The Paradox of Open Mindedness
 |
| Dualism at it's most sentimental and least truthful... |
One of the catch all phrases of modern paganism is OPEN MINDEDNESS. I myself am not immune to it's use, because it implies something that I feel is positive, in moderation. This post is about what happens when Open Mindedness becomes something less positive, and in some cases transforms itself into it's exact opposite.
“Beware: open-mindedness will often say, 'Everything is permissible except a sharp opinion.”
― Criss Jami
Positive open mindedness needs a heavy dose of discretion. Negative open mindedness can be summed up by the phrase, "If you stand for nothing, you will fall for anything." This is the paradox of open mindedness. If we increase open mindedness to a level that encompasses all perceived reality, we cannot truly believe anything. Why? Because extreme open mindedness is close mindedness. If all beliefs and all perceptions are viewed as truth, even contradictions, are negated. If all conclusions are right, then all conclusions are wrong, no matter the starting point. Every idea has an opposite, and if all ideas are right, the opposites negate each other. In the complete absence of judgement, there is only chaos.
I am a pagan and a heathen. I do not speak of judgement as the apocalyptic notion of right and wrong. I am speaking of the intelligence of man and woman, the ability of the human mind to consider, think critically, and draw a PERSONAL conclusion from observation and experience.
― G.K. Chesterton, What I Saw in America
I have been attacked several time in interacting with other pagans for stating opinions which were perfectly logical, simply because they implied a PERSONAL belief in a moral judgement. I have been labeled as close minded for bringing attention to glaring ignorance, and told that to be open minded I must accept that what I view as ignorance should not be mentioned, simply because it is a personal judgement. Yet does the implied need of others for me to hold my tongue not imply a close mindedness on their own part?
Are we to hold our tongues against blatant ignorance simply because another individual might not feel the slight? Is injustice to be born simply for the purpose of harboring an ideal that in itself is a paradox? Are we to languish in silence, and hoard or own knowledge, simply for a false ideal which has no logical solution?
What is the purpose of learning in the face of extreme open mindedness? What are we striving to learn when at the end of our days we can never claim anything is truth? I am sorry but the concept that any and every thought and idea is correct and acceptable to someone is no logical argument for the acceptance of ignorance which might harm another human being, or degrade them.
― Flannery O'Connor
This fluffy bunny blend of extreme tolerance and acceptance infuriates me. Such open mindedness is simply the tool of a fool to masquerade as a wise, enlightened soul. It is a no fail diversion used by the uneducated to belittle those who possess intelligence, when they have been outwitted and have nothing more of value to add. Oh, let me just call this person close minded, since I possess no other reply or knowledge that is of value...
So what is real, positive open mindedness? It is not the blind acceptance of another view simply because it exists. I would venture to say that open mindedness is not even a quality, but rather an interaction of mental and emotional processes which is in constant flux, and when they are balanced, at that moment alone are we truly open minded.
Openess is a balance between intuitive personal truth (emotions and experienced knowledge) and a mental willingness to learn, experience, and draw conclusions based on the combination of both. It is our own ability to have faith that we are in a constant state of growth and change, and be willing to accept the fact nothing is static, including ourselves. Openess is not the absence of a firm foothold of strongly held beliefs, it is acceptance that truth is subjective, and a willingness to engage and learn from others even if some off our own beliefs are proved false as a result.
There is absolutely no shame in holding experientially confirmed convictions, and fighting for them, against ignorance. Judgement, on a personal level, has an important purpose. It enables us to shape and guide our lives towards our goals, our truth, our happiness in this world. Judgement enables us to choose which road to travel, what will lead to a better future for ourselves and our kin.
This fluffy bunny open-mindedness is simply ignorance in disguise. It is a personal projecting of a circular concept onto a linear gradation. It is the view that open mindedness is at one end of a spectrum and close mindedness is at another. The truth is that true open mindedness is not at one end. It is in the middle. And what fluffies call "open mindedness," a true heathen knows is but COWARDICE.
It is but a niding who says "all things are permissable."
In Frith,
Cena
Great post Cena. I agree with a lot of what you said. I am an open-minded person yet, I do have my own opinions as well. There is nothing wrong with sharing my opinion even if others do not agree. That is Freedom of speech, no? There are some who claim to be open-minded yet I have found them to be more close-minded when it comes to Heathens. I believe they fear us, yet I may be wrong. Anything out of "their" norm, is wrong. Shake it off, you did well by sticking to your guns. There are many more around you who do in fact, appreciate your opinion. We may disagree but we won't attack. Have an awesome day my Vanatru girlie!
ReplyDeleteVery strange you should mention that Brenda because I felt much the same, as if for some reason they have a fear of heathens. This post was something that had been brewing for awhile, that whole debacle just kind of gave me the fire to finally say something. I just can't accept the fact that people believe open mindedness gives them a free pass to draw conclusions without supporting them. I have been working my ass of for two years now academically. If someone is going to have a common discussion, that's fine. But if you are going to claim a concept or idea is truth, I just feel it is lazy and disrespectful to not do your homework. To label someone as close minded because they expect that is a farce.
ReplyDeleteMakes me curious how you feel about censorship of statements that coincide with your statement here:
ReplyDelete"Are we to hold our tongues against blatant ignorance simply because another individual might not feel the slight?"
To me this would mean that you are against censorship of a persons opinion or views on a subject. Maybe I am wrong, or am misunderstanding your choice of words when you state "are we to hold our tongues... because another individual might not feel the slight?"
I can tell you that while I don't follow your pantheon of Gods I hold no fear of them or those that worship them. As a matter of fact I am concerned with what I have found related to your belief system because it seems very closed to additional interpretations of your Gods, in a way it almost seems like a Polytheist Christianity in the way specific information is coveted and considered "truth" over others description of truth.
The cold hard fact is a majority of Pagan/Heathen religions do not have a single truth due to the fact that the stories were passed via word of mouth and communal story telling (since the origins are based in fairly illiterate cultures and only the power wielders truly held the knowledge of reading and writing). So this means that each village may have a variant on the pantheons, so to hold one truth greater than others when it comes to Pagan/Heathen religions is to claim willful ignorance and blind faith... something typically reserved for those that worship a single "book of absolute truth" over the experience and understanding of others with similar paths.
So in the end, while I may agree with the theme of your post, I find your execution to be a bit off. Basically you are committing the same logical fallacy as many monotheists, where they believe that if you do not agree with them in belief you are absolutely wrong. Slippery slope you seem to be try to climb there. But believe me, when you're ready to reach out for a hand, "Open minded" Pagan/Heathen's will likely be the ones to toss you a life line... hopefully you are not so caught up in your version of right and wrong to assume it will be let go when it begins to bare your weight.
Thank you for your response. I am sorry that you were confused utterly by the meaning and intent of this post. I am quite comfortable with the execution, and as of yet have received no other complaints about the execution of the piece or suggested logical fallacies.
ReplyDeleteIf you believe heathenry to be a close minded faith, you are quite mistaken. Their is little similarity between heathenry and polytheist Christian dogma. Heathens do not believe in dualism, therefore right and wrong is subjective to the independent individual and its community.
Patronizing offers of future assistance are irrelevant. I am quite assured that I shall have no need for reaching out my hands to any of a closed mind parading about as wise men as women. I have quite enough individuals of many faiths in my life who actually know something of me and my lives whose hands would never forsake me.
In Frith,
Cena
When I stated that, it was not of intent of "heathenry" or of everyone of heathen belief, instead, of the method in which you are presenting your belief system. To base your belief off of any text is asking for trouble in my opinion. I realize heathen beliefs are nothing like christianity, but to claim certainty from a book is committing the same mistake that most see christians making. These texts were not written by those you worship but instead interpreted by a man/woman who is fallible and may not have all of the information but still wrote those texts as factual based on the information they had available to them.
ReplyDeleteAs I said, I was not speaking of your religious views, so please don't consider my statements as casting a wide net, and remember, "heathen religion" encompasses more than just the Vanir belief system, it also covers many Shamanic and Druidic beliefs from the Germanic area and north to west Europe. It has also been used to classify Native American beliefs due to their belief in power wielders being those imbued with knowledge, so such a wide net should never be cast in my opinion, instead I can only speak of those that act as the voice of the belief system.
As far as "Patronizing offers of future assistance are irrelevant." this is like stating "I will never need/heed words of wisdom from anyone outside of my own belief system because there are people in my belief system." If you have ever heard a proverb and said "hey that's a sound piece of advice." or anything to the likes of that, you have refuted this statement, not all wisdom will be imparted through a belief system, instead cultural knowledge can impart just as much wisdom without having religious ties. I'll use a for instance, if you find logic in this phrase: "An it harm none, do as ye will." you have been imparted with wisdom from outside of your belief system. Just because you consider these people to be illogical and closed minded does not mean they cannot impart wisdom or factual information, to close yourself off from this type of people is to stand in a corner with your hands held to your ears screaming "LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" due to the fact your are surrounded by these people everyday and interacting with such people.
Wisdom does not depend on a linear view of logic but instead a willingness to listen and learn from all forms of knowledge and experience.
An example of this is the phrase:
“What should young people do with their lives today? Many things, obviously. But the most daring thing is to create stable communities in which the terrible disease of loneliness can be cured.” (Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.)
This phrase speaks great volumes to me because Vonnegut states he comes from a long line of German Freethinkers, and claimed to be an Atheist, yet he understood the power of acceptance and sharing of knowledge as a form of unifying a community. To turn your back on other "heathen" or "pagan" religions is like shutting out a collective of hundreds of years of knowledge and experience that can allow you to grow and understand the universe around you. I speak not from spite but instead from concern that your choice of defining these people will leave you in the dark about experiential understanding from outside world views, and is also a self refuting statement, because those that you consider "extreme opened minded people" are often those that make the most profound discoveries whether it be religious or scientific, and your very wide net catches more than you probably intend.
My last point for this post is your dismissive nature, if you want to be taken serious you should not dismiss any logical assessment when it comes to your statements, in doing so you refuse the opportunity to view yourself through another persons eyes as well as an opportunity to grow as an individual. From my perspective of the world, I value the comments from people I don't know more than those from people I do know, because it allows me to express myself better to a larger audience, since my friends know how to "read between the lines". So to base your ability to work your way through a dark time or a time where your understanding may need to evolve, on people that already know you and follow your similar thought patterns is to commit the logical fallacy of begging the question. You are using circular reasoning, presupposing that those people that "know you" will know the answer to the question you need answered, and to cast such a far reaching net as to assume it will never happen is self refuting due to the fact that much of our current world society has been based off of morals and values not in tune with your own belief system. For instance I know a big piece of heathen philosophy is "The strong shall rule the weak." instead in current cultural society we must adhere to the tenant of "we are no stronger than our weakest link." and this is true in all forms of society. It is not something you can get away from, meaning that you live your life in a way that disagrees with your belief system, and to deny this would be to deny a majority of the world around you as being valid. Which unless you live your life away from society and without such conveniences you must adhere to this logic that dismisses your own.
ReplyDeleteAlso, your statement "...whose hands would never forsake me." assumes that a person you have already deemed as "willing to accept anything." as someone that would forsake you, this seems like a self refuting statement. It seems to me like you are committing another logical fallacy of equivocation, you are using transference to place your lack of acceptance on someone you have already deemed incapable of refusing others views as legitimate.
I wish you well and hope you will have the ability to absorb the wisdom that may be imparted to you through others experience even if you choose to hold these people in contempt. I also hope your contempt for these other people may find temperance through understanding that they do not commit harm to you unless you allow their beliefs to point you down a path that is not your own, and by your own definition of these people, that seems impossible due to the fact that they have no choice, but to accept your path as being as valid as their own.
