Skip to main content
  1. News
  2. Politics
  3. Republican

The vulnerability of having an open-mind

See also

Are you the open-minded person in your group? How do you define your open-mindedness? What do you do, or say, to bolster this label you’ve created for yourself? Have you ever been deceived in your bid to maintain open-mindedness? Have you ever considered your open-mindedness foolish on reflection? Have you ever thought that being open-minded leads you to being more vulnerable to deception? How many times have you been shocked by the outcome of events that may have been more obvious to you if you had not reserved critical analysis until all the facts were in? Have you ever realized, too late, that you should've been more skeptical? Or, are you one that believes that being more open-minded leaves more room for more critical analysis than those swayed by party affiliation? Are you one that has this notion that if more of us were more open-minded, like you, we could transmit a telepathic message to Washington to knock it off with all the partisanship? What’s the definition of open-minded, and what could possibly be wrong with it?

Are you one that usually listens to what both sides have to say before deciding how to view a specific matter? Or are you of the mind that both sides have their virtues and sins, and that the truth is somewhere down the middle? Do you believe that it’s the partisans that are the ones that are more susceptible to deception, because they’re more likely to vest their interests in what one political party tells them? Most objective thinkers will admit that they’re not immune to deception, but they think that being open-minded provides them a better shield against deception than anything anyone else has come up with yet.

In your quest for open-mindedness, do you read articles from both sides of the aisle, and if you do what is your ratio? Do you find yourself reading ten articles that support your position and one that does not? We all strive for the vaunted 50/50 ratio, but that’s just not very realistic for most of us. Most of us like certain writers more than others, because those writers speak to us on a certain level. The question is why? Do they speak to a worldview that we have based on our upbringing, or our social pressures, or are some presentations simply more entertaining? Psychologists would tell us that those writers we like, feed into our confirmation bias better than others, and the others are representations of the other side that we read simply to stay informed.

Is there a truth that is somewhere down the middle? Most salesmen want you to believe this, because they want to convince you that they are different, they are somewhere in the middle, and that the product they are offering you is something different. “This time,” they will say, “it will all be different. I know what you’ve read about vacuums, but this one’s different.” Even though most of the evidence we have suggests that this vacuum is not different, the idea that this product is new and improved enchants us to the point that we decide to, at least, listen to this urgent young man's charismatic presentation.

Some political commentators speculate that most people are not political, and that these people don’t prejudge a politician based on the fact that they have a D, or an R, following their name. These commentators will tell you that most people are more interested in problem solvers than they are in the idea that one ideological philosophy is superior to another, and that they are less susceptible to sales pitches as a result. This idea that an open-minded individual doesn’t care who solves the problem as long as it’s solved is described, by these commentators, as the virtue of being open-minded.

Other political commentators, the partisan types, will tell you that it’s almost impossible for an informed individual to be totally nonpartisan in this day and age. These commentators will tell you that other commentators, and politicians, want to keep you open-minded, so that you are more open to ideas that have failed every time they’ve been tried. A closed minded person, in this sense, will tell you that they know their history, and that they haven’t seen any evidence to suggest that this time it will be any different. For most closed-minded people, these salesmen are guilty until proven innocent. Closed-minded people may leave some room to be convinced, but invading that narrow space will be a herculean task for any salesman seeking to prove them wrong.

There are exaggerations of both sides of the aisle, exaggerations most political scientists call extremes. There is the extreme left, and the extreme right, and the open-minded will tell you that the faults of these extreme positions are what drives them to being an independent, nonpartisan type. The open-minded, independent, nonpartisan types think that the extremes of any position seek party domination, as opposed to solving problems. The one thing that the open-minded, independent, nonpartisan types fail to consider is that both parties have methods of solving problems that are characteristic to their party, and those methods usually suit a voter's worldview better than the other. The solution is to study party platforms, and pay attention to the methods that each party employs to solve problems, and find out which method appeals most to you. Ignoring these facets of the parties, and remaining extremely open-minded on the issues, causes confusion, and greater susceptibility to demagoguery.

The closed-minded, partisan types are generally regarded as the more stubborn of the two, but in some cases—when history suggests that the actions being proposed have never proven successful before—couldn’t it be said that the open-minded people are the ones remaining stubbornly open-minded by disregarding the facts?

