"Open-mindedness" is a myth, and rightly so

[thebobartist]

It seems to me that a lot of people who call themselves what I call myself - "liberal", specifically - have this bizarre ideal that they all like to bow down and worship without really thinking about (and no, I'm not talking about Michael Moore!).

Open-mindedness - what does it really mean? We always shout about how angry it makes us that people aren't open-minded, but we always follow that up with (not always audibly)because they don't agree with us.

Is it just me, or is that fundamentally closed-minded?

Technically, isn't saying that all racists and fundies and the like are wrong and insane and/or evil and/or stupid closed-minded as well?

Now, think about that. Just let it sink in.

We need to accept that we are closed-minded, and for good reason. If you weren't solidly sure of your opinion, hopefully, you wouldn't have that opinion, am I right?

Being totally "open-minded" would really just mean that you are really, really gullible, and sure, there are people like that, but that's not a good thing. That's very, very negative.

"Open-minded" needs to stop being a liberal code for "agrees with our conceptualization of the world" and "closed-minded" needs to stop being a code for "this person disagrees with me/us, and therefore must be stupid".

Just sayin'. I feel that if we all took heed of this advice, we'd be viewed much more as people trying to make a positive change in America and the world as opposed to pretentious little attention-seeking wannabe trendwhore activists.

[Guaranteed]

1. For me, open-mindedness refers to a more hands-off,

civil libertarian ideal, wherein if something that someone does seems strange or abnormal, but isn't hurting anyone, then it's acceptable.

[thebobartist]

2. I think that's fine

but should we really call it "open-mindedness"? I think that's misleading.

[Guaranteed]

4. Well, you can call it whatever you like.

Call it being non-judgmental, "living and letting live," minding your own business, or even leaving people the hell alone.

[izzie]

13. Yar and you hear what every one is talking about.

I do not understand why people wish to make laws not to do many things when with out these laws we are not saying you have to do it.Like birth control. What is wrong with it? If you want to use the info it is there and if you do not want to use it you are not made to. And I do not put this in the same class as be able to get in to a two ton car, drunk and driving 95 mph. It is not the same. If you wish to do that get on a race track and go ahead. Leave me alone and let people live as they like.

[Solon]

3. Open mindedness...

at least in politics, is to me, means to apply critical thought to a position, examine it from all points of view. Then make a decision as to whether the idea is acceptable or not. It is not rejecting an idea out of hand due to emotion or appeals to authority, but to examine ALL ideas with an open mind, which means that you should admit you maybe mistaken about your own positions.

[thebobartist]

5. That's what it *should* be,

but that's not really "open-mindedness" in the most technical sense. It's intelligence and wisdom, much more respectable things.

I suppose I can't really change the widespread use of "open-mindedness" as a positive thing, but I just felt like I wanted to get that out there.

[Solon]

10. It should be noted that everyone has a moral or ethical...

foundation where they put all there ideas and ideals in perspective. For example, in politics and life, my litmus test for ideas, political and otherwise, is simple. To do the least harm, and most help, to the majority of people, through democratic means. I then examine ideas that others have postulated and then I would come up with my own and examine them to see how they would best fit my ethical foundation. That is how I would reject or accept others ideas as well as my own, but I am also open to the possibility that I am wrong, hense not rejecting ideas without thinking.

[kiahzero]

54. Bullshit

Words acquire their definitions from their common usage. The common usage of "open-minded" is:
"Having or showing receptiveness to new and different ideas or the opinions of others."
OR
"ready to entertain new ideas."

Neither of these are close to what you are arguing. So not only did you create a straw-man argument, the apparent reason for your concern in the first place does not exist.

We can better understand the meaning of the word by looking at it's inverse, close-minded:
"Intolerant of the beliefs and opinions of others; stubbornly unreceptive to new ideas."
OR
"not ready to receive to new ideas."

In other words, a close-minded individual is not willing to take in new information to reach a new conclusion. They are not logical thinkers; they are prone to make arguments off of false premises, since they will not accept new information which contradicts these premises.

So, if a liberal calls a conservative close-minded, it might be, as you say, simply because the liberal in question is upset that the conservative did not accept their argument. However, whether or not the conservative is, in fact, close-minded depends on whether or not the argument made by the liberal is sound. If the argument is sound, then the conservative must either accept its conclusion, or be intellectually dishonest and therefore close-minded.

