umnut wrote...
Do this, look at this, listen to this, it's the new trend!
I'm not much of a social person myself, and I have always been a very strong believer in making your own choices. Still though, I don't think this point belongs in a post about narrow mindedness. I think your real point in here is the people that cave to peer pressure and do things that they really don't want to do for the sake of being accepted, which falls under the same note as your point on people being diplomatic:
umnut wrote...
Talk nicely and politely... be diplomatic.
Both points though are a matter of perspective though. There are issues that you compromise yourself on as well, for the sake of other people’s perceptions. They are simply different issues, but all the same you manage to see one and not the other, and then pat yourself on the back for being supposedly a better and stronger individual than everyone else (which ironically is still playing to other people's perceptions, just in a different way). Even if you are a better and stronger person, you have to realize that on some level you cultivate this persona because of the feeling of superiority that it gives you, and how that in turn will be perceived by others.
The only truely narrow-minded aspect of both of these statements is that you posted them in a thread ranting about narrow-mindedness. I think Japman19 says it best in his post above mine when he talks about point B.
For proof that there are issues you compromise on as well, although I am sure there are many, I think your point about religion serves well. Your stance of "we don't know anything" is quite clearly a very diplomatic position, which, Ironically, it is also a position that is popular with people who don't know what to think, most probably because everyone is telling them something different and they can't make up their own minds.
To clarify, I also believe that when you don't know something for certain, it is best to believe that you are uncertain. But when it comes down to the facts, there is lots of observational evidence to support the claim that traditional religion is a load of nonsense, and I personally think the likely hood of there being some other greater being that carries enough resemblance to the 'god' depicted in traditional religion or western ideology to be referred to as such is fairly small (bordering on slim to none). Now admittedly, it is always best not to discount even a small possibility, but I wouldn't base an argument on it either.
But back to the topic of diplomacy and telling the truth. The truth about telling the truth, is that it is much harder to know when it is best to keep your mouth shut. I also used to believe it was best to always tell the truth, and I still think that in most cases this is true, but there are some times when it is wiser to say nothing at all, or tell a white lie if forced. As a rule, things that are tied closely to emotions and only emotions tend to be the only ones I feel ever warrant this category. For example, telling someone what you really think of them just because they asked is not always a good thing to do. Knowing when and how to be subtle is infinitely harder than simply blurting out the truth, and something that has frequently gotten me in trouble in the past (especially with women).
My main point in all of this, is that while it is good to have strong beliefs and ideologies, it is important to remember that the world isn't ideal. I can sympathize with lots of your points, but I think that they are, in spite of everything, also very narrow-minded. The truth is that to be human is to be a hypocrite. This is not a new development in humanity, or something that is likely to change. In light of that, it is again, much harder to know when to compromise on an issue and when to fight about it. I think you would find that if there was no diplomacy, this world would be a far worse place than the one that it is today.