner explains that the answer is complex and became the subject of his first book[11:08]
While in Columbia's writing program he attempted an autobiographical novel about a character like himself with Jewish parents who became Catholics, but realized he didn't know enough about their actual conversions[11:43]
Began interviewing his mother, who was then living in Florida, initially to create an oral history as a Christmas present for his siblings because he had little money[12:45]
• Says he has always been shy but likes interviewing because being a writer gives permission and a framework to ask questions
Through these interviews he learned about his father's Orthodox family that largely cut him off when he left Judaism, and his mother's more assimilated family that still had friction over her conversion[13:53]
The project grew from an intended family document into a New York Times Magazine article and then into his first book, "Turbulent Souls: A Catholic Son's Return to His Jewish Family," published in 1998[14:14]
As he researched his parents' choices he began hanging out with Jewish friends, mentors, and scholars, studying Judaism and ultimately returning to Judaism himself[14:49]

Family rupture, Cardinal O'Connor, and informed conscience

Debbie shares her own family's experience of an Orthodox Jewish background, her father's shift toward Reform Judaism, his remarriage to a non-Jewish woman, and the family's reaction, drawing parallels to Dubner's story[15:09]
She notes that none of Dubner's grandparents attended his parents' wedding, and that his father's father never spoke to him again after his conversion[16:00]
Mentions that Dubner's mother saw his return to Judaism as a betrayal, but that Cardinal O'Connor helped provide a path to reconciliation by counseling him toward the idea of an informed conscience[16:09]
Dubner recalls that his Times Magazine article was published during a week overlapping Good Friday, Easter, and Passover, and colleagues told him Cardinal O'Connor read from it during Mass at St. Patrick's Cathedral[16:36]
• Says the Cardinal read only the portion about his mother becoming Catholic, not the part about Dubner becoming Jewish, which he understands from the Cardinal's perspective
Explains that his mother's distress over his Judaism was rooted in her sincere belief that she would be in a Catholic heaven and that he, by leaving Catholicism, would not be reunited with her there[17:52]
Wrote to Cardinal O'Connor asking to meet for counsel, knowing the Cardinal understood his and his mother's positions from the article[17:15]
In their meeting the Cardinal described Vatican II changes in church teaching about Judaism and explained the church's embrace of the "primacy of an informed conscience"[19:07]
• The principle, as relayed by Dubner, is that if someone has truly informed their conscience about Catholicism and another faith and believes God wants them to follow the other faith, they should follow that conscience
Dubner recorded the conversation (with permission), transcribed it, and sent it to his mother, which became the beginning of a new kind of relationship between them[20:17]
Says he remains very grateful to Cardinal O'Connor for helping heal a family rift that would otherwise have been hard to mend[20:25]

Curiosity, identity, and how people work

Debbie notes that inhabiting two traditions gave him a lifelong fascination with identity, belonging, and belief, and asks how that shaped his worldview and career[20:44]
Dubner says he believes curiosity is natural for everyone, especially children, and laments how school and parenting often suppress it by demanding compliance and "paying attention"[21:32]
• Critiques the phrase "paying attention" as really meaning "listen to what I think is important" rather than honoring an individual's curiosity
Argues that if people can reach adulthood with their curiosity intact, life becomes more interesting, and he prefers to be around people who are not just smart but deeply curious[22:00]
Describes his interest in how old technologies (like horses and candles) get repurposed when superseded, leading to Freakonomics Radio series on candles and on the economics of the horse market[22:26]
• Recounts recent interviews with a Kentucky horse breeder/agent and retired jockey Richard Migliore, calling them among the most interesting conversations he has ever had
Emphasizes that he brings no special skills to such interviews other than genuine curiosity and a platform; interviewees are giving time to explain how their world works to a stranger[24:10]
Says he wishes more media focused on ideas and how things work, whereas much of what people consume as news is actually gossip about who did what and who is upset[24:41]
Believes almost any person is interesting if you sit down and talk with them and that Freakonomics Radio has had a broad remit centered on figuring out how things work[25:05]
Introduces a new TV project he is starting, a talk show intended to focus more on conversations with people and how people work, rather than topic-driven reporting[25:43]
• Contrasts reputation and character, saying he cares much more about character and has known people with great reputations who were unimpressive in person, and vice versa
Believes that when people sense his curiosity is genuine and non-exploitative, they appreciate it and do their best to meet him halfway in conversations[26:15]

