ONE ACTION DOES NOT MAKE US EXPERTS ON SOMEONE ELSE’S PSYCHOLOGY
After I published Namjoon’s hologenetic profile, someone commented:
“After he went to Chris Brown's concert to show support for him, we know what's his psychology.”
I felt the need to respond to this separately — not because I’m going to defend Namjoon or Hobi.
I’m not defending them.
And I’m not going to claim that their presence at the concert was necessarily the right thing to do, either.
I simply believe there is a fundamental difference between criticizing a specific action and claiming that we now understand a person’s psychology.
And that difference is not just about Namjoon.
It is about how we treat other people, information, and our own attention in general.
1. FACT AND INTERPRETATION ARE NOT THE SAME THING
The fact:
Namjoon and Hobi were at Chris Brown’s concert.
The interpretation:
They went there specifically to show him support.
The next interpretation:
Therefore, they support him as a person.
The next:
Therefore, they agree with his actions.
And then:
Therefore, we now know their psychology and value system.
But look at how many assumptions we have to make to get from the first statement to the last.
We do not know the circumstances of their presence.
We do not know why they went.
We do not know what they knew.
We do not know how they personally feel about Chris Brown.
We do not know what their presence there actually meant to them.
Until the people involved explain the situation themselves, everything beyond the observable fact is interpretation.
You can make hypotheses.
You cannot present a hypothesis as an established fact.
2. HUMANITY IS AT LEAST 2026 YEARS OLD. NAMJOON IS 32.
This seems obvious, but somehow it needs to be said in situations like this.
Humanity has existed for at least 2,026 years according to the conventional calendar we use.
I’m 23.
Namjoon is 32.
Hobi is 32.
And do you really expect a person, by that age, to know the history, biography, actions, worldview, and moral position of every person who has ever existed on Earth?
I don’t.
I don’t know every artist.
I don’t know every musician.
I don’t know every actor.
I don’t know every scientist.
I don’t know every politician.
I don’t know the history of every person whose work has ever ended up in my playlist.
And that isn’t because I don’t care about the world.
It’s because human life is finite.
We do not have an infinite amount of time to study everything that exists.
If someone gave me eternity, I would happily study everything.
But I don’t have eternity.
So I have to choose where I put my attention.
I think that is true for every other person, too.
3. WE DON’T HAVE TO KNOW AN ARTIST’S BIOGRAPHY TO EXPERIENCE THEIR WORK
Imagine someone with thousands of songs in their playlist.
They might know one artist’s name.
They might not know another artist’s name.
They might know the biography of a third.
They might have never even seen what a fourth artist looks like.
That is normal.
Because a work of art and the person who created it are not necessarily the same thing.
Music, film, literature, photography, fashion, and other forms of creative work are simultaneously art, cultural products, and parts of an economy.
What we receive is influenced by:
the market;
the audience;
cultural context;
trends;
current events;
producers;
creative teams;
commercial goals;
social expectations;
the industry as a whole.
So it is completely possible to enjoy a piece of art without knowing anything about the personal history of its creator.
And it is completely possible for a work to be objectively strong, talented, or culturally significant while its creator does not fit our personal moral standards.
There is no logical contradiction in that.
4. BUT SEPARATING THE WORK FROM THE CREATOR IS NOT AN OBLIGATION, EITHER
And I want to make an important distinction here.
If someone says:
“I can’t separate the art from the person who created it.”
—I don’t think they are wrong.
If the creator’s moral character is part of how you determine the value of their work, that is your value system.
You can stop listening to an artist.
Stop watching an actor.
Stop buying an author’s books.
Unfollow them.
Stop supporting them.
Stop recommending their work.
That is a completely legitimate way to exercise your own choice.
You do not have to force yourself to consume art created by someone whose values you reject.
But that does not mean a person with a different value system has to make the same choice.
5. SO THE PROBLEM IS NOT DISAGREEMENT ITSELF
I see no problem with saying:
“I don’t like the fact that they were at that concert.”
Or:
“For me, being there is incompatible with my values.”
Or even:
“After this, I no longer want to support BTS.”
Those are all legitimate positions.
The problem begins when:
“I think this action was wrong”
turns into
“I know why they did it,”
and then into
“I know what kind of people they are.”
No.
You don’t.
At least, you don’t know that from this one fact.
One action does not automatically turn us into experts on another person’s inner world.
6. AND THIS IS WHERE RESPONSIBILITY COMES IN
I’m drawn to the idea that we don’t necessarily need to put a final label on someone:
“good” or “bad.”
There is a person.
There are their decisions.
There are their actions.
There are the consequences of those actions.
There is responsibility for them.
And there is our own evaluation.
That allows us to say both:
“I believe this action was wrong.”
and:
“I do not know this entire person.”
Those two statements do not contradict each other.
7. IF SOMEONE VIOLATES YOUR VALUES, YOU HAVE A CHOICE
If you believe Namjoon or Hobi did something incompatible with your values, you do not have to hate them.
You can simply stop supporting them.
Nobody is forcing you to listen to BTS.
Nobody is forcing you to buy their music.
Nobody is forcing you to treat them as moral authorities.
Nobody is forcing you to share their value system.
They have the freedom to choose their actions.
You have the freedom to choose what place they occupy in your life.
And this is where, I think, the attempt to control someone else’s life ends and genuine personal responsibility begins.
8.PUBLICITY DOES NOT MEAN GIVING UP THE RIGHT TO BE HUMAN
There is another important side to this: the freedom of the artists themselves.