You may view things as you wish. This blog is open to all, yet designed for a specific audience. The fact of the matter is that on the whole you know little to nothing of my personal beliefs, though you seem to think you have a grasp of them, how I do not know? But it is irrelevant.
ReplyDeleteI never have and never will claim that my path is the only or right one. Those who know me and have engaged with me realize this. The fact of the matter is that you know NOTHING of what I believe. I admin several groups which are welcome and inclusive of any and every path which interacts with germanic gods. In these groups is everything from Norse wiccans, eclectics, hardcore recons, and everything in between. We encourage any and every view.
However in your own perceived need to somehow "educate" me, you have made the fatal mistake of coming here claiming things about my individual beliefs which are but your own assumptions. You know nothing of me. You have yet to provide any example from anywhere which illustrates me stating that my beliefs are right, above anyone else. In face, if you had bothered to do your homework, you would realize that I make quite certain to state that a personal opinion is my own whenever I post anything which may differ from the beliefs of another.
You have your view and I have mine. There is no need to debate this further. Neither view is wrong or right. They simply represent two separate paradigms of understanding the world. I apologize if you feel that my possessing an opinion of my own is somehow an affront to yours.
I feel no contempt for anyone simply because their views differ from my own. I welcome different views, as I always have. But I do have contempt for those who would try to censor my words when I speak out on a legitimate claims which represent harmful ignorance about ANY individuals spiritual path. I have no need for their company or help.My only wish is that the Gods might give them the wisdom to discern ignorance in all its forms, and courage to speak and act against it.
In Frith
Cena
Again, and this is really the only point I care to make at this point because you seem to validate my other statements... I never once stated that your beliefs were wrong or that they represented what you speak, but instead I spoke to how you present yourself to an outsider via the words of this post. You're right I have not read your entire blog, or fully educated myself on your specific belief system. I also never intended nor stated that you needed "educated" about YOUR beliefs but I did make a reminder that the term "heathen religion" spreads far and was using that statement to tell you I had no intention of casting such a wide net because that would in fact be ignorant because each of those beliefs, as you know, are vastly different from one another. I am happy that you have welcomed those people within your circle, but again, that's not what I was attempting to bring into question here.
ReplyDeleteI apologize if you have taken offense to the fact that I am telling you what it seems like for you to openly condemn a whole group of people, but the fact of the matter is, all anyone outside of your "circle" reads is a script of contempt. My words were not meant to insult you or make you feel that I am belittling your views, but I do find it concerning that you jumped immediately to a defensive stance assuming that I have come to attack you for what ever reason. So again, know, I have no issue with your beliefs, but what I do have issue with is the desire you state of you not being belittled or condemned due to your, yet having no issue openly condemning others for their beliefs, this is not an issue with your beliefs. And I know this because I have known a few people that follow the Vanir beliefs... I will happily mirror the statement you made (with a slight additive of my own), please don't jump to conclusions because "The fact of the matter is that on the whole you know little to nothing of my personal beliefs..."
In the end, I only wish for open communication within our community and things like this post reflect very negatively on what is typically a very accepting and open community. As well as, your attempt to make it seem that I am condemning your belief, which I am not, is an issue I have as well, but that can be saved for a different day because I know I have no issue with your beliefs simply because they are not mine and do not cause me harm.
I hope you have a wonderful day and maybe when you are willing to come back with a less critical view of my words, you re-read them, because they were placed there out of concern for the message you offer, not the notion that you have expressed.
Very enjoyable post. I've certainly seen the invidious side of "open mindedness" you describe. It seems to me that this tactic is, at its heart, an attempt to control others by not allowing them their own boundaries. The self-appointed arbitrator of "open mindedness" takes it upon him or herself to define what matters to others. Such an underhanded way of conducting relationships negates any hope for genuine understanding, connection, or respect. It is, as you write, cowardice.
