I have enjoyed some fascinating debates on the forum. I have found it interesting when" FACTS" have been presented to support a viewpoint, yet the " FACTS" have then been rejected.
What does this mean?
Well the " TRUTH" is as a dub, I was often presented with " FACTS" that the organisation was wrong, yet as this information challenged my belief system I convinced myself the " FACTS" were either completely wrong or misinterpreted,
This is why I remained in " The Truth" :-Despite facts that my viewpoint was completely wrong?
So because I felt threatened of the consequences to my belief system being wrong,regardless of how wrong I was I was never going to readjust my thinking and accept this new information despite it being true and the evidence presented with facts.
This is :-
A) Why I realise rather than facts driving my beliefs it has often been my belief system which has dictated the facts I choose to accept.
B) And why I have tried when presented with contrary information to my be belief system, to accept my current thinking may be uninformed and that it is ok to change my mind.
So in conclusion :
a) Facts can be misinterpreted or take information out of context to support an argument.
b) When facts are presented in an honest and irrefutable way, my dub past allows me to empathise with the resistance some on this board have in accepting those facts.
Anyway any suggestions on how best to avoid unhealthy debates when people don't believe the facts.