[sweetheart]

6. listening is no myth

Whilst i wholly agree that political conflict is about identity
politics, and that this thinking leads towards closing ones ears,
then we are faced with the real fact....

In every moment of life, we are aware and listening... and beneath
the subterfuge of voice and ideals, is in every moment an open mind.

Political folks feel that by putting down the baggage of the cause,
that they betray the cause, sorta like putting down ones gun in
a war. Yet the way to win is not to be at war.

And so it sounds like your pointing to the fear of surrendering the
war. Perhaps, by putting the impulse to fight down for a moment,
one can discover that the listening, observing, conscious awake
being that is inside your body, can be silent and at peace.

The place to end the war, is in our own hearts... then your
political voice is not hipocritical, that you are peace calling
for peace, not making war for peace. An open mind surrenders the
need to be right and meets people heart to heart day by day.

It is the ultimate bravery to be open... its worth a try, and if
you get caught in in a war, let it go and accept the whole lot
without judgement.

Open minds do not carry baggage of pre-defined self or ideals, rather
letting these form as the moment dicates and dropping them when
time moves on.

[thebobartist]

7. That's beautiful,

but that's not quite what I meant. When I say "open-minded", I don't mean "a person who thinks beyond the boundaries of stagnant political ideals", I mean "a person who automatically accepts everything they are told, even if they all contradict each other".

I suppose it is a matter of definition.

[sweetheart]

11. contradiction

My political views tend to be rather liberal when they form. I find
life to be sacred, and even the most despotic people, when engaged
face to face with a truly open minded (read "enlightened") person,
tend to themselves be more willing to put down their preconceptions
as we do when we meet our lover for a rendesvoux.

After making love, sticky with sweat and joyous release, an impression
is left... it might even be contradicting.

But then in the next moment, its all gone.

Liberalism is commonly related to "the enlightenment" from which
it formed, both culturally and directly. TO listen to all voices
as potentially voices in your own mind, is like listening to many
exotic birds chirping.

The mind always contradicts itself, being an instrument for combat.
The heart only simply present. Someone who is easily pursuaded
is not open minded. I agree, it is a matter of definition.

:-)

[coda]

17. Definitely a matter of definition.

You are very nearly equating open-mindedness with gullibility.

They're mutually exclusive.

Geez, I think of myself as being open-minded, yet I haven't automatically accepted the proposition that I rationalize the abuses at Abu Ghraib as frat house antics.

Is that what you meant?

[sendero]

26. Your...

... definition of "open-mindedness" is not the one generally accepted, so your entire point is moot.

[thebobartist]

30. My point is that

the commonly accepted definition is not well-founded.

[RoyGBiv]

45. That's a silly definition...

I missed this the first time through the thread, but I'm so taken aback by it I had to comment.

Had I read this definition, I doubt I would have bothered to put any effort into my other posts.

Open-minded does not ever mean "automatically accepting everything one is told." That is absurd.

[Beam Me Up]

48. sweet, sweetheart

:thumbsup:

[gottaB]

8. There are a few hundred hits for site:www.freerepublic.com "open-minded"

Most of them are critical of the common association between open-mindedness and liberals. In freeperland, rarely is the question asked is I open-minded?

I think it's a good question for you to ask, but we shouldn't lose sight of what we're up against politically. There was a time when a person could be both a liberal and an Republican, or a moderate and a Republican. That's a vanishing breed. The more open-minded members of the Republican Party have been enfeebled. Rightwing Christian fundamentalists now control that party, and they have made the calculation that the only votes worth caring about are those of rightwing Christian fundamentalists. All of their policies, all of their talking points, all of their politicking is directed towards pleasing this consituency, even if it comes at the expense of traditional supporters or sympathetic swing voters.

It doesn't takes much effort to see that the fundmentalist constituency is, at present, anything but open-minded. That's not to say that there aren't open-mindend Republicans or open-minded Christian fundamentalists. Politically, however, there is no expression of that open-mindedness that matters.

Peace,

gB

[thebobartist]

9. "Is I open-minded", ha ha ha

That's a fantastic callback.

All I'm really trying to say is that I think we hold "open-mindedness" up as an ideal that it's really not - what is "open-mindedness", really? I am saying that if you really think about it, it isn't usually used to mean that a person thinks hard and tries to accept all sides as legitimate before condemning them - it is usually used by liberals to label a person who agrees with them, though their agreement may be entirely closed-minded and without forethought.

