Epictetus

If a man, said Epictetus, opposes evident truths, it is not easy to find arguments by which we shall make him change his opinion. But this does not arise either from the man’s strength or the teacher’s weakness; for when the man, though he has been confuted, is hardened like a stone, how shall we then be able to deal with him by argument? (Epictetus, Discourses 1.5.1)

Well, if this centuries-old bit of philosophy doesn’t strike a chord with today’s political discourse, I don’t know what will. More than anything, it shows me how these “unprecedented” times we find ourselves in are really nothing new, at least from a philosophical standpoint. For ages, people have been rejecting what is known to be, and hardening themselves against any arguments to support the truth.

Take the flat earth “movement,” if you will. Those who have rejected the demonstrable fact that the Earth is a globe will not be easily swayed by arguments to the contrary, no matter how well-thought, evidence-backed they may be.

The same holds true for our political discourse today. Once someone believes that something is true, even when there is evidence to the contrary, you will find it harder and harder to convince them otherwise.

I am not one to casually toss around the “both sides” comparisons, but there are people across the political spectrum who will reject truths from their opponents simply because they are political rivals. The truth they are rejecting, from my perspective, is that their opponent is incapable of acting in a way that could ever benefit anyone but themselves. Once someone has that in their head, it becomes harder and harder to convince them otherwise.