[trendoid]

This is what scientific/rational beliefs are all about, open to new data and susceptible to change. Normally, when your long held beliefs somehow become part of your identity, it becomes harder to let go off them when contradicting data arrives. Being ambivalent is also seen as a negative trait since it signifies indecisive mind. There are shit loads of behaviors and expectations that evolution has invented which not only are not relevant today but also harm the society and individual in the long run.

[TheSpiceIsLife]

Also, I'm not sure how you got to this being about scientific / rational beliefs. I'd posit a persons emotion response to music is as irrational and unscientific as they come. Changing ones mind about music down the track (pun!) has nothing to do with an analysis of the data because, with regard to music, "good" is entirely subjective, as distinct from "quality" with regard to acuity.

I think this is the part of the 'science' that some people take issue with. The 'scientific method' isn't always an appropriate way to view everything.

[trendoid]

Yes, I agree with the music bit. I had other examples in mind that Sivers mentioned like his opinions about Indonesia and gym that changed overtime as he got more exposure to both.

Science might not be the best way to view everything but I was pointing out to the practice of constantly changing ones beliefs without putting extensive emotional investment in any of them.

If I love someone today and tomorrow they turn out to be a betrayer, I will be hurt but knowing humans are complex, I shouldn't be too surprised and change my views about that person instead of living in denial.

[TheSpiceIsLife]

Ambivalence does have an upside: it reduces the propensity of a person to react. When reacting could lead to worse outcomes ambivalence can be the better strategy. I also don't think ambivalence and indecisiveness are the same thing. Ambivalence says "don't care" or "not interested", whereas indecisiveness says "not sure" or "confused".

[trendoid]

ambivalence : "the state of having mixed feelings or contradictory ideas about something or someone"

[pndmnm]

While the historical meaning of "ambivalence" (literally -- strength in two directions) does mean a contradictory complex of feelings, I now almost exclusively hear it used to mean a low level of feeling or lack of caring. When you say ambivalence, this is most likely what people will understand to be the meaning.

[microtonal]

Although, I am not a native speaker, I always interpret it as having contradictory feelings. Maybe because 'ambivalent' in my native language also has the original meaning. I agree with a peer poster that apathy is what you are describing.

[trendoid]

Hmm, haven't noticed it since people around me dont speak enough English. "Apathy" is what I still see more to describe "low level of feeling or lack of caring".

[001sky]

'Ambivalence' can be used in a strategic context (ie, similar to 'strategic ambiguity'--in relation thought/intent). Whereas other notions of "muddled" are pertain to more passive states (apathy, confusion).

[TheSpiceIsLife]

Dictionaries are not authoritative sources of word definitions for living languages. Current usage is the authoritative source, dictionaries are a high latency recording of word definitions based on usage.