Timing and goals for the upcoming TV show

Says the plan is to start shooting episodes in November of the year of recording[26:23]
Estimates that the show will likely air sometime in the first one to three months of 2026[28:05]
Wants to do the TV show in addition to Freakonomics Radio and continue his audio work for another 10 or 20 years if possible[28:14]

Hero worship, Franco Harris, and parasocial relationships

Childhood fixation on Franco Harris and later meeting

Debbie notes his father died when he was 10 and that he became entranced by Pittsburgh Steelers running back Franco Harris, even signing school papers "Franco Dubner"[30:08]
Years later he journeyed to meet Harris and wrote a book about the experience, expecting a warm embrace that did not materialize[30:25]
Dubner says Harris "wasn't very interested" in him personally, though he describes Harris as a very good and menschy man overall[30:37]
Explains that as a boy he had a powerful parasocial relationship with Harris, reinforced by recurring rescue dreams after his father's death[31:31]
Later, while at the New York Times, he saw Harris on the cover of Black Enterprise magazine as a co-owner of an industrial food business and became curious about the afterlife of a professional athlete[32:20]
Wrote Harris a letter proposing to write about his post-football life; Harris called back and invited him to Pittsburgh, though he kept some distance[33:31]
Recounts Harris picking him up at the airport and walking past a statue of Harris's famous "Immaculate Reception" play in the terminal, which was surreal[33:31]
Harris focused on whether Dubner could help sell his line of nutritional baked goods to clients, while Dubner wanted to follow him as a reporter and write about his life[34:06]
• Dubner admits he could not sell and instead wanted to observe and write, which Harris was not enthusiastic about
Describes a later incident when he traveled to Pittsburgh for an extended visit, only to find Harris had left town without telling him[34:27]
Despite difficulties, he published the book and was later invited by Harris to a Super Bowl party he hosted, though even then Harris kept him at arm's length[34:40]
Around the 50th anniversary of the Immaculate Reception, Dubner and his son planned to attend a celebration in Pittsburgh and were initially invited, then disinvited, from a family-and-friends party[36:04]
• Believes some people close to Harris felt Dubner's book portrayed him too harshly by honestly depicting episodes where Harris was distant or didn't show up
Between the disinvitation and the event, Harris died suddenly, and Dubner and his son still attended the game and heard moving tributes that reinforced his respect for Harris[37:17]

Lessons from hero worship

Debbie quotes his line from "Confessions of a Hero-Worshiper": "I came looking for a savior, but what I found was a man, and maybe that's the truer gift"[36:46]
Dubner affirms he still believes that and likes that line, saying he probably rewrote it many times[37:45]
Adds that he sees Harris not just as a man but as a mensch, and that he misses living in a world where Franco Harris is still around[37:17]

From rock band to writing and ambivalence about fame

College, The Right Profile, and leaving music

Debbie notes that he attended Appalachian State University, majored in communication, and started a rock band called The Right Profile, which they pursued seriously for five years[37:34]
Confirms that the band name was an homage to the Clash song about actor Montgomery Clift[39:26]
Explains he grew up playing piano and band instruments like French horn and trombone in a musical family[39:47]
In the band he initially played piano, inspired by Chicago blues pianist Otis Spann, whom he calls his childhood piano hero[39:06]
Over time he began writing songs and playing more guitar, and the band gradually improved from being "terrible" to being pretty good[40:12]
The band progressed through playing small and large clubs, opened for bigger acts, and eventually secured management that also represented bands like The Del Fuegos and The Replacements[39:54]
They played CBGB's in New York, attracted the attention of Clive Davis from Arista Records, and signed a major-label deal, entering pre-production for their first record[41:25]
As recording approached, he gradually decided he did not want a life centered on drawing attention to himself and chose to quit the band, which was dramatic and traumatic[42:53]
Moved to New York City, had a girlfriend there, went to graduate school at Columbia, and has been doing some version of writing ever since[43:10]

