Attempting to change someone's opinion - is it ever right, is it ever possible?

MorkandMindy · Aug 16, 2015

Where I am now it seems necessary to change opinions especially with an election approaching and the real possibility of another war monger becoming President. So many voters are Christopaths - right wing Christians with lots of guns wanting to wage war on anyone even slightly different than themselves. They don't like countries that disagree with 'Murica'.

And plenty are on the offensive at home as well, blaming the behaviour of people in 'liberal' parts of the country for natural disasters in the Bible Belt states. Stirring up the Fundamentalists whose policies have failed in their own states, against the liberals who aren't doing quite as badly in other parts of the country.

But is disputing their opinions necessary and does it work?

I don't think it generally works. There has been plenty of research into which opinions people can change and which they fight for the death for. What people believe and how strongly is determined by the person's other beliefs and stands and how people are fed the information, and you just can't beat the media and the PR guys, they are the pros and they get people on their side and fully committed.

Is it necessary? Maybe not if the next generation learns from the one before. The people who voted to invade Iraq might want to stick to the opinion they told many people including their relatives on the topic, not wanting to 'flip flop'. But the next generation may learn from us for example that it isn't a good idea to invade a country without a clear idea of why, other than to make the Vice President very rich, and maybe they have also learned to be very skeptical of the so-called 'history' we were all taught over the years at school which form the foundation of our misunderstanding of the present.

As one generation slowly replaces another maybe attempting to change people's opinions is not necessary.

My present opinion is the most a person can do is to reinforce the beliefs of people who already agree and nothing more. Right in the depths of the Bible belt disagreeing isn't even safe.

Any ideas would be more than welcome.

MorkandMindy · Aug 29, 2015

There are two ways of approaching a new thought. One is easier, often more efficient and certainly easier on the ego and that is to ignore anything new and be able to say: 'I was right all along'. The other approach is to seriously investigate some new ideas in the hope of finally finding one that explains reality.

The second approach is only worth taking if you need to or if you want to.

MorkandMindy · Aug 29, 2015

In my case I was apolitical and had no opinion about the US election in 2000, or about the EU because I thought I knew the path I had to take.

My next obvious career step was out of engineering because the manufacturing base particularly in England was disappearing, so I was starting a computer science degree which for decades had paid more than engineering, in fact a programmer at work with a 2-year qualification and a year's experience was being paid the same as the head engineer with a Cambridge engineering degree and 18 year's experience.

It also seemed to make sense that as the bespoke industrial electronics could be replaced by standard multipurpose units programmed to do different tasks at a fraction of the cost, there would be an increased demand for programmers.

MorkandMindy · Aug 30, 2015

But somehow just a few months into the course the computing job market collapsed. I saw adverts for computing first line support desk staff at 14.5 k/year in contrast to ordinary telephone answering receptionists at 16.5 k. And a MIS I knew who had been on 70k had her contract terminated and had to sign a new one at 35k. The reason I was told was that so much programming and help desk work had been moved out to India.

So I decided that before investing a lot of time in retraining I had to look into the future. So I got involved in learning about international economics and politics for that reason and not because of any desire to prove this or that.

I could also live and work in either the US or the UK so wanted to compare the pros and cons of what are in many ways very similar countries, which in a few ways are also very different.

MorkandMindy · Aug 30, 2015

Picking up from the first point in the OP:

Where I am now it seems necessary to change opinions

.

Someone wrote in a different thread expressing disbelief or dislike of my description of the problem so I thought it might be an idea to post a short video taken over here.

It is a bit more extreme in the Bible Belt but not that much as I've heard most of the conservative christians here express the majority of the statements given in the video. And if you look around many parts of CF you will find the same stuff posted.

Watch and learn what is going on in the number one military power:

And if you still don't believe it then just listen to the leading Presidential candidate Donald Trump.

theFijian · Aug 31, 2015

Extreme views are just that, extreme. We know that you don't like american fundamentalist Christianity, so whose opinion are you seeking to change? I suspect nobody's, but why pass up another chance to air your own bigoted views?

:sleep:

ianb321red · Sep 18, 2015

Is this a post or a blog?
You need to get out a bit more...?

MorkandMindy · Sep 20, 2015

ianb321red said:
Is this a post or a blog?
You need to get out a bit more...?

More like a hopeless situation. People in England don't believe what happens here, and people here think England is a gang land of rampant gun fights now that only the criminals have guns.

People believe what they want to believe.

