Yeah but on the other hand some people that come off as close minded simply have different axiomatic beliefs than you do. Things that look like logical flaws to you can be perfectly consistent if they hold "belief x". Until you address belief x arguing against specific flaws in their argument is about as effective as hoping to convert catholics by making fun of the pope's hat.
Very true - I've found myself arguing to death with people before realizing we had different goals. I just took it for granted that they wanted "xyz obvious thing that anyone would want" from the situation. And often it's me who overlooked something big and was being dense.
I once spent a half hour discussing (arguing) with a girl on why I am an agnostic. I knew we had different goals, but I thought if I could explain my axioms she would at least concede that my position was consistent.
The discussion went in circles at least three times.
This quote made me smile: "The ability to accept uncertainty requires extraordinary intellectual discipline." But, overall, unfortunately, the article explains why my interests are so shallow. :/
Human minds are not formal logical systems. We don't have axioms per se (that is, a belief or desire held with absolute certainty from which all of our other ideas follow). This is true even when we think we believe something axiomatically.
Another way of thinking of this is that our ideas are not a hierarchy with one level at the bottom and each level as the foundation for the next. Instead, they form a "heterarchy" -- a complex, twisted network of interconnections, where the right argument or experience can modify what previously seemed to be the most deeply-held idea.
I find the reasoning specious because self described "liberals" and "conservatives" mean all types of things when they describe themselves as such. The results of studies involving correlations between conservative or liberal ideology and other traits tells you more about differences in favorable word connotations than anything important about individuals.
