I agree with you that many people think that way. Or more accurately = don't think. > But my point here is simply to explain why arguing about these issues bas

I agree with you that many people think that way. Or more accurately = don't think. > But my point here is simply to explain why arguing about these issues based on rational consistency or benefit/harm calculations is so often unproductive. What else can the proponents of change do? How can you change the thinking of people with a framework based on not thinking? Are you suggesting that irrational arguments would be more effective?