A Matter of Opinion

ProgressiveU has exposed me to an agglomeration of new ideas and independent thinkers. I am most struck, however, by the bizarre combination of ideas many bloggers have; combinations I never before thought possible or even logical. People daily defy my stereotypes. For example, I often categorize people and ideas in political terms because that is easiest for me. But ProU bloggers just don't allow that. One person might hold some sort of drastically conservative idea and at the same time hold another idea which I would consider radically liberal. It's made me wonder exactly how and why we humans arrive at the beliefs and convictions which we do.

I know myself best, so I will act as an ideological guinea pig here in my own experiment. I will try to describe some of my general ideas and what informs them. Please do not mistake this for an appeal to accept my views. I just want to use my beliefs as an example, in order to explore why I think the way I do, and so in the process find out something about the way people in general form opinions.

Firstly, I am a Christian. This definitely influences the way I think. But the only reason I am a Christian is because that's what I was born into. I'd be Muslim, Mormon, or agnostic if those were the religious traditions I happened to be born into. Of course, at this time in my life, my faith is no longer just a childish following, but a more developed worldview.

Secondly, I am an individualist. This too is a factor in my ideas. I'm not one for following societal expectations or mannerisms. I am perfectly comfortable sitting quietly by myself. In fact, sometimes I just wish people would leave me alone. But is this just because I was an extraordinarily shy child?

Thirdly, I am a conservative, and I mean that beyond the mere political implications. I am all for family values, small government, and such. But I am also not very ostentatious in social situations- that is, I'm conservative. Why, and how, did I ever come to hold such ideas? My mother is "conservative," so perhaps I get that from her, and yet, my dad is an outspoken "liberal." Why did I pick up my mom's ideas as opposed to my dad's?

You may fiercely oppose some or all of my views, and we may fight about them, but that doesn't mean one of us has to be wrong. We can be on opposite ends of the ideological spectrum and yet both be correct. Further, since these are opinions, they can't be substantiated fully by facts. Or, we can interpret facts (even the same facts) differently so that they support our point of view.

So, what's the deal? Why do I have these opinions, which are so unlike many others'? I’ve come up with three possibilities. I do not think that any are totally accurate.

Firstly, The way we are socialized no doubt has a significant effect on how we end up thinking. That is, the way we are brought up determines how we think. We are socialized by our families, peers, role models, teachers, and a virtually endless list of others. People are brought up in different environments and by different people, thus leading to a wide array of different opinions. This would explain why I am a Christian, but it doesn't satisfactorily explain why I'm individualistic and conservative. Remember, my parents were polar opposites, and yet I ended up adopting only one of their ideas- I was socialized only by my mother. By what process did that happen?

Perhaps, then, genetics explains why my mother was more successful in socializing me than my dad- perhaps I have more of her dominant genes. It may be an overly simplistic approach, but some believe that our genes fully determine who we are- the way we think and act, besides basic physical attributes. It is nature triumphing over nurture, or genetics over socialization. While I do think that some aspects of personality can be inherited, this too falls far short of explaining why people hold the opinions they do. I think that genetics are not the primary informers of personality traits. I think that certain genes simply predispose us to be a certain way- but they do not guarantee we'll end up like that. For example, my mother is also very shy and individualistic, so perhaps I inherited those traits from her. But on the other hand, I come from a long line of alcoholics (which is supposedly a genetic disease) and yet I don't drink at all. I may be at risk of becoming an alcoholic, but that does not mean I will ever become one. Obviously, genes do not play the key role in determining who I am and what I believe.

Lastly, the Platonic approach helps to explain how we arrive at an opinion. According to Plato, we arrive at truth by utilizing reason. So, perhaps I believe in what I do because I thought about it- I used my faculties of reason to arrive at an inevitable conclusion. I can claim that I am a conservative because it is rational. However, the problem with this is that a liberal (or whoever else) can also arrive at his own perfectly accurate conclusions using the same method. So, opinions aren’t even formed exclusively through “true knowledge" and rationalism.

It comes down to the fact that true knowledge, whatever Plato meant by that, is just a matter of opinion. What is considered “right” probably depends on the presence of "absolute truths"- another idea espoused by Plato. He thinks that there are certain ideological standards which are true, no matter what, simply because they are. But, how does one establish or discover an absolute truth? As a result of this introspective experiment, I am led to believe that all opinions, no matter who holds them and why, are informed by absolute truths, and one thing alone reveals these truths: faith.

When I say "faith," I don't mean religious faith. I mean that we feel something in our gut to be true, so therefore we accept it as such. You feel that the law is wrong, so you rebel. Or, you feel that it is right, so you follow it. You feel that abortion is right or wrong, so you construct your opinions accordingly. After determining what we feel to be true, we then argue our opinions backwards: we all start with a conclusion (e.g. gay marriage is good or abortion is bad), and then seek evidence that corroborates that conclusion. People can claim that they are objective and base their conclusions on facts instead of vice versa, but that is simply false. Facts themselves are based on the faith that they are true.

So, what does this mean? Does it mean that everything we think we know or believe is false? I don't think that's necessarily true. I stated that I believe in absolute truths, it's just that we humans can't really be sure of what they are. They can't necessarily be scientifically verified, so we can only "feel" them. But we all feel different things. I happen to believe that my ideas and opinions are in fact based on absolute truths, but that hardly means anything when I'm arguing with someone else- after all, they can just turn that statement around and use it for themselves. I know what I know and I believe what I believe because I instinctively feel that these things are true.

I’ve concluded that for all intents and purposes in this world, everything comes down to a matter of faith and opinion. That is, in my opinion.