Is being open-minded more difficult & taxing than being closed because it involves ruling out more possibilities when coming to conclusions?

11 Answers

Relevance
  • 5 months ago

    Perhaps.

    Maybe it is more difficult and taxing because it involves critical thinking and reasoning and most people do not even know how to do either.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 5 months ago

    Depending on the individual I'd definitely say it would be more challenging, but that is also the way the fire grows within us and manifests fearlessness to just keep on going and growing.

    With knowledge comes power, and with power comes more responsibility.

    Thats not to say that a closed minded person still won't freak out and feel suicidal when getting fired from mcdonalds.. Maybe the world just balances itself out.. We need both

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 5 months ago

    It's more tedious. First you have to consider more things before snapping off a decision. Also, eventually you do come to know some things in life but still have to contend with people who don't yet - and who challenge what you know. You have to constantly remain vigilant for whether you are being close-minded on a particular thing because you it already for crissake, or because you have some agenda and self-deception going on.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 6 months ago

    I think being open-minded is, in a way, more difficult than being close-minded, but not because it involves ruling out more possibilities when coming to conclusions.

    A close-minded person is the one that rules out more possibilities; they rule out, without consideration, every possibility that isn't identical to their preconceived notions. An open-minded person rules out, after considering them, only the possibilities that they decide are highy unlikely, or nonsensical.

    The reason that being open-minded is more difficult is because it takes some mental effort, and hopefully, some research and study.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • The effectiveness of the mind is most important. You should not let your attitude toward something interfere with how you judge it.

    There is no such thing as a closed mind. Such is not even using their mind to begin with. Their attitude has overwhelmed reason.

    On the other hand it is not the mind which is open but your emotions toward something which interfere. Emotion could inhibit reason for other reasons than negative. To accept something while turning off your mind can be dangerous.

    There are times however when the mind should not lead. There are times when emotions are king. They reach far and wide. Deep and up high above.

    You should follow your most precious emotions over reason because it is the world you wish to live in and reason is not a motivation.

    Reason is not life. It is will tell you the price but not the value of a thing. & some things we are willing to afford even if they are pricey.

    For our heart we would pay any price.

    Where reason is key is in the way.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • j153e
    Lv 7
    6 months ago

    Degree of difficulty depends somewhat upon the psychology and emotional, mental, and memory complexes of the individual.

    Kant's intuition that phenomena are processed of the organism, of mankind, notes that examining one's emotions, thoughts, and memories, in one's physical body temple, constitutes the arena of awareness. Merleau-Ponty's "Phenomenology of Perception" and Heidegger's "Being and Time" are examples of the Kant-to-Husserl influence in modern philosophy. Husserl's use of the suspension of "rush to judgment" (aka method of phenomenological reduction) also reflects the Hellenistic Greek perspective, and that of Rene Descartes' "radical doubt" method.

    The notion of Popper that reductivist or atom-based scientism necessitates a quality control over theories' conclusions which is exerted by means of their falsifiability is a type of radical doubt which necessarily never ends...i.e., conclusions in science are not final or closed, but are always kept in abeyance by open-ended falsifiability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability Thus a pseudo-science is defined by popperism to be e.g. marxism, theories of creation, and climatology, when their "predictions" are too grandiose to be able to be logically falsified within protocols of current experimental expertise.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    6 months ago

    No. Open-mindedness is not about the beliefs you have but how open you are to revising them according to circumstances. A person who is well disposed toward open-mindedness doesn't find it difficult to revise their beliefs while a person who is closed minded does.

    • peter m
      Lv 6
      5 months agoReport

      And that from an Anon. Don't make us laugh.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Mike W
    Lv 7
    6 months ago

    Both require a lot of work, the difference is in the conclusions that are reached. A closed mined person is generally looking to be proved right. An open minded person is just looking for the truth, and will accept that their assumptions are wrong if the evidence shows that.

  • P
    Lv 7
    6 months ago

    Not at all, it's much safer in the end. Being closed prevents progress and creates conflict

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Teva
    Lv 4
    6 months ago

    If you are open minded there is no need to come to any conclusions or rule anything in or out. If you are open minded you don't believe anything or disbelieve anything. Your own experience will reveal the truth of any given thing to you. There is no need to intellectualize in the way you describe.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.