A fool he is who believes and a fool he is who does not.
At any one point we have, for a fool, either a believer or a non believer or both but never neither.
But then who is the fool and who isn't. Who decides who is what?
We, the self proclaimed genius, the self appointed judges pass out the judgement and declare whether who the fool is and coincidentally, the fool is the one which we are not.
We have a believer in one or many of the following: in God, in Science, in Women, in Green-men, in Veganism, in Vengeance, in Sympathy, in Sinfulness, in Tolerance, intolerance, in Rules, in Revolts, in Education, in Ignorance, in Weapon-building, in Talks, in War, in Peace.
One believes in the spiritualism of science while another believes in the science behind spiritualism.
A racial joke is funny for one and offensive for another, but always there is at least one who believes it funny, the creator.
Besides these, pure black and white, believers and non-believers, there also exist a grey region for middle monkeys.
These grey monkeys, if ruffled rightly, would just spring to the one side or the other (or from one to another, time to time) against their initial resolve to remain uninvolved.
A grey monkey turns towards a black or white side when lured with a ripe yellow banana or turned against through a continuous pester.
But which side is right. Should majority be always right? Should the intelligence of the minority be always doubted? Does absolute right and wrong even exist?
Why should anyone even care about another being right or wrong? You could believe, or not, and I needn't agree with you on either case or even on both cases.Being in a minority, even a minority of one, did not make you mad;
- 1984: George Orwell
Why shouldn't the other person, though foolish or misguided, remain so forever. The sky appears blue at day time and changes shade through day and night as the light scatters at various angles at various times.
Could White be White from all angles? Should a belief be a belief from all angles?
It is stupefying to see various colours of a rainbow and believed Stupid to accept the various shades of truth or belief.
To believe or not to believe is one's own volition and to deny that, is, I believe, a sin, and you could believe otherwise or nothing.
While a train moving at a speed of 60mph is not actually moving at 60mph on all frames of reference, why would you want to always assume the other's view should be wrong an seek to correct it while your version is right only from your own perspective?