As an agnostic, I've valued open-mindedness and I try to make sure that it's part of the way I form a viewpoint on something.
The most effective way I've found to integrate open-mindedness into my views and conclusions is by not being needlessly restrictive. I often see people come up with a view to explain something and it usually follows one track - either this happened or that happened. It's as if there's little room for any other viewpoint in between. In contrast, I usually try to come up with a view that's flexible - one that leaves the door open for a wide range of other viewpoints (ones that aren't obviously false). Sometimes this may involve coming up with a view that falls down the middle or that's moderate or ones that accommodate viewpoints from both sides of an issue.
For instance, you might have an atheist that concludes that Jesus's resurrection was a myth. The Christian might say no, it was a real occurrence. If I'm not yet convinced either way, then I can formulate a view involving some of it being true and other parts are myth. The benefit of having such a view is that I can incorporate evidence from both sides and this obviously helps me not get stuck in the single track type of thinking on matters where no one has really proven their case (although there may be strong points on both sides), assuming it can be proven at all.
Now this is not to say that agnostics and others should stay stuck on having views that are flexible, but I do think they are good starting point and you can progress from there as you find more evidence.
Feel free to share any ideas or experiences on good ways to be open-minded when analyzing a view or coming up with a viewpoint.
The most effective way I've found to integrate open-mindedness into my views and conclusions is by not being needlessly restrictive. I often see people come up with a view to explain something and it usually follows one track - either this happened or that happened. It's as if there's little room for any other viewpoint in between. In contrast, I usually try to come up with a view that's flexible - one that leaves the door open for a wide range of other viewpoints (ones that aren't obviously false). Sometimes this may involve coming up with a view that falls down the middle or that's moderate or ones that accommodate viewpoints from both sides of an issue.
For instance, you might have an atheist that concludes that Jesus's resurrection was a myth. The Christian might say no, it was a real occurrence. If I'm not yet convinced either way, then I can formulate a view involving some of it being true and other parts are myth. The benefit of having such a view is that I can incorporate evidence from both sides and this obviously helps me not get stuck in the single track type of thinking on matters where no one has really proven their case (although there may be strong points on both sides), assuming it can be proven at all.
Now this is not to say that agnostics and others should stay stuck on having views that are flexible, but I do think they are good starting point and you can progress from there as you find more evidence.
Feel free to share any ideas or experiences on good ways to be open-minded when analyzing a view or coming up with a viewpoint.
Last edited:
