I'm going to take a moment to discuss something not related to Access, but brought up in this thread: cognitive dissonance.
It's, in simple terms, the discomfort related to two conflicting ideas in the consciousness that creates a desire for resolution.
Journalists, PhD candidates, law students and some scientists are trained to deal with cognitive dissonance. Sometimes people outside those disciplines can, on their own, learn to deal with the need to resolve conflicting ideas without taking a polar position. My mother, a teacher for 30+ years, finally fell to the saying, "To each his own."
Here's a good example: Is it better to use pesticides so that millions have sufficient food supplies, or that we avoid pesticides for better individual health?
This phenomenon was demonstrated quite well with the third link that Pat H. used in her post #66, contrary to the title of the article. The answer to her question was in plain view, in her own reference. It's demonstrated daily in the mass media, where mega corporations find profit in the selling of a one-answer-is-correct-for-all position for conflicting ideals. Politicians as well use this technique to polarize a base for their personal benefit. President Trump, unquestionably a media master of playing to the simple-minded, learned from his reality TV days, couldn't be a better example of this.
Any time you feel the need to justify a single position amongst alternatives, you might want to ask yourself, "can I, without falling victim to the proclivity to adhere to a personal bias, recognize the validity of two opposing positions at once?"