Conscious Neutrality

18 May 2024

I find people who conciously choose to stay neutral in every situtation very immoral. They should let their mind have opinions and not worry about where does it lie in the spectrum. Why does it matter if it’s not in center? If it’s not neutral? If it doesn’t say “ok there are good and bad things on both the sides”?

“Neutrality”, a lot of times, is percieved as a sign of “open-mindedness” and “maturity”. Sure, many issues are nuanced and not simply black and white. But that doesn’t mean one should refrain from having any opinion on it. As long as you’re respecting others opinion [upto a certain extent], why worry pleasing everyone? Just call a spade a spade. Also, a lot of times, people resort to “neutrality” because it gives them a sense of intellectual superiority, which in turn boosts their self-esteem. True intellectualism comes from critically engaging in ideas and standing up for what one believes in.

Great people, over the course of history have had opinions and beleifs of their own in which they strongly beleived. I personally find that beautiful. They didn’t care about where their beleif/opinion laid on the philosohpical, political, etc. spectrum.

This also reminds of one of the Dan Carlin’s Hardcore History episodes where he starts the episode by asking a question, if we were to create a numerical list of all things for which we’re willing to die for, how long will that list be? What goes inside that list? And how long does your list go before you get to things like willing to die for a concept? We’ve seen many revolutionaries throughout history beleive in live free [liberty] or die. A non free life wasn’t worth living for them.

Obviously, dying for an idea or concept, trying to change the world and align it with your own beliefs is going to the extremes and it may or may not be moralistic. But that’s not the point I’m trying to make. I just want to accentuate the beauty of having an idea/opinion/belief and standing up for it.