While I appreciate the sentiment, and I can't help but identify with it, your use in your response above of the words "truth" and "fact" almost interchangeably are what I'm suggesting are the problem. Considering that your only contact with the objective universe is via your subjective interpretations of it, how do you know that your perceptions are more in line with facts than mine?

Additionally, the idea that others should behave in ways that agree with my own perceptions of reality doesn't sit well with me. I'd *like* them to, of course, but what if *I'm* wrong?

In my parlance, nobody's perception holds any bearing on facts. Facts don't care about our feelings, facts remain facts regardless. Whatever truths may be evident to you, are not necessarily evident to me. While I agree that we *should* strive to align our truths with facts as much as possible, we also need to acknowledge the fact that for an infinite number of reasons our psyches are only capable of so much, themselves being borne and shaped out of ideologies and narratives that we only have so much control and influence over.

It is my view that understanding that people can be innocently and honestly wrong and incapable of changing their views but still decent people when their contexts are accounted for is an important step for the more enlightened of us (of which I can only aspire to count myself a part of) to be able to interact with those of opposing opinions in constructive ways.

While it may disappoint me that somebody is playing a self-or-mutually-destructive game that I might consider to be obviously wrong, stupid, or counter-factual, I can still try to understand why they're playing that game in order to build meaningful dialog with them... or, alternatively, identify that it may be best to just run away as fast as my legs will carry me.