It’s hard to have any in depth discussions on political and power forums. On media shows especially in such forums people have predetermined agendas and the the ultimate aim usually is to win the argument or conquer the opponent that has its own rewards for winner whether that be propagation of personal opinion or spread of political and power views. None the less understanding any subject matter or opinion in depth requires dedication and commitment. There are no short cuts. And learning a conduct/science/art or even opinion needs proper hard work for learning the very basics of matter in hand. You can understand a doctor’s opinion in a talk show but you need to remember that the doctor had spent a decade of her life (sometimes much more) to learn to make that opinion that still remains fallible and open to scrutiny and criticism as at the end of the day it’s a person’s opinion based on a set of knowledge. If enquired a doctor has all the responsibility to offer the audience/viewers/readers that where she acquired her knowledge from that led to development of her opinion. If proved incorrect or inaccurate in any way the doctor must return to original sources and not only must update her knowledge but must immediately change the previous opinion. An honest doctor would spread the knowledge to others by all possible means so that human life may benefit from it.
Interestingly I come across opinions and wars on opinions based on extremely scanty and patchy knowledge and backgrounds especially on social media. People don’t even know what the underlying matter behind a facebook post, a single twitter line or an Instagram picture is but they are ready not only to propagate it but also to defend the opinion that comes to them as a hash tag. Dr Dawkins used the word ‘meme’ for this attitude and trend. I am guilty to have been indulged into similar practice I must admit. Such careless and reckless attitudes and practices are unhealthy and unhelpful in any subject matter but they become seriously dangerous when it comes to spreading personalised ideas of religion or in the name of religion to an audience that has no sense of critical analysis and appraisal and has emotional acceptance of snippets of information. One big simple explanation is that we can’t ask an expert of religion to offer background and original sources that led to development of their beliefs and opinions and people do follow them blindly like experts of any other conduct, However the consequences of same attitude in this area in very serious, unlike any other filed. Let’s be careful, sceptical and even suspicious whatever may arrive to us on quick and patchy knowledge sharing sources.