ReplyDeleteThe point is it is assuming of you to feel "concerned" about the content of this blog. You are not a moderator of the content here, and those who read this blog are perfectly capable of making their own decisions about what is valid to them. For someone so "open-minded," you seem to feel a strange need to impose your "concerns" onto others.
ReplyDeleteI have perused your own blog as well, and if I'm honest I find some of your own posts "concerning." However I have the sense not to comment about their execution, for the simple fact that it is NOT MY PLACE. If you had asked questions about whatever happened to bother you about the post, or asked for clarification, I would have been more than willing to engage with those comments.
However I am content in the knowledge that you are simply angry little troll who has decided to post upon a blog which has nothing whatever to do with you own beliefs simply because you felt dismissed by the fact that I deleted your comments on my personal page on another site. And surprise surprise, you have decided to post the same patronizing, assumptive comments here as the ones which caused me to delete your posts in the first place.
The execution of your discourse is a little off. Good Day.
Again you take my statements as an attack... this is sad because I had full intent on reading more of your blog and inquiring more about the Vanir, because as I said, I have known others that follow such beliefs, they had a bit of a different approach to it. I must say that I find the link (http://waincraft.org/) that had been provided on the website that you mentioned interesting. It has been my first step towards understanding your world view.
DeleteI am still curious why you believe I am attacking you?
I have no ill feelings towards you and the event that you are speaking of I had little to no presence in the decision or the causation. As is I honestly know little about the situation as a whole, after the 2nd post of mine you deleted I did not return to the situation, I had no reason to, and neither comment were intended to attack or belittle, so making an assumption that I would be attacking you with little to no information on what you were speaking of initially is presumptuous. But that's not the issue at this point, I made no effort to have that situation come to the point it did, and I came here because I had followed your link to your blog out of curiosity not spite.
So, I guess my main question, in relation to the issue presented in your post is:
If you can be too open minded, what is a valid definition in your world view of open minded, since most consider it to be without boundaries of acceptance?
Again, this is not to cause contempt between the two of us but rather understanding. I would be happy to open a civil dialog with you, if you are willing, but if you continue to assume I am here as an offensive tactic, believe me, I have much better things to do, instead as I said I am fully interested in an open and civil dialog.
Orderinthequartz, I am sorry my comment to the previous poster came up directly under yours. I am glad you enjoyed the post. And I agree wholeheartedly with your comments. =)
ReplyDeleteIf you are truly interested in my meaning, then I can discuss that. I do not feel that most people view open-mindedness as a willingness to forgo all boundaries of acceptance. To have personal boundaries is not equal to being close minded.
ReplyDeleteI spoke of balance between personal truth and openness to knowledge. My view is that people make a mistake when they assume that their own morality is absolute truth,and another's is wrong. My view is that each individual, regardless of the traditions which inform it, ultimately make the choices of belief and behavior which is in essence their personal morality. In my view personal morality is a choice that we all have the right to make for ourselves.
The conflict comes when that ownership (personal morality) comes into conflict with idealism about right versus wrong.The belief in this type of dualism in itself is a personal choice. It is unproven and subjective. My belief informs me that to label anything consisting wholly of the quality of right or wrong and to prove such is so is impossible. It is a false classification.
If I accept the fact that to be open minded means that all views are valid, in essence I am claiming that all things are true. Yet there is not an individual on this planet who possesses that quality, because it inhibits life itself. For example, a serial killer might believe it is perfectly fine to kill any individual at random. A racist might believe it is perfectly acceptable to discriminate and punish another because they possess a certain skin tone. A rapist might view women/men as objective tools to fulfill sexual desire.
If I possess ultimate open mindedness, then I in a sense accept EVERY view, is valid. It is my belief that such an extreme form of open mindedness is harmful.Therefore, condemning another for not holding the same view that "all things are valid" is in a sense advocating a harmful way of thinking as well as living. This is not how I believe a logical individual would define "open mindeness," in the positive sense.
