Not everything is invalid, but everything can seem valid

 In a previous post I mentioned that I had a theory that "everything is invalid". Now I realize that statement is not only false, but a misleading way to present the moral of the theory.

Essentially, the theory goes that everything a person can possibly think or say can seemingly be justified with the right words. A part of me thought this invalidated everything that could be said; that even the theory invalidated itself. Now I realize that this is a glaring contradiction.

However, I still think there's something to be drawn from the idea that anything a person can say may seem valid if explained the right way. This leads to the dangerous conclusion that anybody can be taken in by a thought, whether that thought is valid or not, hence the existence of conspiracy theorists like flat earthers.

It's not just pathos either; dots can be connected and drawn in such elaborate ways between ideas that anything could seem logical even if it isn't.

I know that I could do more to explain how this theory works, but I'm afraid I don't have what it takes to make a valid argument for it. However, I would advise that if you were to take away anything from it, then take this: if a person tries to convince you of something, always be willing to open discussion and dig deeper. Even science isn't about telling the truth; it's about reducing the uncertainty of what we know.

There's a fine balance between being open, and being skeptical. If you want to know the truth about anything, there's a fine line to tread between the two. Be open to changing your mind, while at the same time asking questions about everything you come across.