Preconceived notions

One of the main problems I encounter on the web is preconceived notions. That is people reading something into what is said other then the intended message because of my handle or their limited knowledge of my background. It's a constant problem with me too! I assume erroneously because of my limited knowledge of who it is I am exchanging with.It is a hard discipline to keep an open mind. But I try.

Does anyone else have that problem? What do you do to keep your mind open? I try to keep the concerns of others in mind without losing the importance of the big picture but somehow that still gets messed up at times!!!
Sometimes it leads to discussions on topics I never intended to talk about but feel compelled by the insistence of others and the need to reassure them the untruthfulness of any wrong assumption on their part.

Just an observation of how our minds work and the leaps they take I guess. Because there is no real fix except to keep trying to be open minded. Any thoughts or constructive criticism?

I understand what you mean about subjective and rational preconceived notions. But my point wasn't concerning the degrees of validity in such notions.

I am far more concerned with how they distract and obfuscate from the primary topic on hand. For instance something can be done for the betterment of all concerned. There may be nothing in the language behind a specific proposal that addresses certain, specific concerns. Or said language may even seem detrimental to specific concerns. However in reality it is most possible that the proposal may be helpful to such concerns overall. So said proposal never materializes to benefit others because of opposing preconceptions of what the goals of said proposals are.

No, I'm not talking about separating people from their words. That would be illogical. What I'm talking about is the end result.

Something that is needed to be kept in place or not, what ever the case may be, should be done. No matter what the players personal agendas may be. If it has been shown that it is most beneficial to all and the least detrimental as well. For instance if a system is offensive to the minority and pleasant to the majority it makes more sense to make provisions or concessions for the minority rather then reverse the entire system all together and offend the majority. Regardless of the personal views of those on all sides of the particular issue.

Take the political realm for example. You wouldn't trade in your car when all you needed was tires. But people are willing to "trade in" their government when the one in place just needs a tune up. That is mainly do to misconceptions and personal agendas rather than looking out for the over all good of all. That's all.

Preconceptions are primarily the result of of misconceptions mingled with personal agendas. Very rarely are they formed exclusively as a result of objective interpretations of evidence and facts as you've suggested. Though it isn't ruled out as never happening. For even when those facts are considered they are subject to interpretations based on the thinking of the one who is doing the interpreting.

For instance in the political realm people assume I am pro or con a certain thing because of my religious affiliation. Often times they never believe that after careful consideration I form my views based on what is best for the country over all.

How have I contradicted myself and why would you infer I don't really mean what I say? I have consistently held that the majority of preconceived notions are negative. Especially concerning the potential good that gets lost because of them. And I've acknowledged your point that there are some positive ones. My concern isn't with those because they are few and far between.

I do understand your point but more over than not "rational" preconceptions are a rare commodity. Sure they are nice when they come along but back to what I was discussing originally; preconceived notions. Emphasis on notions. Is it your contention that I'm wrong and most preconceived notions are objectively sound? More fact then notion? I must strongly disagree.

What you call. "fear based" assumption is in reality what is experienced as a matter of fact. No fear or assumption on my part. I appreciate your input but I do not suffer from inaccurate deciphering especially when people as much as tell me why they believe I think what I think. Am I perfect at it? No, of course not but I've garnered enough wisdom from living 50 years that most preconceptions people have are defensive and negative concerning others. Not all, but most.

This discussion has proven my point from beginning to end. When that is realized then the opportunity for growth can come into play.

The subjective preconception and insinuation that Christians are Christians because they are delusional is wrong. And to claim it was just and example of the principle you're trying to explain is telling in of itself. Intellectual honesty will provide the proper environment for mutual growth. Until that status can be reached I believe this discussion has been exhausted.