When we have gathered sufficient evidence to convince ourselves that something is true, we will believe it. When we search for evidence to support an opposite belief we can often find it too and this can cause us to abandon an old belief and replace it with a new one.
An example of this is when a person forms a belief that the establishment is not to be trusted and that there is a sinister motive behind every action taken by people in a position of authority. At the time of this writing we are in the midst (or beginning, or ending) of the Covid 19 pandemic. There are people that believe that the threat of this virus is overstated and that it is nothing more than a common flu. They believe that the government is attempting to control it's population by spreading false information to further it's agenda. The old "bait and switch" technique.
On the other hand there are people that believe that the government is not doing enough. They believe that the lockdowns are not strict enough and that anybody that leaves their house for anything but the absolute necessities of life is selfish and endangering the life of everyone.
Of course, there are people that hold moderate views as well. Views that fall somewhere in between the two polar opposite views I have mentioned above.
What do you think might happen if you were to devote 30 solid days to focusing only on one of the extreme views? If you took in information from one view and excluded all information from the opposing view? How long would it take before you began to view all the opposing data with suspicion?
