In the The New York Times article,“How to Move a Mind," author Maggie Koerth-Baker challenges society’s negative connotations towards “flip-floppers” or people who change their minds. She claims everyone does it consistently and it has become a part of everyone’s lifestyle. Koerth-Baker describes the reason we place much guilt and pessimism on changing one’s mind is because our choices are attached to our emotions. Since our emotions lead our decisions, Koerth-Baker explains that by changing one’s mind society believes it proves the lack of emotional or moral capability of a particular person. She argues that by changing one’s mind, we are changing a fundamental part of who we are and therefore, we choose to ignore or convince ourselves otherwise. Even though each change has a profound fundamental meaning, Koerth-Baker asserts that such change should not be harshly judged, everyone is and should be capable of changing their mind. While changing one’s mind can been seen as a negative action in our society, flip-flopping is proof of one’s development of thinking in an inventive society and does not define insecurity or lack of moral capability. It is not just to place a negative connotation on anyone who changes his or her mind because this does not always imply a negative connotation. All articles read for this paper discuss the idea that American society judges and criticizes “flip-floppers” because it suggests uncertainty, lack of decisiveness and even a fault in character. According to Koerth-Baker, flip-flopping should not be condemned: “We tend to side with people who share our identity-even when the facts disagree-and calling someone a flip-flopper is a way of calling them morally suspect, as if those who change their minds are in some way being unfaithful to their group. This is nonsense, of course. People change their minds all the time, even about very important matters” (Koerth-Baker, 2012, p. 14). She believes that it is a natural process to develop one’s thinking and eventually shift on a particular position. Similarly, in the Psychology Today article published August 7, 2011, “Changing Your Mind," journalist Alex Lickerman argues that being able to change one’s mind ultimately shows one’s potential to ignore his or her pride and choose what is correct-whether or not they agree with it: “The ability to change one’s mind, to admit implicitly or explicitly that we were wrong, in other words, ultimately boils down to an issue of character-of our ability to transcend our small-minded ego and care more that value is being created than we’re the ones creating it” (Lickerman, 2011). Lickerman states that it goes beyond the action of changing sides but the process in being able to do so. He acknowledges that by admitting one was wrong and they experienced a shift in views that represents strong character. Lickerman, just as Koerth-Baker, questions why society doesn’t value an intellectual who is capable to let go and consider other options; “So why don’t we value instead the intell