Being a public figure does not mean giving up the human right to be complicated.
When someone becomes a public figure, they do accept certain consequences.
Their decisions will be discussed.
Their actions will be criticized.
People will be disappointed.
Some people will stop supporting them.
That is normal.
Being public should never mean being immune to criticism.
But being public also does not mean:
“Now millions of people have the right to control your identity, explain who you are, tell you what you think, decide whom you should support, and dictate what kind of person you are supposed to be.”
No.
An artist still has their own values.
Their own freedom of choice.
Their own responsibility.
And even the right not to explain their choices.
If Namjoon or Hobi want to comment on this situation, that is their decision.
If they do not, that is also their decision.
We do not automatically gain access to someone’s inner world simply because they once chose to step onto a stage.
9. BECAUSE YOUR ATTENTION IS ONE OF THE MOST EXPENSIVE RESOURCES YOU HAVE
This matters especially in the age of social media.
Your attention is constantly being competed for.
Platforms want it.
Brands want it.
Media wants it.
Algorithms want it.
Politicians want it.
Influencers want it.
Conflicts want it.
Scandals want it.
Other people’s lives want it.
And sometimes we voluntarily give enormous amounts of our own attention to things we supposedly hate.
We spend hours:
researching someone;
looking for more evidence;
arguing;
trying to convince people;
proving our point;
following them;
getting angry;
spreading information.
And eventually, the person we supposedly cannot stand receives hours of our life.
I’m not sure that is always a good trade.
10. AND THIS IS WHERE I WANT TO DRAW A VERY SIMPLE LINE
Ignoring something bad is not the solution.
If something genuinely bad happened, call it bad.
If someone caused harm, acknowledge it.
If there is a problem, discuss it.
But there is a difference between:
“I see the problem.”
and:
“I am going to give this problem an enormous amount of my attention.”
The first is awareness.
The second is a choice.
11. IF THERE IS TOO MUCH DARKNESS IN THE WORLD, WE DON’T HAVE TO PRETEND IT IS LIGHT
I’m not drawn to the idea that loving the world means pretending everything is fine.
If something is harmful, call it harmful.
You do not have to call it beautiful just because you want a beautiful picture of the world.
You do not have to excuse bad actions simply because you like the person who committed them.
You do not have to close your eyes to things you find disturbing.
But there is another question:
What do we do after we have named the problem?
We can spend our entire lives analyzing it.
We can endlessly tell everyone how terrible it is.
We can build our entire identity around fighting it.
Or we can ask:
“Okay. What do I want to put in its place?”
Because the world does not automatically become better simply because we hate what is bad.
If you believe there is too much darkness, create more light.
If you believe there is too much cruelty, add something that is the opposite of cruelty.
If you believe there is too much hatred, create something that people can love.
The darkness has always existed.
It probably always will.
But the amount of good in the world is not fixed.
We can create more of it.
12. BECAUSE MAKING SOMETHING GOOD IS SOMETIMES STRONGER THAN FIGHTING SOMETHING BAD
If you don’t like someone else’s music — support music you believe in.
If you don’t like the culture around you — create culture of your own.
If you don’t like the way people communicate — communicate differently.
If you don’t like the way people treat one another — treat people differently.
If you think there is too much cruelty in the world — add something that contradicts it.
You do not always have to spend your life cleaning up the same mess.
Sometimes it is much more useful to build something better beside it.
The mess existed.
The mess will probably continue to exist.
But making sure there is more of something better is always an option.
13. SO I CHOOSE NOT HATE, BUT DIRECTION
That does not mean I will defend every person I like.
It does not mean I will excuse bad actions.
It does not mean I think criticism is toxic.
It does not mean we should be kind to everyone and ignore everything.
My position is much simpler:
Call things what they are, but do not invent what you do not know.
Criticize actions if you believe they are wrong.
But do not turn assumptions about someone’s motives into facts.
Do not assign beliefs to people that they have never expressed.
Do not declare yourself an expert on someone’s psychology based on one event.
And above all — do not give your own life to the very thing you supposedly want to remove from it.
14. AND FINALLY — THIS IS NOT REALLY ABOUT NAMJOON
Namjoon is almost secondary here.
This situation simply illustrates a much broader problem.
We constantly try to determine:
who is good;
who is bad;
who deserves love;
who deserves hate;
who is “right”;
who is “wrong”;
who deserves support;
who should be cancelled.
But life is much more complicated than these categories.
People do good things and bad things.
They change.
They make mistakes.
They learn.
They refuse to learn.
They face consequences.
Sometimes they do not face them in the way we think they should.
And we never get complete access to another person’s inner world.
So my principle is very simple:
There is an action.
There are consequences to that action.
There is a decision.
There is responsibility for that decision.
And then there is our own choice.
We can support.
We can stop supporting.
We can stay.
We can leave.
We can criticize.
We can remain silent.
But that is our life.
And I want people to take control back to exactly that place.
Not trying to control who someone else should be.
Not trying to force another person to think the way we do.
Not trying to decode someone’s psychology when we simply do not have enough information.
Instead, ask yourself:
What am I choosing?
What aligns with my values?
Where do I want to put my attention?
What do I want to support with my time, money, love, and presence?
And what am I personally adding to this world?
Because ultimately, another person’s freedom may end where harm begins — but our own freedom of choice begins much earlier, with the decision about what we allow to occupy a place in our lives.
And if you believe someone made the wrong choice, you do not have to fix their life.
You can simply make your own choice better.
That, to me, is one of the strongest forms of disagreement there is.
