DeWayfarer · 61-69, M
Everything changes. And constantly. For every action, there's a equal and opposite reaction. Yet it's not just one dimensional as your question suggests. Reactions are rarely exactly in the same direction.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
I don't recall that but I have modifed my views, or at least understood the opposing one better even if still disagreeing in principle, when the matter has been explained to me more fully. Often it is because I do not know all the background facts and reasons.
Few important things are binary, we cannot always be expected to understand them in great depth; but we cannot hold reasoned views on those with which we disagree unless we at least try to understand them and their supporters.
To be unable to comprehend is one thing. We are not all polymaths, and some matters are so egregious we genuinely cannot grasp their reasons or motives because we cannot think like the individuals responsible - nor think for them. (Not "motivation" - that is not a synonym for "motive".)
However, I hold that to refuse to comprehend is lazy, in extremis even cowardly; likely to lead only to rancour rather than respectful disagreement. It's not always the division that matters, but how the division is made and represented, and why, that creates the problems.
To use me as an example:
- My views on my own country's domestic politics have changed significantly over the years; but only slowly, by seeing and assessing the changing policies and results.
- My religious beliefs have matured with me - as I gradually realised the fundamental purposes of such beliefs, their commmonalities and their variety.
- Whilst on broader social matters, I try to accept others but realise it is not always easy. Though I abjure what I see as a craze, for partitioning people behind slang labels as if items in a supermarket.
Risking raising comparisons with that "individuals" scene in The Life Of Brian, we are all just... people.
Few important things are binary, we cannot always be expected to understand them in great depth; but we cannot hold reasoned views on those with which we disagree unless we at least try to understand them and their supporters.
To be unable to comprehend is one thing. We are not all polymaths, and some matters are so egregious we genuinely cannot grasp their reasons or motives because we cannot think like the individuals responsible - nor think for them. (Not "motivation" - that is not a synonym for "motive".)
However, I hold that to refuse to comprehend is lazy, in extremis even cowardly; likely to lead only to rancour rather than respectful disagreement. It's not always the division that matters, but how the division is made and represented, and why, that creates the problems.
To use me as an example:
- My views on my own country's domestic politics have changed significantly over the years; but only slowly, by seeing and assessing the changing policies and results.
- My religious beliefs have matured with me - as I gradually realised the fundamental purposes of such beliefs, their commmonalities and their variety.
- Whilst on broader social matters, I try to accept others but realise it is not always easy. Though I abjure what I see as a craze, for partitioning people behind slang labels as if items in a supermarket.
Risking raising comparisons with that "individuals" scene in The Life Of Brian, we are all just... people.
SleepingWithGhosts · 46-50, M
A couple of the younger agents at my office had tried to convince me that my boss was out to get everyone in the company. My boss, being a contemporary and close to my age, showed himself in a very different light to me, and has helped me greatly in my role over the past couple of weeks. From his experience and knowledge that he has passed on to me, I now consider him a great guy and a great resource.
Thevy29 · 41-45, M
Whenever that person presents a well thought out argument I can see their point of view.
Likestoenjoylife · 51-55, M
I am a numbers guy you need to make the numbers add up for the better to make me change have let people try something on a trial basis to see if it could work .
Ambroseguy80 · 56-60, M
AdmiralPrune · 46-50, M
Sunday.
bijouxbroussard · F
I softened my opinions on "illegal" immigration when I learned how much US corporations and military have interfered (and continue to interfere) in many of the countries people are fleeing from.
Catastrophe · New
BlueSkyKing · M
My working adage is: If it’s not science, it’s superstition. What trumps science is better science.
FrozenWasteland · 61-69, M
It's been a while
therighttothink50 · 61-69, M
[media=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPQ9_vQ0cto]
GoFish · 41-45, F
the only thing i could think of was this lady years ago saying white lives matter and i thought at the time she was being ridiculous but i wasn't aware of the rising hostility at the time and how leftist mainstream culture is attacking them and they are becoming an endangered minority .. but it will become more obvious latter 🤐 kids are being brainwashed to be hateful these days because the educational establishments are being taken over by people with dark agendas (they hate america and are teaching our children hate and promoting violence)
pride49 · 31-35, M
It's usually me admonishing myself and admitting to others I was wrong after discovering facts I thought were true, were wrong. This error comes from trusting 'facts' through mouth rather than research. My sister always wanted to tell me talking to people, etc. is where all the information is. It is not. It a constant telephone game. Real research involves more than listening and believing everything that is heard. Suffice it to say. She lives in a world of fiction for only believing second hand testimony.
