It is more harmful to compromise one's own beliefs than to adhere to them.

The statement above asserts that it is more harmful to abandon one’s own idea than to commit to them. The unsubstantiated claim of the author has several flaws.

To begin with, some people believe that compromising one’s own belief is a destructive act, since the compromising person is betraying his/her own beliefs and also others. Adhering to a cause sometimes make the one responsible toward that belief. To illustrate, consider that if it was not for the consistent leaders who preserved the integrity of themselves, in the crucible of the vicissitudes, no significant change would have ever taken place. Take leaders such as Gandhi and Martin Luther King. These were regular people who were consistent in the realization of their dreams of a better society, despite the threats and bribes offered to both of them. Had they compromise their principles, their whole followers would be harmed from their leaders being unfaithful to the belief.

However a blind commitment to some beliefs can exact irredeemable consequence for the societies. Many people hold dangerous thoughts, which holding them is seriously damaging. Consider all the dictators who defy any compromise of their opinions. Kim Jong-un, is the dictator leader of North Korea where a significant share of his people suffer from the lack of food. He did not compromised on an atomic issue which further sanctioned the North Korea and has deteriorated the living situation of the people for the sake of his own power. Also think about the extremist ideas of terrorists who tear apart people because of their believes. Is compromising such believes more harmful for the society than sticking to them?

Finally, to claim that it is harmful to refrain from holding one’s own idea, as the author claims, is absurd, for it is entirely tied to the nature of a belief. Besides that, situations can determine whether one’s compromise is harmful or his/her loyalty to a convict. For instance, when individuals under the inhuman torture make a moral comprises _ for example, giving the code of a bank’s safe to a robber_ as their life is at stake, such a compromise saves their own lives rather than being harmful for them. Therefore, whether losing an idea is more harmful than adhering to it, rests upon the nature of the belief and their pertaining situation.

In short, the harmfulness of compromising a belief is predicated upon whether the belief is harmful per se, and also the situation that such a belief is refrained. We cannot assess the harm of an abandonment of a belief in a vacuum.