Seeking anonymity and reaction to being recognized

Debbie observes that his desire for an anonymous life did not entirely work out; he counters that being a book author and radio host is still relatively anonymous because people may not know his face[43:32]
Says that after the Freakonomics documentary film came out, he began to be recognized in airports, which he disliked[44:06]
Responded by cutting his hair short and growing a long beard, which reduced recognition for a while[44:26]
Stopped doing frequent TV guest spots because he felt much television is not made with the best intentions, forethought, or talent, and he did not want to pursue it merely for attention or money[44:04]
Mentions there was once a Freakonomics TV show ready to go that he walked away from because it didn't seem like it would be good or fun and he didn't want to be greedy after Freakonomics's financial success[44:37]

Why he now wants a TV show

Despite earlier reluctance about TV, he now wants a visual medium to have deeper conversations where people are "seen and not just heard"[44:47]
Notes that being 62 makes him care less about personal exposure and more about modeling real, respectful conversations in a culture where people often shout past each other[47:09]
Says he has modest aspirations but hopes that even if the show only changes a handful of minds, that still matters[47:06]

Writing, creativity, confidence, and treating the brain as a muscle

Learning to write like himself rather than imitating

Debbie recalls his comment on Tim Ferriss's show that it was hard to learn writing from great writing because the impulse is to copy it, which pulls you away from your own natural voice[46:12]
Asked how he located his best natural version, Dubner says it took a lot of time, work, honesty, and, importantly, confidence[46:35]
Argues that a status-obsessed culture leads people to constantly compare themselves to others, which is unhelpful for creativity[47:17]
Believes that while there are imitative elements in creativity, each person is a unique "science experiment" and should "be you" rather than trying to be Raymond Carver, Mark Twain, or Virginia Woolf[47:44]
Says he had experiences of confidence in youth (e.g., feeling he belonged in high-pressure baseball situations) but not in other domains like dealing with important people[48:21]
Defines a creative life partly as an exercise in tastemaking: having good taste that originates from who you are and what you genuinely love[48:44]
States that he now knows what he likes to do: have fun, learn, be kind, and be around people who share those traits[49:07]
Uses golf as a metaphor: many amateurs try to copy the swings of famous golfers, but each swing is highly individual; similarly, people should "swing your swing" in writing, singing, or other creative pursuits[50:07]
Acknowledges that creating something you love and are proud of that the world ignores or dislikes hurts, but he still thinks it is better to create and be criticized than not to create at all[50:49]

Courage, confidence, and hidden incentives in culture

Debbie playfully applies a Freakonomics lens to ask what hidden incentives drive bestseller lists[58:40]
Dubner notes that in publishing, movies, and food trends, once someone succeeds with something different, companies often copy it rather than continue to seek novelty[59:00]
Believes all actors in the system-publishers, creators, and consumers-should care more about things that are new and different, lamenting that discovery mechanisms for such work are inefficient[59:46]
Says courage is too rare despite being a good thing, and that people need to give themselves permission to be courageous about who they are, what they make, and what they think[1:00:10]
Links courage to moving beyond gossip-as-news and toward real thinking, idea-sharing, and the kind of exchange that happens in places like New York City[1:00:34]

Confidence, setbacks, and training the mind

Debbie shares her view that confidence comes from the successful repetition of any endeavor and says for her, confidence and feelings of accomplishment are fleeting, often requiring a good talk with her therapist[1:01:37]
Dubner returns to golf to illustrate how someone can make a great shot and then a terrible one, emphasizing that such failures are usually mental, not physical[1:02:01]
Says he long treated his brain more like a trampoline, reacting automatically to events, rather than like a muscle that can be controlled and trained[1:03:09]
Credits psychologist Angela Duckworth and their joint podcast "No Stupid Questions" with helping him realize he can intentionally direct his mind after setbacks[1:03:56]
• Describes a process of recognizing an error or unkind act, briefly processing why it happened and how to avoid repeating it, and then consciously redirecting attention to a chosen task or intention
Admits it took him more than 50 years to learn to treat his brain like a muscle and suspects it is similarly hard for many others[1:04:23]
Debbie says one of her great struggles is moving out of states of humiliation or shame more quickly, and asks how he trained his brain to do so[1:04:30]
Dubner answers that it came from experience and trial and error, noticing how staying stuck in a bad mood after a failed interview was a waste of time and mental bandwidth[1:05:06]
Realized no one else was forcing him to remain in that state and that he needed a better way to manage his reactions[1:05:49]
Says working weekly with Angela Duckworth on applied psychology helped him improve relatively quickly[1:05:56]
Mentions that their podcast "No Stupid Questions" is still available and that the archive is being republished from the beginning[1:06:13]

