The truth about believing and being skeptical

Being a blind-believer is commonly associated with close-mindedness. But here's a quick twist: whether you are a skeptic or a believer, at any of the extreme ends, it would make you the exact same close-minded person! One could be so skeptic that they would not accept anything that suggests otherwise. The same way that one could believe in something so much that they would not accept anything that disproves it.

A lot of people like to think they are "neutral". So they would say that they are placed right in the middle along the scale in the above diagram. But note I drew that hollow space in the middle.

Most people's definition of being "neutral" is 'not siding with any of the views'. But I beg to differ–I reckon we cannot not side! If we are thinking about it, we will have to be inclined to either views (believing or not-believing). The correct definition of being "neutral" would then have to be 'balancing the two views' as if on a seesaw, not 'not siding with any of the views'.

The hollow space in the middle is akin to the idea in Quantum Physics that matter exists as a potential (it does not really exist) until someone observes it (please see my previous post on Objectivity). Hence if you say you are positioned right in the middle of the above scale, you would really have to be not thinking about it at all!

Two points I want to make: (1) if you think you're a skeptic and not a blind-believer, be careful as you could possess the exact same negative characteristic as the blind-believer: close-mindedness. And (2) be mindful as you always would have to be inclined to one view or the other; and while you can keep balance between the two views, you cannot be so-called "neutral" unless you're not thinking about it.