The ideology of the dispute. True.

I thought here on a sunny morning in St. Petersburg and decided to write the same thought :)
This is my personal reasoning and, in any case, does not claim to be true. Therefore, I ask you not to judge strictly, but rather let's discuss who has a worldview :)

Go…

Truth, often - information that is stored in a person as a field of knowledge.
')
The cells of this area can store both one value (the ideology of loyalty to only one of their decisions), and several (the ideology of taking a different view).

Consider the behavior in the dispute of both ideologies:


Option a: A request is received that coincides with the information stored in the memory cell: The person agrees and does not enter into a dispute.
This option is the same for both ideologies.

option b:
1st ideology:
A request arrives that is different from the information stored in the memory cell: A person begins to argue, because the information is not correct (in his opinion)

2nd ideology:
A request arrives that is different from the information stored in the memory cell: A person begins to argue, because this is new information that can be added to the available information, which will be another step on the way to the truth (in his opinion)

Thus, if we act on the 2nd analogy:
A dispute is a process of collision between two points of view, in the process of which two points of view are born (different from the existing versions in the field of human knowledge), as a result one more step is added to the truth.

The first is the initial point of view of the opponent dispute.
The second is the point of view, resulting from the combination / interaction of two points of view of opponents. The second point of view is often incorrectly called the Truth, which is born in dispute.