I understand that several people here think that it is important to be impartial, to maintain an open mind, and to make sure inbuilt bias is compensated for. This makes sense when confronted with new information you don't understand, and before you have had time to process it.
But I don't understand maintaining such a stance after you have assessed the argument being made. I think that at this point you either agree or you don't, and pussyfooting around this reality is just a form of dishonesty, both with yourself and with everyone else.
In this way "seeing both sides" means either that you just don't understand the argument, that you are concealing your true beliefs, or that you have no opinion either way. In all of these cases, what is the benefit in making a comment? Usually it appears to be done in order to shame someone expressing a strong belief. If this is the aim then why not just be honest and argue the other side?
But I don't understand maintaining such a stance after you have assessed the argument being made. I think that at this point you either agree or you don't, and pussyfooting around this reality is just a form of dishonesty, both with yourself and with everyone else.
In this way "seeing both sides" means either that you just don't understand the argument, that you are concealing your true beliefs, or that you have no opinion either way. In all of these cases, what is the benefit in making a comment? Usually it appears to be done in order to shame someone expressing a strong belief. If this is the aim then why not just be honest and argue the other side?