A person’s beliefs are a crucial part of their identity and play a greater role than nationality, religion, age, or gender.
Any of us can be left-wing or right-wing, conservative or liberal. People also have opinions about other, less global but still significant matters. The only way to understand what someone is thinking is through conversation. We exchange views, find supporters and opponents, allies and adversaries. The degree of polarization depends on the gap between the views of two people. During a debate, both sides are convinced they are defending the truth. However, the very presence of a debate indicates that at least one participant is mistaken. It’s nearly impossible to objectively evaluate a perspective that contradicts your own. Counterarguments immediately come to mind, convincing you of your own correctness, while the other person is endowed with negative qualities. In such a situation, it’s challenging to recognize your own misconceptions, but there are several signs that indicate the need to change your opinion.
Double Standards
The presence of selective morality in judgments clearly indicates problems with your established concept. It looks something like this: someone is allowed “this” because they are deserving, while others are denied “this” due to their unworthiness. Then comes the argumentation. It’s not difficult to justify a position, especially if you possess some simple sophistry techniques or understand the context slightly better than your conversation partner. You advance your well-structured arguments, vanquish your opponent, celebrate your victory, while forgetting that in reality, good or truth doesn’t always triumph. Double standards indicate gaps in the structure of your views. You cannot explain certain points and therefore settle for the simplest justification. This doesn’t mean your position is fundamentally wrong, but it requires some refinement. As you add knowledge, your opinion will automatically change. The extent of the changes depends on the importance of the missing elements.
Denial of Reality
If a person denies objective reality, it’s evident they need to change their views. Otherwise, it turns out they are literally living in a fictional world. This is not an exaggeration. Tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of people right now believe in a flat Earth. Hundreds of millions subscribe to some conspiracy theory. The most surprising thing is that belief in conspiracy theories does not correlate with education level or profession. There are medical professionals who are convinced of the dangers of vaccination and denied the existence of COVID-19. You can find professors who believe in the “moon landing conspiracy” and a world government. Views that ignore or deny part of reality may exist, but they cannot be taken seriously. Their imposition rightly encounters equal resistance. To escape this fantastical world, one must let go of thoughts about their own exceptionalism. No truth has been revealed to you. Almost everyone around knows or has heard something about these fantastic hypotheses but does not accept them, unwilling to join the “higher society.”
RELATED STORY – 8 Ways to Overcome the Fear of Failure If You Haven’t Achieved Any Significant Success Yet
Vagueness of Definitions
Some people can engage in a monologue for 10 to 20 minutes, using obscure terms and referencing quotes from celebrities, yet fail to convey any clear idea to the listener. By the end of their speech, it turns out that the proposed opinion is utterly banal or naive. Behind a façade of vague definitions lies something extremely simple. One could express their position in just a few seconds, but the person wanted to speak for the sake of the process itself. By trying to appear intelligent, you don’t actually become one. Moreover, the effect is often the opposite. At best, those around you won’t understand what you said, but it’s quite possible they’ll understand too well, reading between the lines and discarding all the pomp. An opinion becomes strong and cohesive when it can be conveyed in simple words over a short period. Naturally, it can be elaborated upon if necessary.
Dependency on Context
Context refers to different conversation partners, settings, and your emotional state. If an opinion is dependent on external factors, it means it doesn’t truly exist. In any case, it doesn’t represent a cohesive structure. This often occurs when a person’s views are too ambiguous and fall outside societal norms. Simply put, in certain situations, you feel shy or even afraid of your own views. However, an unwillingness to defend your position does not lead to a complete abandonment of your opinion. Therefore, it tries to become convenient for everyone, adapting to the expectations of a specific conversation partner. A person who adopts this behavioral strategy will soon be exposed. The authority of such a person drops to zero, and their views no longer interest anyone.
Conflict with Beliefs
A system of views needs reevaluation if it contradicts personal, truly deep convictions. It seems paradoxical, but this is something one can encounter quite often. Most people do not generate ideas but merely relay something they’ve picked up from outside. Sometimes a trendy notion can replace moral principles, convincing a person of the correctness of their chosen authority. This doesn’t happen instantly. Initially, the authority is selected based on personal beliefs and preferences. However, people almost never have absolutely identical positions. Disagreements over details are inevitable, and the question is how many discrepancies will arise and how much one will have to bend their opinion to align with the new ideal. Thus, step by step, imperceptibly to the bearer but obvious to others, your views can change beyond recognition. Former principles lose all power, and the acquired views seem cool, progressive, and bold, but they remain so distant. At a certain point, if one gets too carried away, they can completely lose themselves, becoming a mere copy of someone else.