MorkandMindy · Sep 20, 2015

And I'm getting an ear bashing from Christians on both sides of the ocean for opposite reasons.

http://www.christianforums.com/threads/89.7870691/

theFijian · Sep 20, 2015

MorkandMindy said:
People believe what they want to believe.

Apart from you I suppose

Willie T · Sep 20, 2015

There is an old principle: You cannot "teach" anyone, anything. You can only lead them to the threshold of their own understanding.

MorkandMindy · Sep 20, 2015

Willie T said:
There is an old principle: You cannot "teach" anyone, anything. You can only lead them to the threshold of their own understanding.

I think you've got it there.

That principle corresponds with my understanding of learning in general, that things can be learned when they attach to other things the person already knows, so as you say, things that are at the threshold of their understanding.

Poster0 · Sep 20, 2015

Is this in the UK and Ireland forum? Anyway...

Politics are nothing but a worldly system, but not a holy one. Look at how it divides Christians. And for what? Its all a big lie. Do you honestly think that Democrats are holier than Republicans? Politics itself is not holy. Holiness is to separate ourselves from the world and to let our light shine apart from it. Politics are full of lies on all sides. How can we put Jesus name behind the Democratic or Republican Party? When we do that we only tarnish the pure and good news of the gospel. We tarnish it with the lies of politicians. Be separate says God. Be holy. Jesus kingdom isn't America and this world is not our home anymore.

Lets all stop supporting war, and any other political agenda. It only divides us over the lies and deception that politicians feed us.

If we free ourselves from unholy politics then we can not only love each other more, but we can actually see better too. Politics blinds us. Let go of this worldly strife and open your eyes. Christians can stand against the evil of the world, but we must do it behind Christ who is the way, truth and life. We cannot however do it behind a politician. That is folly.

Poster0 · Sep 20, 2015

Be separate says God.

2 Corinthians 6:14 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? 15 What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? Or what does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? 16 What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said:

“I will live with them
and walk among them,
and I will be their God,
and they will be my people.”[c]
17 Therefore,

“Come out from them
and be separate,
says the Lord.
Touch no unclean thing,
and I will receive you.”[d]
18 And,

“I will be a Father to you,
and you will be my sons and daughters,
says the Lord Almighty.”[e]

7:1 Therefore, since we have these promises, dear friends, let us purify ourselves from everything that contaminates body and spirit, perfecting holiness out of reverence for God.

Poster0 · Sep 20, 2015

The real war mongers are in every political party. Politics itself is nothing but strife and that is war. Jesus said that if we hate our brother then we are just like a murderer. You dont need to actually kill to be guilty of murder and you dont need to actually fight a war to be guilty of warmongering.

There is only one body of Christ. There are no politics in the body of Christ. There is only Christ, alone

MorkandMindy · Sep 20, 2015

Poster0 said:
Is this in the UK and Ireland forum? Anyway...

My reason is because the UK joined in on so many wars with the US. The war mongers here are now mainly just the Fundamentalist Christians, the ones who voted en bloc for G W Bush. A certain amount of the same thinking has infected UK Christianity and I think it is an error that needs to be distinguished from true Christianity.

Politics are nothing but a worldly system, but not a holy one.

I agree. Unfortunately we have a situation when I heard Billy Graham endorse G W Bush as a true Christian and the right candidate to vote for. A million people have died and 3 trillion dollars wasted because so many here base their politics on their religion

Look at how it divides Christians. And for what? Its all a big lie. Do you honestly think that Democrats are holier than Republicans? Politics itself is not holy. Holiness is to separate ourselves from the world and to let our light shine apart from it. Politics are full of lies on all sides. How can we put Jesus name behind the Democratic or Republican Party? When we do that we only tarnish the pure and good news of the gospel. We tarnish it with the lies of politicians. Be separate says God. Be holy. Jesus kingdom isn't America and this world is not our home anymore.

Lets all stop supporting war, and any other political agenda. It only divides us over the lies and deception that politicians feed us.

I totally agree. I had to start attending a J W hall to get out of the war mongering gun slinging Christians, and even that wasn't very successful because although they are conscientious objectors and don't vote, they avidly watch the news and cheer for their favourite war monger, well, I pointed out that is like Saul who didn't stone but held the cloaks of those who did. The J Ws were very happy to listen and talk with me which is a vast improvement on the mainstream fundies who would by then have been metaphorically picking up stones.

If we free ourselves from unholy politics then we can not only love each other more, but we can actually see better too. Politics blinds us. Let go of this worldly strife and open your eyes. Christians can stand against the evil of the world, but we must do it behind Christ who is the way, truth and life. We cannot however do it behind a politician. That is folly.

Totally.

Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.

