Opinions/Beliefs Sheep

[Chimera]

This is one of the random things I've been thinking about lately. I have a habit of self-assessment, meaning I retreat into my own mind and puzzle with what I find there. Like, how do I react to specific situations? What would I do if [insert occurance here] happened? What do I think about [insert subject here], why do I think that, and what made me think that way?
It's dangerous business, self-assessment. Especially if you do it right. You figure out how much you've been manipulated into thinking a certain way about certain somethings. How much influence other people, and the media, and society in general really have over you.
How many beliefs are yours?
How many of your opinions did you create yourself?

Honestly. If you take a step back from all of those beliefs already instilled in you about how "everyone's unique" and "you're one of a kind", and just figure out how you think. Think about it. Really. Do it.

Now.

Let's take a good example that most people (in the U.S, at least) should be familiar with: Miley Cyrus. There's a lot of controversy about that girl right now. Now, let's pretend that I don't like Miley (I really don't give a crap about that girl, but pretend I do.) I read something about her on MSN.com, an article that was written by someone else who also doesn't like Miley. And let's also pretend that I'm like 95% of the world and don't formulate my own opinions. EVERYTHING that I read in that article I would add to my arsenal of reasons not to like Miley, SIMPLY BECAUSE I KNEW IT WAS SOMETHING BAD ABOUT HER. So I would think "Hey, that's a good reason not to like her, I'll regurgitate that little tidbit of info the next time I listen to someone who likes Miley."

"Just because you agree with something doesn't mean you don't have opinions!"

No, it doesn't. It's fine to agree with things. That's what keeps me from getting detention in school whenever I want to argue with a teacher. BUT, agreeing with an opinion isn't what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about when you mindlessly agree with something just because a certain someone said it.
Maybe that was a bit hard to chew. I don't think I even understand it. (That happens more than you might think.)

Okay. Let me break it down a bit.
Say, for example, there's a particular hollywood star, or politician, or teacher, et cetera you listen to. They're like, your idol. Everything they say, you seem to agree with. If you don't watch out, you'll get into a routine of just letting that person fill your head with any thoughts whatsoever. You agreed with them before, so they're still saying things you should agree with, right?
But what if they're saying things that you really wouldn't agree with, if you just thought about them on your own?
Can you be sure that you really would agree with them?
Are those really your thoughts they're voicing?

Most people fall into a trap of hanging on to previous beliefs. Especially beliefs they formulated themselves!

"But you were just encouraging people to formulate their own opinions/beliefs."

Yes, I was. I totally was.
But here's the mind-bending part for most people.
You can be an "opinion sheep" to yourself.

(This next stuff is the things I wouldn't even think about divulging to most of society, for fear their brains would explode.)

Who are we but someone for ourselves to listen to? The logical part we use to make most opinions is essentially like a computer. It inputs information, then spews out an opinion. Sometimes emotions garble the process a bit, but whatever. We're talking about pure logic-based opinions here. Remember that.
Now. Sticking with the idea that logic is a computer, it can only form an "accurate" opinion (one that you can call your own) using whatever input you give it. Meaning, if you only know so much about a topic, then you can only have an opinion about that topic based only on that info. Meaning, opinions often are half-baked.
Well, that's not a bad thing. No matter how one-sided, you should always make your own opinions. But here's the thing: you have to be able to contradict past opinions.
Go back to the logic computer. As you learn new things about a topic, you should constantly feed in that information to the logic computer. Even if that information doesn't support your opinion.
Sounds easy enough, doesn't it?
It's not. So many people want to retreat back and say "Oh, I don't agree with that. I'll just ignore it." So they forget about it and move on, picking and choosing what things to use to make their opinion. They want to reinforce their past opinion, not challenge it.
But we're constantly learning new things. So we need to constantly challenge our opinions. Even the ones we've had since we were little kids, and the ones we think "Oh, my view on that will never change."




My main point? Don't just copy and paste other people's opinions for yourself. And then, once you have your own opinion about something, constantly challenge it! If you don't challenge your opinion against every possible argument, from every angle, how do you know that you really believe it?



(I'm guessing that some of this might come as common sense to INTPs. This is actually a post I made on a different site, but it seemed appropriate enough to post here, just to see what other people "like me" think. Also, don't take offense if it seems that I over-explained things...as I said, it was posted in a different forum at first, and I knew I would have to clarify a bit more so that the people there could understand. I swear I'm not insulting your intelligence.)

 

[Wisp]

Oh hi, you're back! Been a while.

Anyways... Why does it matter if we drag ourselves around? It shouldn't. From a purely logical standpoint, the brain is being illogicalif it rejects information, unless it comes from a shady source in which case it may not be true to begin with, so, from a purely logical standpoint (which you insisted upon) we are our own opinions. The only thing that can happen is you become hobbled by other people's ways of thinking. You think along their lines and drag themselves down into the quagmire. Something to chew on.

 

[Chimera]

Yeah, like I was around here so much before.

I'm not talking about the brain being logical or illogical, because depending on the person, logic or emotion or gods know what else is most in control of the brain. But I think that choices regarding acceptance are mostly filtered through something other than logic (for many people, at least.) So if a person chooses not to accept information then they are probably not using logic, and therefore the opinion they achieve comes up short.

 

[Wisp]

Exactly. This always happens, but it happens to some people more than others...

 

[Aphasia]

But I think that choices regarding acceptance are mostly filtered through something other than logic (for many people, at least.) So if a person chooses not to accept information then they are probably not using logic, and therefore the opinion they achieve comes up short.

Emotion. An unfortunate byproduct of organics. Minor note: since humans are social pack(?) animals, most of us can be easily influenced by pack leaders/ people in the forefront/ whatevers i.e: politicians, celebrities, idols, etc. Also people don't really notice faults in their reasoning; happiness is created though ignorance. LEARN!

Unfortunately, I think about many sides of an argument at once, which often makes me into a feeble debater (I think of arguments for the opposition). On the other hand, I'm pretty certain that I am my own person (i.e: not heavily influenced by the thoughts and beliefs of others)

About the first post: I think I thought about something similar a while back. I just didn't put it into words for people to understand.

I am an opinion sheep to myself, so I seek out grass to eat and companionship of other sheep; and when I die, a lush patch of grass will grow where I fell to feed the lambs of tomorrow.

 

[Ermine]

I try to avoid being a sheep to anyone, but often a person's opinions are nothing more than a unique combination of other people's ideas. Is there such thing as pure original thought, or is it all about the combination?

 

[Wisp]

It's about the combination. There is no such thing as original thought, but there is such a thing as original combinations of beliefs... Also, technically, all thoughts have always existed, we just don't think about them.

 

[Jesin]

No, I think it's more that it doesn't mean anything for a thought to exist, except in a statement that it does or does not exist in some particular person's mind.

 

[Wisp]

Thoughts are a stream of electrons running through our brains.

 

[Jesin]

Actually, no. While they may travel primarily as electrical impulses, they also spend a significant part of the journey as chemical impulses.

Also, thoughts don't usually travel in a stream; that's more for sensory input and muscle control. Many neurons often participate in one thought (although not as many as you may think upon first hearing that), and they are often in more of a clump or net than a line.

 

[Wisp]

Whatever. Not my point. The point is that there is STILL physical manifestation

 

[Oblivious]

Emotions are a tricky thing.

I mostly use them as a tool to achieve my means by using mental propaganda and try to view them as a logical variable in myself and others. I found that they can actually be quite useful once I learn to control and understand them. Both personally and socially.

Of course it must be said that certain things just wouldn't be as magical without them. Satisfaction, awe, understanding, love. It is for the beauty of these things that I think, that I may protect that which is important to me.

 

[EditorOne]

"Also, technically, all thoughts have always existed, we just don't think about them."

Well, maybe not: People in the Roman empire certainly didn't think about, say, radar, or radio, or radon.

Perhaps more to the point, people probably always thought about oysters, but who was the brave one who first thought to eat one? :-) Now there was a disruptive innovator. That's not an original thought, by the way. Might have been Oscar Wilde. Might not have been....

I think sometimes you can't have thoughts because the context doesn't yet exist.

It might be a short-yourself kind of mistake to think new thoughts aren't possible. People get rich thinking new thoughts all the time: Youtube, for instance. One of the two partners graduated college in 1999, now he's rich.* He had a new thought: People would actually look at bad quality amateur videos posted without charge on a giant social networking context website.

*'Rich' is one of the conditions that would allow an INTP to fully indulge INTP-ness, right? Just a means to an end.

 

[EditorOne]

Jonathan Swift, not Oscar Wilde.

I hate details.

 

[Anti-socialite]

This is one of the random things I've been thinking about lately. I have a habit of self-assessment, meaning I retreat into my own mind and puzzle with what I find there. Like, how do I react to specific situations? What would I do if [insert occurance here] happened? What do I think about [insert subject here], why do I think that, and what made me think that way?
It's dangerous business, self-assessment. Especially if you do it right. You figure out how much you've been manipulated into thinking a certain way about certain somethings. How much influence other people, and the media, and society in general really have over you.
How many beliefs are yours?
How many of your opinions did you create yourself?

Honestly. If you take a step back from all of those beliefs already instilled in you about how "everyone's unique" and "you're one of a kind", and just figure out how you think. Think about it. Really. Do it.

Now.

Let's take a good example that most people (in the U.S, at least) should be familiar with: Miley Cyrus. There's a lot of controversy about that girl right now. Now, let's pretend that I don't like Miley (I really don't give a crap about that girl, but pretend I do.) I read something about her on MSN.com, an article that was written by someone else who also doesn't like Miley. And let's also pretend that I'm like 95% of the world and don't formulate my own opinions. EVERYTHING that I read in that article I would add to my arsenal of reasons not to like Miley, SIMPLY BECAUSE I KNEW IT WAS SOMETHING BAD ABOUT HER. So I would think "Hey, that's a good reason not to like her, I'll regurgitate that little tidbit of info the next time I listen to someone who likes Miley."

"Just because you agree with something doesn't mean you don't have opinions!"

No, it doesn't. It's fine to agree with things. That's what keeps me from getting detention in school whenever I want to argue with a teacher. BUT, agreeing with an opinion isn't what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about when you mindlessly agree with something just because a certain someone said it.
Maybe that was a bit hard to chew. I don't think I even understand it. (That happens more than you might think.)

Okay. Let me break it down a bit.
Say, for example, there's a particular hollywood star, or politician, or teacher, et cetera you listen to. They're like, your idol. Everything they say, you seem to agree with. If you don't watch out, you'll get into a routine of just letting that person fill your head with any thoughts whatsoever. You agreed with them before, so they're still saying things you should agree with, right?
But what if they're saying things that you really wouldn't agree with, if you just thought about them on your own?
Can you be sure that you really would agree with them?
Are those really your thoughts they're voicing?

Most people fall into a trap of hanging on to previous beliefs. Especially beliefs they formulated themselves!

"But you were just encouraging people to formulate their own opinions/beliefs."

Yes, I was. I totally was.
But here's the mind-bending part for most people.
You can be an "opinion sheep" to yourself.

(This next stuff is the things I wouldn't even think about divulging to most of society, for fear their brains would explode.)

Who are we but someone for ourselves to listen to? The logical part we use to make most opinions is essentially like a computer. It inputs information, then spews out an opinion. Sometimes emotions garble the process a bit, but whatever. We're talking about pure logic-based opinions here. Remember that.
Now. Sticking with the idea that logic is a computer, it can only form an "accurate" opinion (one that you can call your own) using whatever input you give it. Meaning, if you only know so much about a topic, then you can only have an opinion about that topic based only on that info. Meaning, opinions often are half-baked.
Well, that's not a bad thing. No matter how one-sided, you should always make your own opinions. But here's the thing: you have to be able to contradict past opinions.
Go back to the logic computer. As you learn new things about a topic, you should constantly feed in that information to the logic computer. Even if that information doesn't support your opinion.
Sounds easy enough, doesn't it?
It's not. So many people want to retreat back and say "Oh, I don't agree with that. I'll just ignore it." So they forget about it and move on, picking and choosing what things to use to make their opinion. They want to reinforce their past opinion, not challenge it.
But we're constantly learning new things. So we need to constantly challenge our opinions. Even the ones we've had since we were little kids, and the ones we think "Oh, my view on that will never change."




My main point? Don't just copy and paste other people's opinions for yourself. And then, once you have your own opinion about something, constantly challenge it! If you don't challenge your opinion against every possible argument, from every angle, how do you know that you really believe it?



(I'm guessing that some of this might come as common sense to INTPs. This is actually a post I made on a different site, but it seemed appropriate enough to post here, just to see what other people "like me" think. Also, don't take offense if it seems that I over-explained things...as I said, it was posted in a different forum at first, and I knew I would have to clarify a bit more so that the people there could understand. I swear I'm not insulting your intelligence.)

I'm generally sucha b**** that I can't say this to people but you're my hero.

 

[Anti-socialite]

I try to avoid being a sheep to anyone, but often a person's opinions are nothing more than a unique combination of other people's ideas. Is there such thing as pure original thought, or is it all about the combination?

I don't think there's anything new under the sun but I do believe that ideas and thoughts can be genuine. Perhaps that is all that matters.