You do have many good points, though. I often find myself stranded between Democrats and Republicans because of my economic beliefs, but considering that you can't BE socially liberal and economically conservative and mean anything to Republicans, I had to declare myself liberal.

[RoyGBiv]

12. Who is this "we"?

I was with you until you suggested "we need to accept..."

Closed-mindedness among liberals is one of the things that continues to divide separate interests and keep them from forming a viable common-cause front. You are correct to say that many liberals are in fact closed-minded, but to suggest that this is a good thing misses the mark, imo.

A couple of examples:

- Populists were destroyed from within by closed-minded people who put their personal interests above the interests of all people. More specifically, they considered race a dividing line between people who were deserving of economic and social justice and those who were not.

- In reference to a thread in the Lounge, women suffragists hurt their cause by closing their minds along the line of gender and race. One group felt the movement should concentrate on women's suffrage first; the other felt black male suffrage was more important.

In both cases, the issues arose from a viable disagreement that possibly could have been resolved had people open their minds to alternate points of view. But, that didn't happen, and the groups became polarized.

In contrast, again referring to an individual's comment in another thread, consider how FDR met the socialist agenda. He did not close his mind to it. He adopted a lot of it and throughout his tenure succeeded in implementing a great deal of it.

Consider James Madison, who had some very strict ideas about what the Constitution of the United States should look like. A great many of his most sacred ideas were dropped entirely from the final document, but he continued to support it, and today many people still consider him the Father of the Constitution.

Being closed-minded is not, imo, a virtue and never leads to a successful, long-term implementation of ideas.

[thebobartist]

20. Should there not be something in between

open-mindedness and closed-mindedness? I honestly don't know that I see either of them as positive, and I have a really hard time accepting that "open-minded" means "I think rationally".

[RoyGBiv]

29. Thinking rationally...

Rational thinking and open-mindedness aren't equal terms. One can be completely closed off from entertaining any but a single train of logic and be rational. Rationality has little to do with accepting various viewpoints. In fact, a train of rational logic can and often does seek to exclude other viewpoints.

Is there something in-between? I don't know. Is there such a thing as partly pregnant?

It seems to me one of the problems you are having is that you can't see a way to be open-minded about something with which you have a strong disagreement. It might help if you'd consider that being open-minded does not equate to agreement. It simply means being open to hearing the idea and not dismissing it out of hand. For example, I think Creationism, as a science, is a bunch of crap. But, every time some new bit of evidence comes across my consciousness in favor of Creationism, I look at it and consider it, and when I realize it's just the same thing re-stated in a new way, I dismiss it. I am not being closed-minded. I am considering the facts that are available and forming an opinion, which I will hold until some genuinely new and convincing evidence makes me think otherwise.

In a more practical sense relative to politics, all being open-minded means is that one is willing to entertain new solutions to problems and does not instantly retract when those ideas challenge his or her preconceived notions. It's thinking outside the box. We all have prejudices, yes, but the open-minded person recognizes this and seeks to overcome its negative influence.

[DarkPhenyx]

14. I disagree.

Being open minded dosen't mean you can't be annoyed by people who disagree with you. Particularly when they are using flawed logic, debunked "facts", and American historical mythology to back up thier claims. Openmindedness does not mean having to accept abject stupidity.

[thebobartist]

18. Please, then,

enlighten me and give me a straight definition of "open-minded" that isn't "agrees with liberals".

[DarkPhenyx]

28. Any of a couple thousand post I've made on this board...

...which get me immediately flamed.

[thebobartist]

31. That's highly unfortunate.

Wouldn't that just make you a superior thinker?

[DarkPhenyx]

34. No, not at all.

I'm just Phe. That's all I am, and all I can ever be. I am no more superior or less so than anyone else.

[kiahzero]

44. Dictionarys are fun things

Perhaps you should learn to use one?

open-minded: Having or showing receptiveness to new and different ideas or the opinions of others.

In other words - not immediately rejecting an argument you don't agree with out of hand. An open-minded person would consider the other person's arguments before making a decision, and change their opinion to reflect new information.

[thebobartist]

21. Flawed logic

is frequently a purely subjective concept.

