The Great Opinion Thread [Lightningdome?!]

[rubah]

This debate seems to be coming up repeatedly in half a dozen threads, it seems like!


If possible, what does it take for an opinion to be "wrong"?
The kicker? Any answer to this will be your opinion.

Also, what does it mean when an opinion is "wrong"? This is subtly different from "when is an opinion wrong". What happens when a person has a wrong opinion, etc.

Also, also, what does it take for some statement to be a "fact"?

http://www.snowy-day.net/stuff/others/let%27s-go!.gif

[Rye]

An opinion, by definition, can't be wrong, An opinion is "a personal view, attitude, or appraisal." The only thing right or wrong in an opinion is whether that person truly things "x" or if they don't try think "x."

On the other hand, if you phrase something "X is evil" "X is bad." Then it can be wrong. You're putting out a declarative statement, which can be true or false, wrong or right.

Saying "I think x is evil" is only saying what you think, which, as I said before, can be stupid or unfounded, but the opinion itself can't be wrong; saying an opinion is wrong is akin to saying "No, you don't actually think that."

It's all in the phrasing, to me. That's my two cents, anyway. And that's what I've always learned!

[PuPu]

Statements can be wrong. Putting "In my opinion" or "I think/believe" in front of a statement makes the sentence an opinion, but it doesn't mean the statement is incapable of being wrong.

"The sky is red" is wrong.
"In my opinion, the sky is red" is also a wrong opinion.

[leader of mortals]

Statements can be wrong. Putting "In my opinion" or "I think/believe" in front of a statement makes the sentence an opinion, but it doesn't mean the statement is incapable of being wrong.

"The sky is red" is wrong.
"In my opinion, the sky is red" is also a wrong opinion.

If someone truly believes that the sky is red, then you can't tell them they are wrong, because they truly believe it, but if they don't believe it then they are lying, and then it isn't actually their opinion, it is a lie.

[Tavrobel]

It's an odd thing. There's also the possibility that the phrases "I think that" or "in my opinion" are not just verbal/written cues that someone is stating a non-fact, it could represent a degree of certainty by which a statement may or may not be true. It's also up to me (or the listener) to distinguish whether the person speaking is giving an opinion based on evidence, an opinion based on intuition/belief, or an opinion that is an indication of degrees of certainty. Opinions can definitely be wrong.

... in my opinion.

Alternatively, one could render the topic to be a lesson in semantics or tautology. Pick one, and troll with it. It should be actively encouraged. The almighty Bob Ross would say that we need to make a decision, where's it gonna go?

[PuPu]

You're not getting it. "In my opinion, the sky is red." The entire statement itself is true. Yes, it is their opinion that the sky is red. But that's not what I'm referring to.

The entire sentence isn't their opinion. The only part of this sentence that is their opinion is "The sky is red" and it is a wrong opinion.

[rubah]

I think an opinion is when a person's perception of something does not preclude others from percieving the same way, or differently.

We all must live in our heads, in the dark space behind our eyes, so what we know of the world and the universe and other people must come from what we take in via eyes, ears, hands, etc. When our senses tell us things that agree, 'fire is hot. fire is hot. fire is hot. fire is hot,' then we can begin to take that as "fact". It's possible for a lot to be accomplished this way. We've gotten civilization to the point that it is now.

However, it's entirely possible that there is some faultiness between our senses and the real world. One cannot discount that our entire existence is a misfiring synapse. I don't think it's very likely, but it is still possible. (that is, everything that says it is not a misfiring synapse or a hallucination is part of that same hallucination and must be discounted as well). Once again, I don't think that is the case, but it cannot be discounted as a possibility.

Anyway, sharing opinions is a way for us to try and delve behind the dark curtains of other people's eyes. We do this all day long, ever since we are small, so it has very little mystique or intrigue for us left.

If someone has the opinion that 2 + 2 equals something else, then they are free to search out how that could be true, and share their opinion with whatever proofs they can offer, but that means neither
a) 2 + 2 couldn't equal some other value
nor
b) that they do not truly hold that opinion.

An opinion can be poorly supported by facts, and an opinion can be infuriating to hear, but I don't believe (and this is my opinion) that it can be wrong unless it is not actually believed.

