To be fair dogmatic statements never really had a chance against dogs. But are dogmatic statements entirely bad?

According to the dictionary, a dogma is: something held as an established opinion; especially: a definite authoritative tenet.

Therefore, any firmly held belief is a dogma.

My opening sentence was a dogmatic statement.

Dogmatic statements have been used by great thinkers. For example, Steve Jobs built his career on being dogmatic. This aided his popularity and also gained him some criticism. He was dogmatic in his beliefs that computers would change the world. He held so strongly to that opinion that he convinced himself, and many others, that it was a fact. And eventually, he made it so.

He was also dogmatic on time frames and did not shy away from stating and enforcing them. Because these dogmatic statements were enforced on others there grew some resistance. People didn’t want Steve’s opinion, which was often a very narrow time frame, to be their rule of law.

As a writer, I frequently catch myself being dogmatic. This can serve as a positive and a negative.

Afterall, the majority of the time it is my opinion that I’m writing about.

However in general, and specifically when writing, it’s a great practice to support your beliefs with why. Dogmatic statements can become an easy alternative to explaining the logic and reasoning behind a belief. Personally, I’ve noticed a deeper growth in understanding my own beliefs when I have to explain why I believe something.

Dogmatic statements can be harmful in two specific areas. One, overuse of dogmatic statements. You won’t be right all the time and when proven wrong it’s going to be more painful to rescind your statements when you just claimed it was completely true.

Second, it’s a bad habit to fall into. Particularly in conversation, it’s a big turn off to be dogmatic. People want a discussion, not a lecture.

But most importantly remember, dogs > dogmatic.