My major point here is that people have contradicting viewpoints on many topics. People give lip service to having an open mind and accepting other viewpoints. Many people usually impose their viewpoints when they don’t like another person’s viewpoint.

Purely my opinion but I don’t think that there will ever be world peace as an example. Looking at it from and American standpoint we have competing values. We believe that people are entitled to their own way of life and belief systems. Then we bring in Holy books and recognize that people will interpret them in different ways. What I think people do is say and give lip service to allowing differing views other than their own right up until another person’s viewpoint collides with their own.

From a social psychological perspective this makes sense. It makes you appear open minded, multicultural, worldly, etc. However, at the end of the day we all have biases, preferences, values, religious ideologies and so on. I get it people want to appear a certain way publicly yet you can’t escape your own biases.

On the world’s stage, one group of people or country may believe in a way of life that is diametrically opposed to another group of people/country. One country may for example believe that people who do not agree with them should be eliminated. Well, they have the right to their opinion, right? But the average person (from America) interjects saying yes you have the right to your own opinion as long as it doesn’t hurt or kill other people. However, when you say this, you are now imposing your viewpoint on them. According to your original logic of everyone is entitled to their own viewpoint they may believe killing is okay. In their way of thinking killing is fine under whatever conditions they dictate. As a side note even in our own countries states have differing laws on this. Again, lip service and your value, people will say you can have a different viewpoint as long as it doesn’t hurt or kill other people, an imposition of your viewpoint.

I could put in an exhausting list of examples regarding right here in America after this sentence but we all can think of them ourselves. One meager example is sex education in schools. Now please stop and don’t interject your own viewpoint even in your own head reading this, and just read the next sentences. Some parents believe this should exclusively be done in the home and not spoken about at all in public schools. Yet other people believe it should be taught in schools as a public health education issue to be a baseline amount of education. After all, the argument goes sex ed. is in fact a health-related issue. Some parents believe is personal and should be done in the home. See, competing values and everything is fine right up until the point it personally offends you. Then you impose your viewpoint or give caveats, justifications, examples, “what ifs” and so on.

Again the take away is people “believe” in a right to people’s own opinions right up until it conflicts with their own.