I wasn’t particularly provoked by a perception Trump support. The main issue I had with your article is that it is an expression of your individual viewpoint with a claim of objective truth. Not to deny that it was well-written, but you’re making a claim that most everyone acts on instinct and reverse rationalizes — while doing exactly that. There’s a lot of good work being done that seeks to explore how humans develop perspective and you are basically ignoring all of it to extol your viewpoint as truth.
Rather than argue that we should just accept everyone refusing to form rational opinions, why not hold people accountable for opinions that diverge significantly from reality? I feel like this kind of thinking only enables the current shit state of American thought. That’s why science is peer-reviewed. Where would we be if Copernicus just settled for, “well, if the Catholic church thinks the Earth is the center of the solar system, that’s cool too.”