What is an open mind?

Abstract

In this article, I suggest that an open mind wholly unburdened by preconceptions and prejudgments is a mistaken ideal. Not only is it unrealistic; it deprives us of context and background knowledge relevant to judging well. I begin with two cases that show how the ideal of the “prejudice-free” mind, though appealing, may end up thwarting good judgment: blind assessment and “blank-slate” jury selection (the ideal of empaneling jurors without prejudgments). I then trace the prejudice-free ideal to the Enlightenment, exposing its roots in the subject-object worldview. Drawing on Heidegger, I suggest that the subject-object worldview is misguided and that all judgment involves a prior understanding of the matter we judge. To have an open mind, paradoxically, is to have a stake in defending a prior understanding, to be possessed of an understanding of the good that one wishes (at least provisionally) to promote. I then draw out the implications of this view for how we might make sense of cultural differences, examining the difference between the practice of marriage based on a romantic conception of love, and that of arranged marriage. By thinking through these two practices, seemingly opposed, we can arrive at a conception of marriage and love that preserves both.