For me, a long time ago, a good indicator of a person’s foolishness and narrow-mindedness became their possession of an opinion they are ready to fight for and defend. A typical indicator phrase is: “I think so.” That’s it. Time to flush it away. Arguing is pointless. You have to agree, nod along, and look for ways to validate that person’s opinion. At least to extract some benefit from their presence in your world. Otherwise, you might as well just walk away.
Often, people with “opinions” refer to pluralism “I respect other people’s opinions, so you should respect mine too. If you don’t respect my opinion, then you’re rude, uncivilized, and not worth talking to. A principled and uncompromising jerk, and all that. By the way, everyone usually thinks according to their own level of depravity, but that’s not what I’m talking about.”
The most interesting thing is that there is opinion, and there is fact, knowledge. Facts are stubborn things. A theory is valuable when it has predictive power. People with opinions do not possess knowledge, do not know how to work with facts, and fiercely defend the integrity of their worldview, or rather, their little world filled with fairies and goblins, astrology, homeopathy, and “spiritual practices.” The very demand to respect someone else’s opinion is incorrect. Opinions should not be taken into account at all—neither anyone else’s nor one’s own. Semi-educated people…have opinionsThey consider it primary in defending their point of view. They simply lack the knowledge that shapes the perspectives of educated, knowledgeable, experienced, and wise individuals.
Semi-educated people, for example, cannot understand at all why. synthetic theory of evolution true, but creationism — No. They only see the tip of the iceberg — the phrases coming from the speaker, and they haven’t spent 10 years on their own education to truly understand where facts end and opinions begin. They will argue passionately, trying to disprove Darwin’s theory, without even listening to the arguments that… Darwinism In fact, he is not right, and no one disputes that with them.
If you show facts to a person who holds a strong opinion, they won’t take them any more seriously than just a counterpoint in a debate. They’ll start to get personal, ask loaded questions, deny the reliability of the source of the facts without offering a more credible one by their own standards, nitpick the wording, and ignore uncomfortable logical conclusions. And finally, as the most unassailable argument, they’ll inevitably ask, “So, do you recognize anyone’s opinion other than your own?” and walk away with a sense of victory, revealing that they themselves don’t acknowledge anyone’s opinion but their own, which supports their little world and justifies their actions.
Such.people with opinionsThey believe that their views on the structure of the world and their right to deny facts are similar to their right to have their own opinions on preferred colors, food, blogging platforms, car brands, styles, sexual preferences, and tastes, which, as we know, are not disputed. In other words, for them, the choice between two theories boils down to a gut-level “like-dislike” simply because they have no other criteria for assessing truth. They didn’t learn it in school. They couldn’t or didn’t want to.
The aggressive form is particularly dangerous.opinion holdersThe last reliable hope for humanity remains the aforementioned theory of evolution, which may not allow for successful reproduction.people with opinionsMaybe that’s why she is often rejected by them? After all, there is an opinion that: wearing a seatbelt while driving is unnecessary, vaccinations do more harm than good for children, homeopathy is better than traditional medicine, veganism is beneficial, and celibacy is the path to success in life.