I once believed that opinions could be wrong, but that was when I held some opinions that a lot of people would believe are wrong. I probably still do, but it's a nice illustration of how incomprehensible each side can be on polarizing issues.

"how could anyone believe x?"
"how could anyone not believe x?"

We have to get past the fact that these opinions do not mesh to be able to discover why they are held to begin with. Because your opinion is based in what seem to be facts doesn't prohibit you from learning why someone has an opposing opinion. It might make it painful, however :p But it's important to be able to put the polarities aside to connect with people.

[Madame Adequate]

An opinion is by definition not a statement of fact. If you say "In my opinion the sky is red" then you're either making a point to launch into a philosophical argument on the subjective nature of reality/linguistics/perception/etc. or you are making a factual statement ("the sky is red") and simply dressing it up as an opinion.

Just because you prepend something with "In my opinion" doesn't mean it is an opinion. It may well be a factual claim; simply dressing it up otherwise doesn't change what it is, anymore than adding "No offense, but" in front of "you smell like a llama" changes how offensive the statement is.

[leader of mortals]

You're not getting it. "In my opinion, the sky is red." The entire statement itself is true. Yes, it is their opinion that the sky is red. But that's not what I'm referring to.

The entire sentence isn't their opinion. The only part of this sentence that is their opinion is "The sky is red" and it is a wrong opinion.

How can you tell someone that the sky is not red? If someone truly believes that the sky is red, you can not disprove it because you can not see what they see and you can not be inside of their brain.

And I agree with MILF, an opinion is not supposed to be a fact, an opinion is something that can differ among people. For example, saying that the sky is red is much, much different from saying "This band sucks giant nutsacks". Saying that the sky is red isn't an opinion at all, even if you add "in my opinion" in front of it, it is a declarative statement about what you percieve.

[PuPu]

An opinion by definition is also someone's beliefs and thoughts. If it is really their thought/belief that the sky is red, then it is their opinion as well, and their thought/belief/opinion/etc. is wrong.

"Opinions can't be wrong" just plain doesn't work due to the fact that opposite opinions exist.

"(I think) the sky is red."
"(I think) the sky is not red."

Saying "opinions can't be wrong" and that neither of these "opinions" can be wrong, is incredibly contradictory and doesn't work. One of these has to be wrong, and if one opinion is right, then the opposite opinion has to be wrong and vice versa.

"This band is bad" vs. "This band is not bad"

This works the same way. Both of these opinions can't be not wrong. One of them has to be wrong.



How can you tell someone that the sky is not red? If someone truly believes that the sky is red, you can not disprove it because you can not see what they see and you can not be inside of their brain.oh god

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b81/alien_gundamneo/RI/1157304463835.jpg

If you're going to argue that "opinions can't be wrong" because they technically can't be proven wrong, you might as well just throw out the terms "right" and "wrong" from the dictionary, because nothing can be "proven" to be right or wrong by what you're saying.

[leader of mortals]

Well Pupu, think of differing opinions like having two or more different points of focus. If a ball is rolling and someone is on the side of it and someone is in the way of it, to one person it looks like the ball is getting bigger, while to the other it looks like the ball is going to the right or left. Both of these are correct for the person that is percieving it, but not for the other one. This is an example of opinion. Having these two argue about this is like someone arguing about whether or not a band is donkeyballs.

[PuPu]

Those are actually facts. They can be proven to be true to someone else.

"The ball is coming towards me" and "The ball is going left/right from me" are facts.

"The ball is getting bigger" is not a fact and is wrong, by the way.

[leader of mortals]

I wasn't saying those were opinion, I was using them as an example.

[Bunny]

Opinions are always wrong.

[NeoCracker]

Alright, I'm going to get this out of the way now. Colors are determined by certain frequencies' or whatever the term is, of light and what not. The color red appears for a certain frequency. Now, I may very well have my terms mixed up, but it is in fact scientifically possible to prove that the sky is in fact, not red.

People just seem to think 'Opinion' applies to anything they think. Opinion cannot be applied to something that is concrete. If something is blue, no matter how hard that person feels otherwise, it is not red. Putting 'In my opinion' in front of it simply means that they have no idea what on opinion actually is.

