issue109 committed&critical 小女子拜求指点

stellababyUID: 2882980

一战新G，毫无经验...

People who are the most deeply committed to an idea or policy are also the most critical of it.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.



Perfection is what people have long pursued, especially for those possessions people care so much, therefore, it is reasonable and undeniable that people who are the most deeply committed to an idea or policy are also critical of it, since they clearly know how to shape those ideas and polices to be perfect, but at the same time, they also keep the most tolerant to the imperfection and even turn a blind eye to them no matter how imperfect they are, under such circumstance, it is people who disagree with a certain idea or policy can be the most critical. It seems complicated to figure out the logic since it depends on different situations, therefore, I partially agree with the assertion.

As what I have mentioned before, an idea or policy that people are strictly adherence to can never be perfect, it is common for some fanatic followers to spend life time shaping their belief and strongly against errors in it, just like scientists will concentrate more on modify new theories, trying hard to find their deflects in order to make them impeccable. Democracy is a current value in western world as well as a popular topic among people who stick to it. They pay much effort to examine it, analyzing intensely how it gets into debacle when it applied to southeastern Asia or Latin America countries. The reason why they remain critical of democracy is mainly because they want it to be universal, that is to make it become a fundamental idea that every countries hold. It is such ideal goal that pushes their step to get further in criticizing democracy. However, no matter how many examples have been found to prove it impossible to be universal or how weak when it applies in Islamic countries respect religion supremacy, they choose to overlook such exception and seldom critical these aspects.

Those who are dislike a certain idea or policy, indeed can be more disinterested to find out that idea’s deflect and judge more fairly than people who are most committed to it. Take the example of democracy again. The opinion from Islamic world cannot be ignored because they explicitly point out democracy has double standards between western world and Islamic world while this so called universal value can become an excuse for western countries interfere their inferior affairs. Therefore, to fully get a view on an idea or policy, we should judge opinion on different sides because humans seldom can be truly composed and candid, while their critic more or less attached with selfishness.

Generally speaking, people who are the most deeply committed to an idea or policy are sometimes the most critical of it, but they have the potential to overlook the deflects because they will never give up what they strictly believe, and others who disalike the idea or policy can critically find out the impaction of the idea or policy but also have to potential to be over-critical because of the inner abhor.