A moral compass is what we use to discern value and validity. It is not static. True open mindedness is the ability to discern what is personally truthful to us, yet in the same sense accepting that each individual we come into contact with has their own view of morality. It is also accepting the fact that all beliefs, including our own, must be cultivated by outside knowledge in order to develop the mind and spirit to their full potential. True open mindedness is the willingness to expose ourselves to alternate views, in the hope that we will be a bit wiser for it.
Since our moral compass is subjective, we must also know that as our knowledge and experience grow, so will our personal morality. We will be exposed to situations on a daily basis that will either confirm or deny what we feel we "know" to be true.
I do not feel that openmindedness as a positive quality means "all things are valid." I define it as the ability we have to be open to all knowledge, and willing to examine it before we negate it. Open mindedness should not be about validity. It is about finding and seeking knowledge in a way that is accepting of the inherent differences of belief within all.
"I do not feel that openmindedness as a positive quality means "all things are valid." I define it as the ability we have to be open to all knowledge, and willing to examine it before we negate it. Open mindedness should not be about validity. It is about finding and seeking knowledge in a way that is accepting of the inherent differences of belief within all."
DeleteI truly like this statement. It sums up my personal assessment of open mindedness also. I agree that accepting all claims as valid is a cop-out to deflect confrontation. You mentioned you checked out my blog, my blog is meant to keep cop-outs from happening anymore, I desire to stand up, to those trying to keep alternative beliefs "swept under the rug", and make alternative beliefs heard and better understood. I have taken the battle to those that would try to claim we are just imagining our claims or that we have no validity because we "don't have a special book".
Now you might notice there are two different writing styles on my blog, one of the writers is actually an Atheist, I like to have multiple views published across my blog due to the fact that I find understanding and knowledge gain as the only method of tuning my personal beliefs to my current lifestyle and choices, that's the reason for the name "Evolution of Skepticism" I refuse to blindly accept anyones claims, instead I find taking a critical and skeptical point of view to ones claims is the only way to get the truth.
I definitely appreciate you taking the time to reply to my question and hope to continue gaining a better understanding of your world view. I will forewarn you that some of my posts may be worded in a challenging way, but that is more out of curiosity and for me to gain better understanding rather than attempting to refute your statement.
thanks again for your reply and a more elaborate version of your point of view.
Now, considering all this, I feel it is ignorant to deny the ability of an individual to possess their own opinion is an affront to common decency. To label another's opinion as unacceptable according to my own views on the definition of open mindedness, is logically equivocal to closemindedness. In essence by saying, you should not say that, they are in essence making a moral judgement upon me as well, therefore to label me as closeminded in that instance is hypocrisy itself.
ReplyDeleteThis is why I deleted my profile, and said comments. I was making a statement of personal opinion, directed at no one specifically. Instead of addressing the content of said comment, what was addressed was my own action of mentioning it. Which in itself is assumptive considering the whole of my belief or knowledge of my character (our anyone elses) cannot be implied in a single statement. I felt that the level of assumption in deleted responses was close minded and in fact insulting. Which is why I chose deletion rather than a long drawn out debate over a trifle.
I have no contempt for anyone, if I have anything it is sadness that I was unable to to interact more on said site because those who are ultimately in charge decided after two posts that my opinions deserved a constant attack on their assumptive knowing of my character rather than an attempt to discuss any relevant topics whatsoever. I chose to leave, as I did not find the content I was looking for there, and so felt that the gained knowledge could not outweigh the negative interactions with a few members.
I am sure it is a place in which many find value, though I personally found my own views did not match the intention of the sites creators. That is all I can say on the matter.
As I said, other than the situation between you and I, I had no clue what was happening between you and anyone else. I had no hand in anything related to the situation and didn't even know what was going on until after it happened.
DeleteI do appreciate your feedback on what happened as well as the ability to continue to share and learn about your world view because from the original post I read of yours I was intrigued and hoping to gain a better understanding of your point of view.
thanks again and I hope you have a wonderful evening!