[DarkPhenyx]

27. No, flawed logic is always a solid thing.

Sometimes people call logic flawed when it isn't. Therein lies an important difference. This stems primarily from that fact that most people have absolutely no clue what logical thought really is.

[thebobartist]

32. What is it that gives us the idea that we have the solid logic

and that others have the flawed? Obviously we do or else we wouldn't be thinking it, but that's fundamentally closed-minded, once again.

[DarkPhenyx]

33. OK, if you say so.

I can see you have no intention of discussing the subject and just want to rant on. Please feel free to do so and I'll go find something more productive to do. Thanks.

[thebobartist]

35. I don't understand.

How am I ranting?

I don't see that there would be any way to get you to not think I was ranting other than suddenly disagreeing with myself.

[DarkPhenyx]

37. Rant was a poor choice of words.

Perhaps "refusing to enter into honest debate" might have been a better choice. Either way the result will end up being the same.

[tom_paine]

38. I think you DO understand what DarkPhenyx is saying.

And he is right.

So is Bridget Burke. She's got you pegged, too, but cannot say it directly due to Forum Rules.

[DarkPhenyx]

39. Oh, and for the record:

You Win!

[kiahzero]

46. Math teachers are closed-minded!

They won't accept my viewpoint that 2+2=5!

:eyes:

You've created a straw-man argument, and seem so proud of yourself that you can knock it over.

Logic is not, in any way, subjective, just like math is not, in any way, subjective. What is subjective are the axioms used to create the logical argument... challenging those can indeed be subjective, depending on the topic. However, when someone points out a flaw in the logical argument, that's in no way subjective... a logical fallacy is a logical fallacy.

For instance, I stated previously that you created a straw-man argument. That is because you created a distorted position (that being "open-minded" implies "that you are really, really gullible, and sure, there are people like that, but that's not a good thing. That's very, very negative," when in fact, the definition is not even close to that). You then proceed to argue that this means that people should not be open-minded.

For the record, here's the definition of a straw man fallacy:
1 Person A has position X.
2 Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3 Person B attacks position Y.
4 Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

Position X would be the actual definition of "open-minded", and position Y would be your distorted version thereof.

[markses]

15. Just let that sink in...

Oh, boy. Never thought of all this. It's only been THE dominant question in political/social theory for the last 30 years. :eyes: What insight. Trendwhore activists. Positive change. And you're telling us about "codes"?!?

[thebobartist]

19. You know,

you could have actually responded saying something with a point instead of reacting without thinking.

[markses]

42. I'd say the same for your initial post

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

16. Perhaps it's misused, but it does exist

Open minded simply means being open to other opinions. If you've ever been swayed on a topic because of something someone else says, you're an open minded person. If you're constantly being swayed by other people, however, you're brainless. It's a fine line, sure, but it exists.

[Bridget Burke]

22. Good phrase--mind if I use it?

"pretentious little attention-seeking wannabe trendwhore activists" It has a certain ring.

You're really good at setting up concepts & demolishing them. Re-defining definitions. Shouldn't there be links to famous semioticists?

Are you in graduate school?

[thebobartist]

23. I guess you can if you want to.

Though my sarcasadar is off and I can't tell if you're really being serious or not.

If you are, then thank you, and no, I am not in graduate school. I'm actually just taking a few courses at the local community college so I can transfer somewhere nicer when I get the funds.

[Jim__]

24. Close-minded is a negative thing

You say:

We need to accept that we are closed-minded, and for good reason. If you weren't solidly sure of your opinion, hopefully, you wouldn't have that opinion, am I right?

No, you are not right. Being "sure" of your opinions is a good thing. Being so "sure" of your opinions, that you won't listen to or consider arguments that differ with your current opinion is to be close-minded. No matter how "sure" we are of our opinions, we should always be open to new arguments and new information. Being so open, is what I mean by "open minded."

[thebobartist]

25. That's fine.

I don't think people can technically be completely closed-minded, either. I should edit that.

[Liberal Classic]

36. Truly, the hardest bias to see

is one's own.

[jeffrey_X]

40. It boils down to perspective.

Some people have the ability to look at life, society and other people from different perspectives. Others do not.

I know this was a key for me in converting from a brain dead, closed minded conservative, to an open-minded liberal. I was willing to truly and honestly look at life from other people's perspective.