Freakonomics: origin, title, errors, and legacy

Writing Freakonomics and choosing the title

Debbie asks whether it is true that Freakonomics was almost titled "Eccentric Economics"[1:06:38]
Dubner recounts being sent as a writer to profile economist Steve Levitt for the New York Times Magazine and immediately loving Levitt's brain and the story, even before knowing whether readers would care[1:08:32]
After the article drew interest and people asked Levitt for a book, Levitt called Dubner saying he wasn't a writer and asking what to do; Dubner advised getting an agent and recommended his own agent, Suzanne Gluck[1:08:32]
Others suggested Dubner write a book about Levitt but he didn't want to repeat the profile, until Suzanne proposed they co-write a book, an idea neither had considered[1:08:40]
They collaborated enjoyably and produced a manuscript of empirical stories on topics like sumo wrestlers, real estate agents, the Ku Klux Klan, and high school teachers with no single unifying theme[1:09:05]
Levitt's sister, who had experience in publishing and advertising, generated about 200 potential titles, one of which was "Freakonomics"[1:10:58]
Dubner and Levitt immediately loved "Freakonomics" as so outrageous it was good, but their publisher initially refused, arguing that "freak" primarily meant someone engaged in transgressive sex[1:10:58]
They proposed other, often intentionally bad, titles (he cites "E-Ray Vision" as the worst), and as publication neared without a title, the publisher finally relented and accepted "Freakonomics"[1:11:07]

20th anniversary edition and correcting the Stetson Kennedy story

Debbie notes the upcoming 20th anniversary edition of Freakonomics and asks if there is any chapter he would write differently today[1:06:36]
Dubner clarifies that the new edition is essentially the original book with only a little new material, mainly a short foreword he labored over for about six months[1:07:02]
Says his biggest regret involves a chapter about civil rights activist Stetson Kennedy, who infiltrated the Ku Klux Klan and used their information to undermine them[1:07:12]
Initially wrote about Kennedy based on Kennedy's own books and other biographies, portraying him as having gone undercover into Klan meetings and shared their secrets to ridicule them[1:07:54]
After publication, a former collaborator alerted them to an archive suggesting Kennedy had significantly exaggerated his undercover role, although he had done other courageous work[1:08:45]
Dubner describes the painful experience of flying back to Florida to confront Kennedy with the archival evidence; Kennedy denied wrongdoing, saying it was long ago, but Dubner found the documentation compelling[1:08:51]
They rewrote that section of the book in later editions and wrote a New York Times Magazine column explaining the error and correction[1:09:54]
He regrets that by exposing exaggerations, they partly "de-lionized" someone who had indeed been heroic in many ways, and says the episode shows there is essentially no such thing as too much research[1:10:50]

