People who debate about politics logically; I wonder what they are expecting. “Oh, you are right. My argument is logically flawed. OK. Now I’m on your side.” Try to recall if that has ever happened to you in your whole life.
Both politics and religion are positional. Logic was not the reason why they took particular positions in the first place. Logic was applied after the fact to rationalize their choices. So, no amount of logic will convince them to change their positions. When people logically debate about politics or religion, they are ultimately trying to justify and rationalize their own positions. In other words, they are talking to themselves.
If someone changes his political position after a logical debate, the credit goes almost entirely to the person who changed his mind, not to the person who debated him.
These positional issues make up the foundation of one’s self-image or ego. To change any of them would have a profound impact on how you stand in the world, and how you think of yourself. It is highly destabilizing and painful. J. Krishnamurti said “A confident man is a dead human being.” This makes sense in this light. Our confidence is built on these assumptions we make in our lives. When these assumptions are destabilized, we lose confidence. But to be open-minded and willing to change your fundamental positions, you have to sacrifice your confidence. Most people would rather feel confident because the alternative does not seem to offer any immediate benefit.
