Thought-enabling vs. Thought-abrasion

I have a tendency to only surround myself with those people who take opinions similar to my own. I do not think I am alone, and I believe this is a dangerous habit. This habit is seclusive, subjective, even ignorant.  Strong personality types often wear thin on each other, simply because they rely strongly on thought.  Due to this reliance, it can be burdensome to have an idea that is not appreciated.

I believe this can create a cycle in which both listeners become consensus enablers, detrimental to true insight and, further, diluting the identity that makes them the very thinker that they are.  This must be stopped.

While my intention is not to appear overly argumentative, it is to speak freely rather than to be silent.  Those moments in which my mind trails off during the discussion are those in which I should become fully engaged.   These are the moments in which my opinion could be most valuable; these are the moments in which my identity comes to life in discussion.

.... these are the moments to be embraced, even relished. There is, however, one caveat: an opinion accomplishes little if given in a condescending manner.  Sharing knowledge and information in an affable way can sometimes be difficult, leading to the careful phrasing of thoughts. Taking such care is acceptable up until the point that it loses personal meaning or is passive aggressive. It is possible to actively question one without downplaying his/her thoughts. Such thought-abrasions might best come in the form of a question as to why one might think this way, considering alternatives. Ultimately, it is imperative that I be careful in my rhetoric but unleashing in my thought.