Think for yourself

My views are not set in stone, merely temporary and of this time. I can, and frequently do, change them. A woman at work regularly insulted those who disagreed with her. I saw this as being defensive and a sign of losing any argument. Resorting to insults is just childish.

She couldn't explain why she held her (extreme) opinions, just said 'Well, that's what I believe!' I turned out that her 'views' belonged to her husband!

There are many things that I am not flexible on including my views on social justice, my views on morality /ethics, my basic religious beliefs, my views on racism in all its forms etc. I find myself lacking patience with those culpabley ignorant of issues that they express strong opinions on.

On the positive side, I made a career of change, changing work ideas, changing people's attitudes toward each other and their immediate environments etc. However my change of attitude towards the EU and its predecessors took place many years before Brexit, which I think is dishonorable action that is also aimed at further enriching those who have, damaging the weakest in society and will cause the final breakup of the UK.

Growstuff

Weakness may be the wrong word, I’ve always admired people, who are totally committed to a point of view, even if I’m completely opposed to it.

Sometimes, I’m not certain if I’ve changed my mind, or had it changed for me, or changed it not necessarily for the right reasons.

I think I know what you mean Sara. We're not creatures of pure reason and it's sometimes difficult to untangle our motivation for holding certain beliefs or acting in a certain way.

I don't think it's weak to change ones mind. I have a bit of a problem with people who stick to a certain ideology through thick and thin, when faced with evidence which contradicts the beliefs.

and if anything is about how set in their views many on this site are

Most people have views they adhere to. So what?
Many people are open to change or will listen to arguments and maybe accept there are other ways of looking at things. That's common too.
For others, some things are set in stone, and that's perfectly fine too.

Should it be any other way?

What suits one, does not suit another! Thankfully, freedom of thought and view hasn't yet been outlawed.

I don't think GN is any different and I am wondering what the point of the OP is?

I think it's an interesting topic for discussion.

Growstuff

I dislike and distrust, for example, politicians who appear to change their fundamental beliefs to attract votes, on the other hand, I think a politician should be open to new ideas, and be ready to do a U turn if necessary.

I think I do have an open mind over most things, I have changed my mind on occasion, but I’m concerned that this may be down to the eloquence of the persuader, rather than what I truly feel, maybe I’m just fickle.

I don't form my opinions based on forum post information. In fact I'm concerned at the effect of digital media on information transmission generally. People tend to pick up on headlines and soundbites and often don't research topics further.
Critical appraisal of sources should be a required subject at schools these days. It may well be studied by more academic pupils but it's likely that they aren't the ones likely to be swayed by an opinion read on Facebook or Twitter.
Re GN some opinions posted just make me want to form an opposite view as the posts are framed in such a virtual signalling way!

'So, not much chance of becoming active in the Labour Party at this point in time. '

yes, this has become very obvious lol - well not the last part. Your definition of 'VS' is very different to mine.

Jane10 I have a similar issue with some GN posts, although I suspect the posts which get my back up are towards the opposite end of the belief spectrum. BTW I don't like virtual signalling for its own sake either.

PS. I'm not entirely convinced some people aren't wind up merchants, but it's difficult to tell.

Jane10 It's a difficult one. Should only people with certain analytical skills be exposed to opinions?

It could be akin to unsolicited advice- Where even those that advocate against it fall into the trap-

It could also be that change goes unnoticed, perhaps because it's so slow or not even considered, so don't look for it-

One person's opinion can be presented and believed as fact. That's the problem.

It's interesting isn't it how as young people we are open minded and gradually the trap closes and we can't or won't take on new ideas.

I think some of the problem is, that we’re subjected to so many opinions from so many sources, it’s impossible to know who, if anyone is telling the absolute truth.

Even the really big issues, climate change , the NHS, education, if you hear ten people speak, you’ll possibly hear ten different opinions.

How are we meant to know who we can trust?

This reminds me of my dad. He always had strong views on everything and was very outspoken about them but even in his nineties if I disagreed with him or reasoned with him he found it easy to change his mind and accept what I was saying. The only thing he had real problems with was homosexuality. He could never quite get his head around it.

There sometimes isn't one right answer to the big issues, but people can be aware where they're coming from. For example, I have some quite definite views about the purpose of education which are different from other people's views. Therefore, I would come up with different solutions, but I could justify them. The NHS also throws up difficult issues. Resources are finite and somebody has the responsibility to share them out fairly. What's fair to one person doesn't always seem always fair to somebody else. I confess that I don't know enough about the details of climate change to have fixed views, so I listen and try to learn.

Sara65 There is a biblical quotation - "By their fruits ye shall know them" Many things can be clarified by asking ourselves "What would be the results of that?" and further, "What might be the results of that?" The answers could at least put us on the right track toward whether the thing proposed would be a Good Thing or a Bad Thing - and who it might be good or bad for.

Some things, for instance, might be good for money-lenders and financial speculators, but bad for those with no money who would end up as borrowers at who-knows-what interest, (and certainly with none spare to buy sterling cheap because what is proposed has caused it be cheap, but a later recovery will send the price up again so they can sell it dear)

I've never understood why Maggie was admired so much for her 'this lady's not for turning'. Why not? Fine if you're right all the time (who is) but if you've made an error of judgment surely you should be willing to reconsider and not dig in for the duration.

Maybe it's related to the old idea of a "stiff upper lip" colonial. I agree it's weird that being pig-headed and stubborn is seen as a virtue.

Re GN some opinions posted just make me want to form an opposite view as the posts are framed in such a virtual signalling way!

Virtual or virtue?

I've had 3 golliwogs for years, 2 were bought in a teashop in Broadway (Worcs)
They, a floppy dog and two teddies are my toys which sit on a bedroom shelf.

Virtue-signalling

That was to grapefruitpip

I've had 3 golliwogs for years, 2 were bought in a teashop in Broadway (Worcs)

...so that makes it, what? Ok? Not racist? Totally acceptable?