Final Paper Part IV: An Open Mind
The point so far has been that we do not understand our world both internally and externally. However, this can change, and we can always become more knowledgeable. You learn something new everyday, and if you think about what this exactly means, it’s something really profound: we don’t simply have newer and newer boundaries for us to break, our views about what we currently have can change drastically. To put what I am trying to say simply: the first step to changing the world is to be open to change ourselves. While its source has been long lost somewhere in the internet, a comment somebody once made put the idea perfectly: don’t let your opinions be your identity. Don't tie what you believe too much to yourself, these things are malleable, and trying to stick to them too hard causes you to think and do based simply because it is "you" and not for some actual logical reason.
When you were a small child and learning how to write, you no doubt could not learn to spell correctly. Maybe you wrote everything in capital letters, or tripped up on words with strange phonetics. However, someone taught you the correct ways to do things, and you listened. Why do we not have this sort of attitude in other aspects of our lives? Why can’t we seem to accept that we don’t know everything about anything? Society as a whole seems to be really concerned about being “right” (no doubt due partially to an education system that pushes the idea of a singular answer) and looks down upon those that change their views. However, as Loeb states in Soul of a Citizen, in his personal experience with supporting the Vietnam War, he does not really care that he was wrong on the issue, what matters is the fact that he was willing to listen and ultimately change his viewpoint. As another example, Buddhist monks spend much of their time in debates with other monks. When defending ideals, they must be able to defend their ideas against many counter arguments. The one who wins the debate is the one who ultimately loses, as it shows that did not learn anything from the debate.
And so I urge you to always keep an open mind in everything that you do. Be wary about believing something is the truth just because it it the first thing you hear, or the only thing. Obviously, there’s some stipulations. There’s such thing as being weak willed and submitting to any idea or challenge sent at you (or being a “tool” or whatnot). With the prevalence of false or incomplete information, it becomes all the more important to be able to glean actually useful and truthful information. Well, I’m not expert on the subject, so rather, here’s a PBS Idea Channel episode on the subject of fake new.
In summary, it’s important to try and find out the intention of whoever wrote whatever you’re reading or seeing. Does it confirm your biases and assumptions, does it try to make you feel a certain way? How reputable is your source, are they known for some sort of leaning? Is your source potentially being paid to say something or exists simply to gain a profit? When parsing through issues and arguments the important word here is “balance”. You can never know one hundred percent if something is true or not, there always must be some sort of leap of faith. That does not mean, however, that you cannot make an informed leap of faith. When determining the right course of action the “balance” that I mentioned is one between logic and emotion. We cannot use simply one or another. Emotions run rampant on both sides of the political spectrum and it clouds each judgement. For example, when viewing acts of terrorism, actual numerical figures tend to be ignored about the groups in question and emotions about simply feeling unsafe around certain types of people tend to pervade. On the opposite side of the spectrum, our logic can never tell us anything with absolute certainty. Statistics only mean so much, they are inherently flawed in how they’re collected and simply can never truly tell us what will happen. Nobody is “right” or “left” brained, we must use all of our brain all of the time in order to function. Always take time to reflect, just like how you would want to double check your work on an exam, try to look back at your actions and thoughts with a different mind.
Next: Conclusion and Reflection
When you were a small child and learning how to write, you no doubt could not learn to spell correctly. Maybe you wrote everything in capital letters, or tripped up on words with strange phonetics. However, someone taught you the correct ways to do things, and you listened. Why do we not have this sort of attitude in other aspects of our lives? Why can’t we seem to accept that we don’t know everything about anything? Society as a whole seems to be really concerned about being “right” (no doubt due partially to an education system that pushes the idea of a singular answer) and looks down upon those that change their views. However, as Loeb states in Soul of a Citizen, in his personal experience with supporting the Vietnam War, he does not really care that he was wrong on the issue, what matters is the fact that he was willing to listen and ultimately change his viewpoint. As another example, Buddhist monks spend much of their time in debates with other monks. When defending ideals, they must be able to defend their ideas against many counter arguments. The one who wins the debate is the one who ultimately loses, as it shows that did not learn anything from the debate.
And so I urge you to always keep an open mind in everything that you do. Be wary about believing something is the truth just because it it the first thing you hear, or the only thing. Obviously, there’s some stipulations. There’s such thing as being weak willed and submitting to any idea or challenge sent at you (or being a “tool” or whatnot). With the prevalence of false or incomplete information, it becomes all the more important to be able to glean actually useful and truthful information. Well, I’m not expert on the subject, so rather, here’s a PBS Idea Channel episode on the subject of fake new.
In summary, it’s important to try and find out the intention of whoever wrote whatever you’re reading or seeing. Does it confirm your biases and assumptions, does it try to make you feel a certain way? How reputable is your source, are they known for some sort of leaning? Is your source potentially being paid to say something or exists simply to gain a profit? When parsing through issues and arguments the important word here is “balance”. You can never know one hundred percent if something is true or not, there always must be some sort of leap of faith. That does not mean, however, that you cannot make an informed leap of faith. When determining the right course of action the “balance” that I mentioned is one between logic and emotion. We cannot use simply one or another. Emotions run rampant on both sides of the political spectrum and it clouds each judgement. For example, when viewing acts of terrorism, actual numerical figures tend to be ignored about the groups in question and emotions about simply feeling unsafe around certain types of people tend to pervade. On the opposite side of the spectrum, our logic can never tell us anything with absolute certainty. Statistics only mean so much, they are inherently flawed in how they’re collected and simply can never truly tell us what will happen. Nobody is “right” or “left” brained, we must use all of our brain all of the time in order to function. Always take time to reflect, just like how you would want to double check your work on an exam, try to look back at your actions and thoughts with a different mind.
Next: Conclusion and Reflection
Comments
Post a Comment