![\"\"](\"https:\/\/4.bp.blogspot.com\/-qvbmXmeXNlA\/TgMx32EeNyI\/AAAAAAAABdU\/CL4-875pgIM\/s1600\/butting+heads.jpg\")
<\/a><\/div>\nUPDATE: <\/strong>Two Christians have contacted me to tell me they\u2019re interested. \u00a0Please suggest format ideas for us to talk over and let me know if you\u2019d like to join in!<\/p>\n While picking a fight with Paul Krugman, Bryan Caplan came up with an interesting idea. Both Caplan and Krugman thought that, on average, their own side of the libertarian\/liberal split had done a better job considering the other side\u2019s ideas before rejecting them. Inspired by the Turing Test for machine intelligence<\/a>*, Caplan proposed an ideological Turing Test<\/a> as follows:<\/p>\n Here\u2019s just one approach. Put me and five random liberal social science Ph.D.s in a chat room. Let liberal readers ask questions for an hour, then vote on who isn\u2019t really a liberal. Then put Krugman and five random libertarian social science Ph.D.s in a chat room. Let libertarian readers ask questions for an hour, then vote on who isn\u2019t really a libertarian. Simple as that.<\/p>\n My challenge: Nail down the logistics, and I\u2019ll happily bet money that I fool more voters than Krugman. Indeed, I\u2019ll happily bet that any libertarian with a Ph.D. from a top-10 social science program can fool more voters than Krugman. We learn his worldview as part of the curriculum. He learns ours in his spare time \u2013 if he chooses to spare it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n I\u2019m completely in agreement with both Caplan and Krugman about the need to be able to understand the arguments of the other side, both in order to be better prepared to rebut them, but also as a guard against sticking to your own side out of ignorance and pride. (In fact, this was the crux of my final column for The Yale Daily News<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n One of the greatest gifts of my time at Yale has been living, writing, and arguing in a community of smart people with whom I fiercely disagree\u2026 The imitation test has helped me make sure I really understood what I was rejecting and, in the end, embracing.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Unless your enemies are purposefully contrarian (and I\u2019ve met more than a few of those here) there is something they find uniquely compelling about their ideology. To imitate them, you need to know what that is and understand why it moves people. It doesn\u2019t matter if the benefits of an ideology are outweighed by its drawbacks; unless you can recognize the good as good, no partisan will ever trust your analysis of their creed.<\/p>\n And, unless you\u2019re uncommonly brilliant and perceptive, it will do you a lot of good to confront the merits of the other side. Just because your position is better on net than your opponent\u2019s doesn\u2019t mean there aren\u2019t some pretty hefty costs to the legislation you yourself endorse.<\/p>\n