For as long as I can remember, I ask why.
And the asking drives me to investigate.
If I’m not intentional, I can subconsciously alleviate the discomfort of cognitive dissonance by
dismissing or even
conflicting information and viewpoints.
It takes courage to challenge my assumptions, but when I do it, one of two things usually happens:
1. I find out my assumptions were wrong, they needed to be challenged and I had/have more to learn/understand.
2. I discover my assumptions were on the right track, I learn even more, validating what I understand/believe and doing so allows me to more competently articulate what I understand/believe.
In both situations, I inevitably learn about the reasoning and feelings behind viewpoints that differ from my own,
often gaining empathy,
which prevents me from depersonalizing someone based on their beliefs and/or the groups they are affiliated with.
This often lands me in an uncomfortable place of being equally rejected by people on both sides of an issue.
I’m learning today.
When I’m digging in and learning about a controversial issue, one thing I’ve come to understand is that I need to read/listen/watch to conflicting information, because
one viewpoint is not strengthened by ignoring or dismissing another.
Sometimes, ignoring and dismissing conflicting information actually weakens my argument as well as my credibility.
and I hate it when that happens.