I belong to political party A and my friend belongs to party B. Whenever I present the fact with proper data, he still doesn't accept it telling some reasons not to accept the fact.

Is there any word for this kind of person?

  • I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because there are many duplicates found by an on-site search for 'blinkered'. – Edwin Ashworth May 7 '16 at 9:17
  • 1
    @EdwinAshworth But Op would have needed to know to search for "blinkered", whereas that's one of the words he is asking for! – TrevorD May 7 '16 at 12:39
  • 3
    A somewhat tangential comment: What one person considers to be "facts" and "proper data", another person considers to be a mere interpretation - or mis-interpretation - of statistics. – TrevorD May 7 '16 at 12:44
  • 2
    Though I can't seem to find the research being done, there is a psychological phenomenon where people think (erronuously) that if only the other person would listen, they would understand they are wrong. Turns out it works both ways. As this is about politics that phenomenon applies. Your friend will have exactly the same opinion of you ;-) – Bent May 7 '16 at 16:38
  • @TrevorD I said it was answered before, not easy to find. – Edwin Ashworth May 8 '16 at 14:54

11 Answers 11


Biased or prejudiced is the term you are looking for

| improve this answer | |
  • +1 for biased but prejudiced, not so much. – vickyace May 7 '16 at 10:11
  • 1
    "biased" would suggest a pre-judged position or leaning towards such. The question is more one of "my mind's made up, don't confuse me with the facts", which is more blunt and almost "final" to my mind. – Prof Yaffle May 7 '16 at 10:52
  • @ProfYaffle But what about he made up his mind only if he is biased in the first place. Usually, biased people tend to defend thier stand at all cost, whether it's logical or not. Don't you think so? – vickyace May 7 '16 at 11:59
  • @ProfYaffle Also, the op might have mentioned a political example but we are supposed to consider the question title because it is more broad. I think biased would justify. – vickyace May 7 '16 at 12:01
  • @vickyace - I think of bias as a tendency, a leaning - not a black-and-white position. "I think my daughter is beautiful, but I'm biased" - that doesn't mean that I'd argue until Hell freezes over that she is, but that I'm inclined to see her that way. – Prof Yaffle May 7 '16 at 13:56

I'd suggest opinionated: it suggests not just having opinions, but that those opinions are unshakeable even in the teeth of compelling evidence.

If you want something a little more blunt, try pig-headed or bigoted.

I should say, though, that in the political context you mention, the term employed often depends on which side of the political spectrum is making the accusation: Luddite, bleeding heart, etc.

| improve this answer | |
  • +1 for bigoted, whose meaning does not necessarily imply racism, or prejudice toward a demographic as it is widely mis-assumed as having. – caelum19 May 7 '16 at 20:12

Your friend might be a sore loser/poor sport, i.e. someone who doesn't like to accept defeat and sticks to their guns even when they're proven wrong.

stick to one's guns; also stand by one's guns (chiefly AmEng)

Fig. to remain firm in one's convictions; to stand up for one's rights. (based on a soldier remaining in place to fire a gun even when all appears to be lost.)(emphasis is mine.)

McGraw-Hill Dictionary of American Idioms and Phrasal Verbs

To refuse to change one's beliefs or actions.

Etymology: based on the military meaning of stick to your guns (to continue shooting at an enemy although it puts you in great danger)

Cambridge Dictionary of American Idioms

Also, consider hardliner

HARDLINER - Someone who sticks to established doctrines without consideration of falibility. also: dogmatic


It sounds like your friend is a hardliner and you'll never convince him.


| improve this answer | |

Try adamant - not willing to change an opinion or decision or refusing to be persuaded or to change one’s mind.

In your case the guy does is not open to opinions because he's adamant.

| improve this answer | |

It may have various reasons, may be the person is too egoistic to be able to accept someone else's belief..or he has an unreal, fantasized, false sense of superiority..or may be he is just biased and prejudiced. You can say having a jaundiced eye for being biased:

Having a jaundiced eye disallows his other senses to perceive a view different from his own.

| improve this answer | |

Yes, there is, and it is:

nonbeliever (noun)

According to Google, it means:

a person who does not believe in something, especially one who has no religious faith.

According to Dictionary.com, it means:

a person who lacks belief or faith, as in God, a religion, an idea, or an undertaking.

Some of these definitions lean towards religious nonbelievers, but if you used it in a sentence with a situation like yours,

Bob, a supporter of Ronald Brump, is a nonbeliever when it comes to true facts I tell him about who he is supporting.

