Recognize that there's some underlying payoff to believing this stuff. > Psychologists like Jovan Byford from the Open University tell me that a good strategy

Recognize that there's some underlying payoff to believing this stuff. > Psychologists like Jovan Byford from the Open University tell me that a good strategy is to try to get to the bottom of the person's legitimate concerns and to find out how they are feeling. If you can find the payoff and substitute something else[1] the person will tend to return to "normal" on their own. It takes a lot of energy to fight the whole world. ([1] E.g. w/ the now-deprecated "Six-Step Reframe" https://gist.github.com/calroc/4719702 https://gist.github.com/calroc/4719702 ) Use the "Meta-Model" from Neurolinguistic Programming. > It is claimed that the Meta-model “yields a fuller representation of the client’s model of the world – the linguistic Deep Structure from which the client’s initial verbal expressions or Surface Structure, were derived” by offering challenges to its limits, the distortions, generalisations or deletions in the speaker’s language. https://www.nlpworld.co.uk/nlp-training-meta-model/ https://www.nlpworld.co.uk/nlp-training-meta-model/ Be careful, it's a power tool. You can easily alienate the person you're trying to reach.