Freakonomics as curiosity without cynicism and its legacy

Debbie characterizes Freakonomics as an exercise in curiosity without cynicism and asks what he hopes its lasting legacy will be on economics, journalism, and how people make sense of the world[1:11:07]
For journalism, Dubner hopes it reinforces the idea that storytelling with data is better than storytelling alone and that anecdotes are not the same as data[1:11:54]
Urges journalists to seek better, more representative data rather than relying on a handful of examples or getting trapped in ideological silos that preach to their existing audience[1:12:23]
Shares an editorial meeting anecdote where colleagues groaned at his suggestion of a story involving West Point, illustrating a reflexive negativity toward the military that can create blind spots[1:12:49]
Regarding economics, he praises the robustness of empirical research in economics compared with other social sciences but notes that many economists historically did not care much about people[1:14:11]
Highlights Gary Becker as a mentor to Levitt and a pioneering economist who applied economic analysis to families and discrimination, work once marginalized but later honored with a Nobel Prize[1:15:06]
Points out that Adam Smith, often seen as the founder of economics, was primarily a moral philosopher concerned with how new technologies like pin-making machines would change society and people[1:15:45]
Connects those questions to contemporary concerns about AI and technology, citing MIT economist David Autor as someone who studies how labor and society adapt to technological change[1:15:57]
Argues that economists must remember the variables in their equations represent real people and that ignoring how people want, need, and respond to incentives limits the usefulness of their work[1:16:51]
Hopes that Freakonomics helped, even in a small way, to remind economists and others that economics and people belong together and that the human element must be consciously included[1:17:26]

Closing reflections and sign-off

Mutual appreciation and closing lines

Debbie thanks Dubner for making work that matters and for joining her on Design Matters; he responds that he had a blast and appreciated the care she put into her questions[1:17:35]
Debbie directs listeners to Freakonomics.com and Freakonomics Radio to read or hear more of his work and notes that the new edition of Freakonomics will be published on November 11[1:18:04]
She signs off with her regular line about making a difference and adds a special homage to Dubner: "Take care of yourself and, if you can, someone else"[1:19:30]

Lessons Learned

Actionable insights and wisdom you can apply to your business, career, and personal life.

1

Protect and cultivate your curiosity into adulthood, because asking genuine questions is a powerful way to understand how people and systems really work.

Reflection Questions:

  • • What topics or questions have you been quietly curious about but haven't given yourself permission to explore yet?
  • • How might your work or relationships change if you treated every person you meet as inherently interesting and worth understanding?
  • • What is one concrete way you could carve out time this week to investigate a question you genuinely care about?
2

Small acts of encouragement-like a teacher recognizing your work-can permanently alter someone's trajectory, so invest in giving specific, sincere validation when it's earned.

Reflection Questions:

  • • Who in your life showed you early confidence or encouragement, and how has that shaped your path?
  • • How could you be more intentional about noticing and naming the strengths you see in colleagues, friends, or family members?
  • • What is one specific piece of feedback or recognition you could give someone this week that might stick with them for years?
3

Creative progress comes from developing your own voice and "swinging your swing," not from imitating the style or success of others.

Reflection Questions:

  • • In your current creative or professional work, where are you unconsciously copying someone else instead of leaning into your own instincts?
  • • How might your output look different if you optimized for what feels most like you, rather than what you think the market or audience expects?
  • • What is one project or experiment you could start that would be uncomfortably authentic but truer to your own taste and sensibility?
4

Your brain is a trainable muscle: after mistakes or setbacks, you can consciously choose how long to dwell and where to redirect your attention next.

Reflection Questions:

  • • When you make a mistake, what is your default mental script, and how long do you typically stay in it?
  • • How could you create a simple post-setback routine (e.g., reflect briefly, extract one lesson, then redirect) to keep yourself from ruminating?
  • • What recurring situation in your life would benefit most from treating your reactions as a skill you can practice rather than a fixed trait?
5

Courage usually precedes confidence: you often have to act without guarantees-sharing new ideas, telling honest stories, or correcting errors-before you feel secure in doing so.

Reflection Questions:

  • • Where in your life are you waiting to feel more confident before taking a step that actually just requires courage?
  • • How might your decisions change if you judged yourself less on outcomes and more on whether you acted in line with your informed conscience or values?
  • • What is one small, concrete risk you could take this month-creative, professional, or personal-that would stretch your courage muscle?
6

Rigorous thinking benefits from both data and empathy: whether in journalism or economics, you need solid evidence and an awareness that every data point represents a real person.

Reflection Questions:

  • • In the information you consume or produce, where are you relying on anecdotes instead of looking for broader patterns or data?
  • • How could you bring more human context into the way you interpret numbers, metrics, or research findings in your field?
  • • What decision you're currently facing would improve if you deliberately combined better data with a clearer understanding of the people affected?

Episode Summary - Notes by Parker

A Question-Asker Becomes a Question-Answerer
0:00 0:00