It would not matter.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    What about the part of the question that says he rejects things because he belongs to a different group? – vickyace May 7 '16 at 6:27
  • Does he reject the facts because he is more biased or more of a non-believer? – vickyace May 7 '16 at 6:29
  • 1
    This word is more abouth faith/religion. Ignorant may suit better? – zx8754 May 7 '16 at 9:04
  • 1
    "non-believer" would have religious overtones to me, not political or more general "I'm-not-listening" connotations. – Prof Yaffle May 7 '16 at 10:50
  • @zx8754 Associating faith/religion with the question is an assumption. The label "ignorant" when paired with the assumption of faith or religion is also itself an assumption. The question states nothing about the level or quality of education of the person for whom a descriptive word is requested. – Deborah Speece May 10 '16 at 10:53

Ideologue "an often blindly partisan advocate or adherent of a particular ideology"

| improve this answer | |

Most of these answers miss the mark to me... I interpret the strict question as "someone who will not listen to an opposing point of view no matter how well-argued or presented". On that basis, the best descriptions would be:


having a mind firmly unreceptive to new ideas or arguments:


narrow-minded and subjective; unwilling to understand another viewpoint.

... or any other "unreceptive" synonyms.

| improve this answer | |
  • This suggested answer seems to assume that the person must be swayed by the data. One can be receptive to hearing new arguments and to understand another viewpoint yet still not be swayed in their own ideas, usually owing to a different hierarchy of what they consider important values for basing political choices on. A different hierarchy, and low desire or ability to verbalize an opposing argument, does not make someone "closed-minded" or "blinkered". Those are negative labels applied by one party when another is not swayed by their arguments. – Deborah Speece May 10 '16 at 11:08
  • Well, thanks for the downvote, but I have to disagree. The OP stated that "whenever" (== all the time), "with proper data" (== supported rationale) and then his friend still doesn't accept it. That implies no matter what the argument or how well-reasoned, the answer is rejected, which does not sound like they're receptive at all. Yes, I've suggested terms that are possibly considered pejorative, but that doesn't invalidate them - certainly not without additional context in the question. – Prof Yaffle May 10 '16 at 11:55
  • It is true that the OP did not specifically request a word that was fair and non-insulting. However, this answer suggests words that are not, and I think that makes it a poor one. – Deborah Speece May 11 '16 at 1:04
  • That the answer equates "being receptive" with "being swayed", which is invalid, is also a problem and does invalidate it IMO. (Did not mean to double comment, but was surprised there was a time limit.) – Deborah Speece May 11 '16 at 1:16
  • I think we'll have to agree to differ (which is ironic, given the subject material). To me, the objective definition of these words supports the original request - of course, otherwise I wouldn't have suggested them - and they are valid without always being insulting or negative, irrespective of whether the OP intended any emotional connotations. "My father is very blinkered about modern ideas of equality" does not condemn him, it merely lays out his unwillingness to listen; likewise "I'm very closed-minded about the forthcoming referendum" is simply a statement without terrible slight. – Prof Yaffle May 11 '16 at 7:13

A sceptic: someone who doesn't blindly accept what people tell them, but critically evaluates everything.

| improve this answer | |
  • This is a reasonable offer, but not a perfect fit, IMO. Whereas a skeptic is universally skeptical, it sounds like in OP's case his interlocutor is skeptical of anything which does not adhere to his established preconceptions. – Dan Bron May 7 '16 at 15:41
  • 1
    The OP seems to be suggesting that the friend is not critically evaluating the evidence presented to them. – Lightness Races in Orbit May 7 '16 at 19:55
  • The OP could add an example. It is not clear that the OP's self-assessment of his presentation of "the proper facts" is not itself biased, or even if the evidence presented is indisputably factual. – Deborah Speece May 10 '16 at 10:29

If you wanted to take a less accusatory tone than the existing answers ("bigoted" and "biased" are extremely laden terms), you could observe that your friend is stubborn, apparently refusing to accept the evidence in front of them because they are stuck in their ways or because they are embarrassed to be proven wrong.

However, I would also caution you against being stubborn yourself. Perhaps listen to the "reasons" your friend provided, and give those reasons the consideration they're due, before leaping to the conclusion that the only reason your friend disagrees with you is their party membership. Maybe you're the one who's wrong? Gaining awareness of our own biases is not easy, but you can at least try to limit the ways in which those biases could even potentially influence you, by not dismissing counter-arguments out of hand just because the arguee does not run in the same circles as you do.

| improve this answer | |

You said it's a "fact" then the answer is the word wrong. Let's ignore that 'fact' and go with dissent.

dissent, verb –Google

hold or express opinions that are at variance with those previously, commonly, or officially expressed.

The title: "Word for someone who [dissents]?" A dissenter.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.