On that note, on opinion can in fact be wrong. I mean just look at how many people think Final Fantasy VIII was a good game. What more proof do you need? :p

[Quindiana Jones]

Any opinions that disagree with a priori facts are wrong. An a priori fact is something that is true in itself. Using the current laws of language and mathematics, "a square has four sides" is fact. "In my opinion, a square has 3 sides" is simply wrong.

However, opinions can also be morally wrong, though this is much more difficult to gauge due to (in my opinion - ho ho ho) there being no objective moral values. However, society determines morality, so if your opinion that killing babies is hella fun and should be done at all available times goes against the collective morality of society, then it could be said that your opinion is wrong morally.

[Tavrobel]

Alright, I'm going to get this out of the way now. Colors are determined by certain frequencies' or whatever the term is, of light and what not. The color red appears for a certain frequency. Now, I may very well have my terms mixed up, but it is in fact scientifically possible to prove that the sky is in fact, not red.

Wavelength. Frequency is a value related to wavelength, but if you have one, you usually have the other.

[Raistlin]

Yeah, colors can be objectively determined by measuring the wavelength of light that is reflected by the object.


"This band is bad" vs. "This band is not bad"

This works the same way. Both of these opinions can't be not wrong. One of them has to be wrong.

Um... I would agree if it's the same person saying that, but if it's two different people, then they can have two definitions of "bad," neither of which can demonstrably "wrong" by an objective standard.

[NeoCracker]

Alright, I'm going to get this out of the way now. Colors are determined by certain frequencies' or whatever the term is, of light and what not. The color red appears for a certain frequency. Now, I may very well have my terms mixed up, but it is in fact scientifically possible to prove that the sky is in fact, not red.

Wavelength. Frequency is a value related to wavelength, but if you have one, you usually have the other.

Ah, thank you. I figured I screwed that up at some point. :p

[PuPu]

Um... I would agree if it's the same person saying that, but if it's two different people, then they can have two definitions of "bad," neither of which can demonstrably "wrong" by an objective standard.

I suppose you are right about that, because nothing can be objectively proven as good/bad/(subjective term).

In a case like this, it becomes a matter of which opinion is more valid and supported. Not all opinions are equal or valid either.

[Raistlin]

In a case like this, it becomes a matter of which opinion is more valid and supported. Not all opinions are equal or valid either.

That is true, but something as individual as what sounds are more pleasing to a given person's brain is not something that any other person can determine or argue against; there is no objective standard to judge it, it is individual to that person's ears and brain. It'd be like arguing against what foods someone said they like; you don't have that person's taste buds, so there is no standard for you to dispute their statement.

[Jessweeee♪]

A stated fact can be proven as either true or false, an opinion can not.

"The sky is red."
This is something you incorrectly believe to be a fact, not your opinion. It's night. There is not a single speck of red in the sky. If you seriously believe it's red there is something wrong with you.

"I think/In my opinion the sky is red."
This is a true fact. The person who said this does indeed believe the sky is red. (Though if you want to be a smart ass you can argue that only the person who the thought belongs to can prove this). If it were sunset, there may be a little room for debate.

"Advent Children is a really good movie."
Well that just depends on your own definition of a good movie. To some people, a good movie just has to do it's job: keep your mind occupied. Others need additional requirements met before they can call it a good movie. So this is just an opinion that can't be right or wrong. Even if you do not understand the definition of the word "opinion" or "fact."

[Moon Rabbits]

Alright, I'm going to get this out of the way now. Colors are determined by certain frequencies' or whatever the term is, of light and what not. The color red appears for a certain frequency. Now, I may very well have my terms mixed up, but it is in fact scientifically possible to prove that the sky is in fact, not red.


This :bou::bou::bou::bou: is meta yo. Sure it can be scientifically proven that red = red because red light has so and so wavelength and so and so amplitude, but like rubah said, this could all just be a misfiring synapse and no one really exists :bigsmile: Who is to say that red light is actually what you perceive as red? What if all colour blind people are actually right or something > _ > Again, like rubah said, there is no way to discern if our senses are actually relaying information to our brains properly or if our brains are even processing that information properly.