Poster0 · Sep 21, 2015

MorkandMindy said:
My reason is because the UK joined in on so many wars with the US. The war mongers here are now mainly just the Fundamentalist Christians, the ones who voted en bloc for G W Bush. A certain amount of the same thinking has infected UK Christianity and I think it is an error that needs to be distinguished from true Christianity. I agree. Unfortunately we have a situation when I heard Billy Graham endorse G W Bush as a true Christian and the right candidate to vote for. A million people have died and 3 trillion dollars wasted because so many here base their politics on their religion I totally agree. I had to start attending a J W hall to get out of the war mongering gun slinging Christians, and even that wasn't very successful because although they are conscientious objectors and don't vote, they avidly watch the news and cheer for their favourite war monger, well, I pointed out that is like Saul who didn't stone but held the cloaks of those who did. The J Ws were very happy to listen and talk with me which is a vast improvement on the mainstream fundies who would by then have been metaphorically picking up stones.

Totally.

Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.

Yes however you are endorsing the Democratic party. How is that better, or any different? It was a Democratic President who dropped the Atom bomb on Japanese civilians. It was a Democrat who got america involved in the Vietnam and Korean wars as well. It was the democratic party who also started the civil war when they apposed the abolition of slavery and then started the confederacy. Yet democrats are always apposing those very things. Isn't the DNC pointing at the splinter in the eye of the GOP while failing to see the log in its own?

MorkandMindy · Sep 21, 2015

Hi Poster zero (?)

I don't watch the news or read papers, and I don't side with any party.

What I appreciate about the ideology of the JWs includes not endorsing any candidate by voting for them. The trap I think they would fall into is then feeling guilty for anything the President they voted for then did and would then I presume, feel the need to 'put their money where their mouth is' and join the military to back whatever war the guy they voted for started.

The trick many people have missed is there are in reality about 4 Republican ideologies, and at least 3 Democrat ones, one of which matches one of the Republican ones and that happens to be the one I think would be the best for the country. As you pointed out the Democrat Party started the wars up to about 1972 when the mantle passed over to the Republican party. The reason was the petroleum industry switched to the Republican Party at that point which then became the New Republican Party, but rather than risk losing most of their supporters, they pretend to be the 'small government party of the individual' still, while the supporters complain about every President after Nixon being a 'Rino'. I would count Gerald Ford also as a true Republican of the old pre '72 GOP variety. I would have picked Nixon over LBJ hands down in the 60s.

I do know that this is just a matter of judgement and I do not confuse my judgement with empirical fact. I am also aware there are a multitude of factors, some not yet known which ideally should be taken into account.

Poster0 · Sep 21, 2015

MorkandMindy said:
Hi Poster zero (?)

I don't watch the news or read papers, and I don't side with any party.

What I appreciate about the ideology of the JWs includes not endorsing any candidate by voting for them. The trap I think they would fall into is then feeling guilty for anything the President they voted for then did and would then I presume, feel the need to 'put their money where their mouth is' and join the military to back whatever war the guy they voted for started.

The trick many people have missed is there are in reality about 4 Republican ideologies, and at least 3 Democrat ones, one of which matches one of the Republican ones and that happens to be the one I think would be the best for the country. As you pointed out the Democrat Party started the wars up to about 1972 when the mantle passed over to the Republican party. The reason was the petroleum industry switched to the Republican Party at that point which then became the New Republican Party, but rather than risk losing most of their supporters, they pretend to be the 'small government party of the individual' still, while the supporters complain about every President after Nixon being a 'Rino'. I would count Gerald Ford also as a true Republican of the old pre '72 GOP variety. I would have picked Nixon over LBJ hands down in the 60s.

I do know that this is just a matter of judgement and I do not confuse my judgement with empirical fact. I am also aware there are a multitude of factors, some not yet known which ideally should be taken into account.

You have identified yourself as a US democrat, and have been pointing criticism at the GOP. Im not sure why you now say that you dont side with any political party.

Poster0 · Sep 21, 2015

Yes, thats a Zero, not the letter "o" on the end of my user name.

Attempting to change someone's opinion - is it ever right, is it ever possible?

Andrew Yang's Forward Party

Andrew Yang's Forward Party

Andrew Yang's Forward Party

Andrew Yang's Forward Party

Andrew Yang's Forward Party

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Andrew Yang's Forward Party

Andrew Yang's Forward Party

Well-Known Member

St. Petersburg Vineyard

Andrew Yang's Forward Party

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Andrew Yang's Forward Party

Well-Known Member

Andrew Yang's Forward Party

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads