Does being open-minded has its limit?
How open-minded one can be? Would you accept every idea someone presents to you?
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
SomeMichGuy · M
Being open-minded does *not* mean that you ACCEPT "every idea someone presents to you"--that's the definition of veing wishy-washy and having zero mind of one's own
It means that, for those things which are
• ultimately decidable questions which require more information to be decided (e.g., scientific inquiry ["What is the nature of 'dark' matter/'dark' energy?"], etc.), or
• indeterminate questions which are primarily based upon forming opinions based upon what is available and arguing on that basis (e.g., literature, etc., or which political party philosophy is better, etc.)
that you are open to hearing someone's opinions about some topic 'x' which falls under a domain such as these.
Arguing about things which are truly just matters of taste--e.g., one's favorite anything, preferred anything, or other likes & dislikes--is pointless and should be avoided, which is a practical matter having nothing to do with "open-mindedness". (If you love chartreuse and I love fuschia, we are unlikely to convince each other to change our tastes by saying why we like the colors we each like.)
Also, not listening to points of view not based upon facts is another practical way to not waste one's time. If someone has new, actual facts (not rumors, etc.), then that bears scrutiny under the first category. But listening to people talking of a flat Earth, machines which violate laws of thermodynamics, or other twaddle...that's not required under being "open-minded".
Come to the table with facts, references...
It means that, for those things which are
• ultimately decidable questions which require more information to be decided (e.g., scientific inquiry ["What is the nature of 'dark' matter/'dark' energy?"], etc.), or
• indeterminate questions which are primarily based upon forming opinions based upon what is available and arguing on that basis (e.g., literature, etc., or which political party philosophy is better, etc.)
that you are open to hearing someone's opinions about some topic 'x' which falls under a domain such as these.
Arguing about things which are truly just matters of taste--e.g., one's favorite anything, preferred anything, or other likes & dislikes--is pointless and should be avoided, which is a practical matter having nothing to do with "open-mindedness". (If you love chartreuse and I love fuschia, we are unlikely to convince each other to change our tastes by saying why we like the colors we each like.)
Also, not listening to points of view not based upon facts is another practical way to not waste one's time. If someone has new, actual facts (not rumors, etc.), then that bears scrutiny under the first category. But listening to people talking of a flat Earth, machines which violate laws of thermodynamics, or other twaddle...that's not required under being "open-minded".
Come to the table with facts, references...