Viewpoints should always be checked

Have you ever been in a debate where you’re running in circles with your verbal sparring partner, each refusing to give the other an inch? I’m sure you have. It happens in almost every single argument, and it’s absolutely infuriating.

I’ve noticed this disturbing trend when it comes to serious debates amongst my peers. People refuse to admit they’re wrong, even when irrefutable facts shoot down their arguments. Even worse, some people take pride in their refusal to change their stance on important issues, as if proudly asserting their flawed belief somehow makes them a strong person. That absurd concept is not only foolish, but is also detrimental to society.

On smaller issues, refusing to consider other people’s beliefs is merely foolish. It’s frustrating trying to debate sports with someone who blindly touts their favorite player, no matter what statistics say, but no significant damage is done to either party. As the topics scale larger, however, the damage of ignorantly standing by factually incorrect assumptions becomes more and more catastrophic.

Just the other day, for example, I read a discussion on the Bible as a historical text in Bill Nye’s book “Undeniable: Evolution and the Science of Creation”. According to Ken Ham, an evangelical leader championing creationism, and his followers, the Earth is about 6,000 years old. He calculates that by pointing to the stories of Adam and Eve, following the timeline through the generations until reaching Christ’s birth.

Unsurprisingly, Bill Nye had a field day debating the guy. Pointing to undeniable facts, like fossils containing impressions of creatures from millions of years ago and layers of rock and ice that were built over the course of hundreds of thousands of years, he hoped to convince Ham and their online audience that there simply is no way the earth is 6,000-years-old.

Largely, he failed to convince anyone of anything. Those who entered the debate claiming the Bible’s word is 100 percent historically accurate chose to overlook the facts, saying “well, we have faith.”

Faith is all well and good, but people have a special ability to think. We are able to ask and solve serious questions that no other species can, so why is it that people refuse to exercise their ability to logically reason?

The old saying, ignorance is bliss, certainly comes to mind. By closing ourselves to the thoughts of others, we feel safe and secure in ourselves. Life becomes so much simpler when you don’t ask any questions. It’s easy to live an unexamined life, to avoid solving any of life’s riddles yourself. Grappling with serious questions, like creationism vs. Darwinism, can be stressful and finding the truth often seems like a waste of time.

If life on earth ended after the individual’s death I’d be okay with people living those unexamined lives. But life doesn’t end. The next generation has to pick up the torch, pressing forward and dealing with even more perplexing moral, economic and environmental problems than we have to deal with today. By living unexamined lives, we pass that trait down to the next generation through parenting. Failing to equip kids with the ability to think freely, to have an open mind, and to consider different interpretations of life sets them up for failure.

Beliefs are supposed to change with experience. There’s nothing wrong with being wrong. Let go of this silly view that being stubborn is somehow good and examine your life because, to quote Socrates, “The unexamined life is not worth living.”