by 
A person's views are a crucial part of their identity and play a bigger role than nationality, religion, age and gender. Any of us can be left or right, conservative or liberal.
People also have opinions about other, not so global, but exciting things. To find out what is in the interlocutor's head, it is possible only through conversation. We exchange opinions, find supporters and opponents, allies and opponents. The degree of polarization depends on the width of the gulf between the views of two people.
In a debate, both sides are convinced that they are defending the truth. However, the very existence of a debate indicates that at least one of the participants is mistaken. It is almost impossible to evaluate someone else's position that contradicts your opinion objectively. Counterarguments that convince you of your own rightness come to mind immediately, while the interlocutor is endowed with negative qualities.
In this situation, it is difficult to notice your own misconceptions, but there are several signs that indicate the need to change your opinion.
Double standards
The presence of selective morality in judgments clearly indicates problems with the developed concept. It looks like this: some people are allowed “it” because they are worthy, others are not allowed “it” because they are unworthy. Then comes the argumentation. It is not difficult to justify your position, especially if you know some simple sophistry techniques or know the context a little deeper than your interlocutor. You move your slim battle orders forward, put the enemy to flight, celebrate the victory, while forgetting that in reality good or truth does not always win.
Double standards indicate gaps in your belief structure. You can't explain some positions and therefore settle for the simplest justification. This does not mean that your position is fundamentally wrong, but some refinement is required. In the process of adding knowledge, the view will automatically change. The degree of change depends on the importance of the missing elements.
Denial of reality
If a person denies objective reality, then obviously he should change his views. Otherwise it turns out that he lives literally in a fictional world. This is not an exaggeration. Tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of people right now live on a flat Earth. Hundreds of millions believe in one conspiracy theory or another. The most surprising thing is that adherence to conspiracy theories has no clear correlation with education level or profession. There are medical professionals convinced of the dangers of vaccination who deny the existence of COVID-19. One can find professors who believe in the “moon conspiracy” and world government.
Views that ignore or deny parts of reality have a right to exist, but cannot be taken seriously. Their imposition is rightly met with equilibrium opposition. To get out of the fairy tale world, you have to give up thoughts of your own chosenness. No truth has been revealed to you. Almost everyone around knows or has heard something about these fantastic hypotheses, but do not accept them, do not want to enter the “high society”.
Vagueness of definitions
Some people can give a monologue for 10-20 minutes, using abstruse terms, referring to quotes from celebrities, without ever conveying any idea to the listener. Or at the end of the speech it turns out that the proposed opinion is extremely trivial or naive. The cover of vague definitions hides something very simple. It would have been possible to state a position in a few seconds, but the person wanted to speak for the sake of the process.
Trying to appear clever does not make you clever. Moreover, the effect is often the opposite. At best, the people around you will not understand what is said, but it is quite possible that they will understand it too well, read between the lines, discarding all the pathos. An opinion becomes strong and whole when it can be conveyed in simple words in a short period of time. Naturally, it will be supplemented and expanded upon when necessary.
Dependence on context
Context refers to different interlocutors, the environment, and your emotional state. If an opinion is dependent on external factors, then it does not exist. In any case, it does not represent a complete construction. Usually this happens when a person's views are too ambiguous, go beyond the boundaries of public perceptions of norms. Simply put, in certain situations you are embarrassed or even afraid of your own views.
However, the unwillingness to defend a position does not make you abandon the opinion completely. Therefore, it tries to become comfortable for everyone, adjusts to the expectations of a particular interlocutor. A person who chose such a strategy of behavior is soon exposed. The authority of such an interlocutor falls to zero, his views are no longer of interest to anyone.
Conflict with beliefs
A belief system needs to be re-evaluated if it contradicts personal, truly deep convictions. This seems like a paradox, but it is a common occurrence.
Most people do not generate ideas, but only broadcast something taken from the outside.
Sometimes a fashion trend can replace moral principles, convince a person in the rightness of the chosen authority. This does not happen instantly. Initially, the authority itself is selected in accordance with personal beliefs and preferences. However, people almost never have absolutely identical positions. Disagreements in minutiae are inevitable, and the question is how much disagreement there will be, how much one's opinion will have to be bent to conform to the new ideal.
Thus, step by step, imperceptible to the bearer, but obvious to others, your views change beyond recognition. The old principles lose all force, the acquired views seem cool, progressive, daring, but remain so distant. At a certain point, if you play too much, you can lose yourself, turning into a copy of someone else.
by 