I don't necessarily think it's that people are holding onto them willfully. It could easily be explained away by not having the time/desire/ability to explore the farthest reaches of the internet which can provide you with a wealth of knowledge and exposure to stuff that you didn't know existed. Stepping outside your walls isn't easy, and for a lot of people, not desirable or even conducive. I didn't know about all those kinds of rap, like back-pack rap for example, cause i'm not really into rap and have no desire to explore the various forms of it, nor do i have the time to.
Most people are going off what's in the mainstream. What they're exposed to via radio and TV and most internet outlets as well. It takes a lot of time and effort to get into a topic to a certain depth, and someone will only do that if they're really interested in it. So for someone to say that rap promotes gang violence and violence against women, they're not wrong because that's what's been quite prevalent in the forms that actually have made it outside of their little loyal bubbles and into the (at least somewhat) mainstream. It doesn't make someone an authority on the topic but they're not wrong. "Ok, so rap has taken lots of forms, but we still have this version over here that's reaching millions of impressionable kids and could be having an adverse impact. Can we talk about that?"
We could talk about it, pull up a chair
And I understand all of that, and not having the time - - but that's where I reach the idea of intellectual laziness: I take issue when a non-researched human promotes un-found propaganda in a would-be serious discussion. Just bugs me, in a way. I hate inefficiency. It's part of my job, I guess.
I love being wrong when it comes from an honest place. That's how pragmatism works....and it happens a lot, where I'm wrong. I just don't seem to jump into many discussion on the internet that I'm not familiar with, because I think it's kinda silly that's all. I understand all perceptions involved, here.
I've found that it's easy to sway people who are capable of being swayed if you just put your own logic behind it and explain yourself as thoughtfully as you can while you also make as little assumptions as you can about where the other person is coming from. One problem is that people go into arguments/discussions assuming that the other has the same level of knowledge/exposure to a given subject, or worse yet, assuming that the other understands your point of view without being told what it is first. They'll take one position you seem to be saying and then extrapolate it out onto other things based on the pre-conceptions they have of you or the kind of things you happen to be saying. It's why i think labels are so dangerous, and why i think the modern left is so very dangerous and damaging to our culture with the affinity for grouping people together and then applying your own pre-conceptions of that group to that person. It's sickening.
I try to assume that people are coming from a pretty good place, and that there is a whole hell of a lot of information out there that no one person can contain it all. We're all going to have our areas of expertise combined with our intellect, our ability to reason and what experiences have shaped us. So if i'm passionate about rock and someone says rock sucks cause of x, y and z, i don't assume that they're a bad person. They don't like rock, but maybe it's cause of a few songs, or a few artists that are notorious earbugs like Nickelback (ugh). Have you heard this? Or that? What kind of music do you like? Oh really, then you might like this, this or this band cause they put this kind of flair into it that might be more up your alley than this, this or this. If the other person comes away going "oh, that's cool, might have to check that stuff out" then you both win.
There's varying degrees to everything. I've found that critical thinking is really a skill that's not easily developed. So if someone isn't getting something on a deeper more complex level that you understand, it's not necessarily cause they're stupid, it's just their brain doesn't work that way or it can't get around that certain topic. I've got no chance of changing someone's mind if i then insult their intelligence, and worse yet, i've spoiled myself for changing that person's mind in the future cause they know that i think they're stupid, even if i don't actually think that. Even if i can't get them to wrap their head around the concept i'm presenting or can't sway them, i'm at least leaving the door open on the next topic. I'm establishing credibility as someone who's opinion isn't arrived at because someone told me to.
I'm rambling, but yea. I'm a pragmatist with strong, strong convictions toward liberty, and exhausting all other options to address a problem before asking government to do it.
