Simple question, not so simple answers.

Re: Simple question, not so simple answers.

Yes ... I mean, no!

I see both sides on many issues. But those on which I do take sides are the result of personal experience and/or considerable internal debate. So, no, I do not change those opinions easily. It takes an extremely strong argument or personal experience to the contrary to make me admit I was wrong. It rarely happens.

Re: Simple question, not so simple answers.

Having trouble deciding on what's for supper, dys?

I can admit when I'm wrong.

Except when someone is breathing down my neck badgering me to just admit that I'm wrong. I can't do it if it brings others satisfaction that I'd rather deprive them of.

I admit being wrong fairly often. Did it today on a2k, but since I've been posting a lot today, I already forget the issue, fairly small in import. On my opinions on politics and religion, I have tuned them over the years, and when I tweak the opinions it usually isn't from someone yelling (heh, with big colored letters) in my face, but from a sentence or two that stick with me. I might not change right away, but may inculcate that sentence into my own filigreed network of opinions if I can work adjustments. Some of the old opinion may go, and the new come in, or notches will happen off of both. And plenty of times there is no change.

I have a past situation with a person I worked with closely. I would argue one way, she another. I would think I "lost" since her personality is by far more adamant than mine, and why was she so condescending, anyway?

Then two weeks later, I hear her being adamant to someone else with my point of view. If I spoke up and said something in agreement, she'd act like, of course, you agree with me. Crazymaking, but part of human nature. Absorption isn't always immediate, or the origin of change understood.

I've also had people's quiet certitude about something I was thinking about thinking about, if you follow me, push me over into more thinking about whatever the subject was, even as I verbally disagreed at the time.

Re admission that I'm wrong, my effort may be in the other direction, that since I see many nuances, and don't articulate them fast, as some on a2k can, jumping in where I can, I appear even to myself as wishy washy, too ready to be wrong. But that's not correct, or mostly not.

I've some uber strong views that I don't bother to get into routinely. I've been here a long time and have expressed most of them at least once. I don't always get the repetitive wheelies happening here - or if I do, a newbie asking this and that, I don't often want to go there. Haven't mastered being acerbic, and am not out to save the world with my words.

Indeed, I am somewhat amazed at the tenor of needing to win that happens in discussion, as opposed to needing to share nuance of thought on either or more of many sides of a point. Not that I mind good debate.
But the bludgeoning thing, how unuseful is it?

I dunno dys. I do know I like the recent shift in one of the abortion threads, as it seems people are beginning to listen to each other a bit more.

It can difficult to listen. I catch myself losing sight of what is actually going on, even though it is much more interesting once a few new ideas start flowing into this thick skull.

keep the peace dys.

On the higher issues, I admit to getting details wrong quite often. But not the essence of it.