Most people disagree with the notion that having an open-mind can ever equate to being uninformed, or stubborn, but the closed-minded would tell you that having an open-mind can lead one to being more susceptible to a salesman’s short-term fixes regardless what historical experience with these matters has shown to be the long-term consequences of such actions.

Talk to any veteran salesman and they will tell you that the most valuable product in any sales transaction is the salesman. The pièce de résistance in sales is to get someone to buy something that they don’t want. The old saying about a brilliant salesman is, “He can sell sand in a desert.” It's a great compliment to a salesman, but what does it say about that person that buys the sand? They're the ones that are open to the idea that they need a new vacuum, even though they’re perfectly happy with the one they currently own.

The key to approaching the salesman that comes knocking on your door, is knowing the difference between the short-term fix that salesman details, and the long-term consequences of purchasing the product he’s selling.

“Hey, if there’s a better product out there, that can make my life a little easier, I’m all ears,” you say as this urgent, young man unveils the virtues of "the latest and greatest" vacuum on the market. All you have to do is listen, right? Keep an open mind. Before you know it, you end up with this "latest and greatest" vacuum on the market that somehow, and in some ways, doesn’t quite work as well as your old, hunk o' junk vacuum. You experience buyer's remorse, and you don't really remember how it happened, but it was so hard to turn this charismatic, urgent young man down once he got knee-deep into his pitch.

Salesmen take advantage of open minded people all the time. Their pitch comes equipped with horror stories regarding the other guys' vacuums. They will paint a black and white picture of all those that struggle with the other company’s vacuum. Those owners, they'll say simply don’t know the virtues of this "latest and greatest" vacuum, and these virtues involve a lexicon that you may not be well-versed in, but trust them it means that their product is superior. Most people don't know that lexicon, and most of those people are sticking with their hunk o' junk vacuums. They're the closed-minded sort that you don't want to be association with. The salesman may include some historical facts in their pitch to reveal the other company’s customer base, and they will assure you that you will experience something different with their product, because of who you are and you do what you do, and you’re one of the compassionate types that abhor human suffering. And if you're not suffering, with all the advantages you have in life, millions of your neighbors may be, and who are you to stand in the way of the progress to the latest and greatest products known to mankind?

Does the open-minded person ever turn around and say, okay purchasing that vacuum was a mistake? All of the evidence was there, but I chose to overlook it while listening to the ‘this time it will be different’ pitch. Most of the open-minded people were perfectly happy with their vacuum, but they felt their heart was in the right place when they gave this urgent and charismatic young man a chance to state his case. They stubbornly open-minded clung to their open-minded label until it was too late.

The one opportunity a consumer is afforded to thwart the theoretical rhetoric of all sales pitches, from all sides, is to gain personal experience. Some companies offer a 30-day trial, but the consumer isn’t usually informed of this option until the salesman begins to believe that the sale is getting away from him. It doesn’t matter if a consumer is open-minded, if they get to experience the difference between the cost and benefits firsthand, and they no longer have to speculate in an open-minded, or stubbornly closed-minded, “just the facts ma’am” manner. It doesn't matter how skilled, or crafty, a salesman is, and all of his superlatives go out the window when a consumer is allowed hand's on knowledge of what's in the product before they buy it. This is a last-ditch effort for a salesman, of course, because it makes them irrelevant in the transaction.



  • Mt. Everest avalanche
    Disaster strikes Mt. Everest as at least 12 people were killed in an avalanche
    Watch Video
  • Most Earthlike planet discovered
    The Kepler telescope has discovered the most Earthlike, possibly habitable planet yet
    Space News
  • Easter crosses create debate
    Easter crosses spark a debate of separation of church and state in Ohio
  • Chelsea Clinton is preggers
    Former first daughter Chelsea Clinton is pregnant with her first child
  • Stanley Cup playoffs
    The battle for Lord Stanley's Cup is on, don't miss a minute of playoff action
  • Ukraine discussed amongst U.S., E.U., Russia
    The U.S., E.U. and Russia agree on ways to diffuse the tension in Ukraine
    Watch Video

User login

Log in
Sign in with your email and password. Or reset your password.
Write for us
Interested in becoming an Examiner and sharing your experience and passion? We're always looking for quality writers. Find out more about and apply today!