From General To Even More General
“Wishy-washy.” “Flip-flopper.” While, sometimes, these terms are used for people that randomly change their views or because of popular opinion, it is, sometimes, used for people that intentionally change their opinions, perhaps because they found newer, more accurate information. So limited generalizations that correctly apply in specific contexts are incorrectly extended across broad, disconnected contexts.
Easier To Generalize
Before continuing, I admit that it’s impossible to avoid ALL generalization. Nonetheless, this is a tactic that some use as their main way to interpret the world. They make broad statements with few exceptions. These people “live and die” by potentially incorrect, deeply flawed generalizations. While it’s one thing to follow your convictions, it’s another to ignore FACTual information that could correct opinions and beliefs.
Ignoring Flimsy Furniture
As I organized this post, I found a metaphor. Imagine assembling a piece of furniture. Typically, there are instructions included that show how to assemble the separate pieces into a safe, complete piece. Then, imagine that someone pointed out a few mistakes, yet how to easily fix them? Now, you know why there were too many “leftover” screws and pieces. However, imagine that you ignore the “easy” solutions and leave the furniture as is? Your ego or hurt feelings didn’t allow you to admit dangerous structural flaws because you feel “embarrassed” or “bad,” though, truthfully, nobody cares. A fragile ego mattered more than easily fixing furniture.
The First To Be Wrong?
From lightly browsing local community social media pages, I have seen many of the same people comment on most of the posts. A “counter-responder” might point out some errors, since the responder may have presented opinions as facts or perhaps had some (not all) of “the facts.” To be clear, when I say “fact(s),” I’m referring only to information that is true (vs. false). Occasionally, I have seen people respond in a neutral, genuinely inquisitive way. They “seek to understand.” However, they are, sometimes, seen as trying to confuse/manipulate or somehow assaulting their opinions, undermine credibility, damage “reputation,” etc. In these cases, the counter-responders only ask…