It’s hard.
I define partisanship in a political sense. One who is a partisan is committed to a particular view or affiliation out of belief and/or loyalty. Nancy Pelosi, for instance, is undoubtedly a firm believer in the leftward policies of today’s Democratic Party. And even if she weren’t, her role as a party leader demands that she display loyalty to it.
When challenged on policy or affiliation, a partisan cannot be expected to view the merits of the opposing view objectively. He or she, after all, already has “made up his/her mind” and so responds defensively. For emotional or other reasons, the partisan finds it very difficult to consider that the challenge may be meritorious.
Simply put, if a person has reached a conclusion in a political vein, he finds it very difficult to change his mind. People want to believe that what they do believe is indeed right and true. And that attitude is usually founded on an emotional commitment.
As first and foremost emotional creatures, we humans are loath to admit we were wrong about something to which we developed an emotional allegiance.
So when our belief about matters that are close to us are questioned, our almost automatic reaction is to defend our stance, seeking reasons why the challenge can be ignored. We are not interested in considering the subject. Our emotional comfort depends upon our success (at least in our minds) in mounting a successful defense.
The objective difficulty with this approach is obvious. Since we are looking only to bolster our position, not seek support for the opposing view, or give it fair consideration, our inquiry is prejudiced.
We have already closed our mind.
No comments:
Post a Comment