[Geo55]

41. key

I believe this is the most valuable ability in understanding the world around us.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

43. I think open-mindedness refers to the ability to change your mind if

the evidence warrants it. It may not happen instantly, but you can take in and process new information and decide whether it forces you to modify your previous opinion.

For example, I was a supporter of the Vietnam War in high school, mostly because I'm part Latvian, which gave my family a tendency to be knee-jerk anti-Communist

However, once I got into college, I found that professors I respected were making very sensible arguments against it, and they were able to prove to me that this was not the same as the Soviet Union annexing a formerly independent country.

I also used to be anti-choice, again due to family influence, but then I reached the age where a lot of my friends were pregnant (mostly voluntarily) and heard about the doubts and fears they felt even with a wanted pregnancy. I also heard stories from medical personnel about delivering the babies of very young teens who had been impregnated through incest or sexual abuse. I still have a gut feeling against abortion, but I now would never presume to make the decision for anyone else.

When faced with contrary evidence, a person with a right-wing mindset just starts ranting incoherently or, as Bill Maher so accurately described Ann Coulter's modus operandi, "just making shit up."

You occasionally find a far leftwinger who goes into rant mode when convictions are questioned, but not as often. In fact, such people can easily turn 180 degrees and become rightwingers. They're really absolutists, and if you disprove even one of their cherished beliefs, they immediately turn around and adopt the exact opposite "shopping list."

For an example, see the older neocons, like Norman Podhoretz, most of whom were Marxists or near-Marxists in their younger years.

We notice the rightwing absolutists more these days, because they're more numerous than their opposite counterparts.

[kiahzero]

47. You're right, and the OP is wrong.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=open-minded

I guess I'm being "closed-minded" for using a real definition of the word rather than an arbitrarily invented variant used to make a point.

:eyes:

[RichJohnson1976]

49. You said it!!!

Here here!

[thebigidea]

50. while you're at it, might as well explain how tolerance is a myth too

[indigobusiness]

51. Open-mindedness merely refers to unbiased, critical analysis ...

letting the facts rise and fall by the weight or bouyancy of their own merit.

Setting aside a personal agenda is fundamentally difficult for some people...ergo, they are not open-minded.

Agendas rule a closed mind.

[aden_nak]

52. The Thing About Open-Mindedness

The thing about open-mindedness is that, well. . . it's a great thing for a person to have, and an even better thing for a society to have. That being said, it's NOT a great thing for anyone on the front line of politics to SHOW.

It is one thing to consider all viewpoints and understand the full situation before coming to a conclusion. That's perfectly fine. And I also agree that one should consider new information, even if it contradicts their current views. That's called being a logical creature.

But there is this undercurrent, this self-destructive concept that everyone has to take the time to consider every ELSE'S words. . . even if you have heard the argument before and been unswayed. The "problem" with open-mindedness is that most people aren't quite bright enough to hold the whole concept in their mind at one time.

If you are part of the political right, then you are "right" as far as you are concerned. Few and far between are the true right-wing political soldiers that allow even the hint of doubt to creep into their public persona. It's that relentlessness that allows the right to paint itself as "decisive" and "confident", even if it is also flat out friggin' wrong.

The left, on the other hand, often spends too much time conceding "valid points" or "interesting views" on subjects they know damn well they've already figured out. In the festering shitstorm of American "political debate", the loudest, crankiest voice often triumphs in the collective conscious of the nation.

The problem with open-mindedness isn't WITH open-mindedness, but with the perception of that open-mindedness as weakness of uncertainty.

Imagine for a moment that you are driving down the road with two people in the back seat. Let's just call them John and George. You come to a fork in the road, and don't know which way to turn. So, naturally, you ask your passengers for advice.

George: "Turn right. I know the way, it's just around the corner from here. Don't listen to John, he's a stupid prick. TURN RIGHT!"

John: "While I agree that turning right has it's merrits, I honestly believe that if we turn left, we will see significant improvement."

George: "Left absolutely sucks. It's a dead end. TURN RIGHT! RIIIIIGHT!"

John: "George, that's an interesting take on-"

George: "RIIIIGHT! GIVE ME THE WHEEL GOD DAMN IT!"

Odds are you're going to be turning right. Which is what this country has been doing for a long, long time now.

[mvd]

53. Well, I've certainly heard their arguments

Their arguments are everywhere. They just don't hold water IMO. And that's proven by the sorry state we are in under Bush.