So like, I'm of the opinion (lolzzz) that blah blah no opinion is wrong because opinions are observations and everyone's subjective realities are different, etc. etc. BUT, I think that within the actual context of (my) existence, opinions can be wrong. When I say "murder is wrong" most people take that to be true. Obviously, some one could just as easily say "murder is not wrong," despite this being untrue when based in a logical society.

[Tavrobel]

Goddamnit, stop using light as an example. Sure you can have a misfiring synapse somewhere, but light has been very specifically defined. Even if you don't see it as being red, it is still red, by the definition. If you couldn't see the red, it would be infrared, which is outside of our perceptual faculties. You can see green, and it will still be red. Read the goddamn definition. 500-700 nm from trough to trough.

If you're going to rage on about higher level physics concepts, use the definition of a kilogram, okay? It's a friggin' block in the middle of France.

[Meat Puppet]

Opinion is such a weird word.

[blackmage_nuke]

Proof everyone in this thread is a nutcase (http://www.smh.com.au/environment/sydney-turns-red-dust-storm-blankets-city-20090923-g0so.html)

[Meat Puppet]

I thought it was DOOM II when that was happening. I was actually kind of scared for a moment.

[Jiro]

Also, also, what does it take for some statement to be a "fact"?


Facts are things that are assumed to be true. Facts are not proven 100% to be true, because as our good friend Einstein said; "No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong" and there is always the possibility of future technology being able to expose errors.

[rubah]

So, how many people assuming it's true does it take, Jiro? It has be something more than sheer democracy, else we'd never get people convinced of new facts xD

[Raistlin]

A fact is not something "assumed" true - a fact is something which is true. There are objectively true facts; we just have to discover and appreciate them.

There's a difference between something being a fact and something being accepted as fact. The former is an objective statement of reality, whereas the latter is based on our individual perception and understanding of that reality. It's necessary to be consistent with your definitions because people may be discussing different things.

Pure democracy does not determine facts, because only existence does that. However, some form of that principle can help determine what we should accept as true (e.g., evolution being universally accepted among the academic community).

[Goldenboko]

Opinions are not, "wrong" they can be misguided. If a person has never taken Physics, they don't know the definition of Red Light, so they don't know that the actual physical color they think they're seeing, is not important, the same wavelength is going to everyone else that is going to them.

The creation of misguided opinions is something that can, if they're opinions that are based on the physical world, teach someone. Example, "I think the sky is Red, because I think I'm a bit colorblind." Tavrobel freaks out at the bad physics just uttered, now someone better knows the definition of color. But what that person thought and imagined can't be called wrong, because without the ability to think outside of the box, without the ability to think it terms that don't seem real to others, our world would be different. Einstein is the example I'm hinting towards.

Then there's just opinion...y opinions. Like "I think this food is the fucking :bou::bou::bou::bou: dude". Don't try to seriously quantify anyone as truly right or wrong.


Goddamnit, stop using light as an example. Sure you can have a misfiring synapse somewhere, but light has been very specifically defined. Even if you don't see it as being red, it is still red, by the definition. If you couldn't see the red, it would be infrared, which is outside of our perceptual faculties. You can see green, and it will still be red. Read the goddamn definition. 500-700 nm from trough to trough.

If you're going to rage on about higher level physics concepts, use the definition of a kilogram, okay? It's a friggin' block in the middle of France.

I love people who love Physics enough that the discussion of it makes them angry. :)

[Laddy]

*headdesk*

[Jiro]

So, how many people assuming it's true does it take, Jiro? It has be something more than sheer democracy, else we'd never get people convinced of new facts xD

Beats me. I was trying to rehash something I kind of learned in class sometimes early last year. It was more science based, which makes me assume that they meant the majority of the scientific community.

But really, I just wanted to take a potshot at sounding intelligent. It's kind of hard with all you engineers and lawyers and mathematicians around

[PuPu]

Opinions are not, "wrong" they can be misguided.

Go go synonyms.


If a person has never taken Physics, they don't know the definition of Red Light, so they don't know that the actual physical color they think they're seeing, is not important, the same wavelength is going to everyone else that is going to them.

"The wavelengths of light from the sky are the same to me as to everyone else that's seeing them. I'm colorblind, so they see blue, and I see red."

"The words in this above quote are the same to me as they are to everyone else that's reading them. I'm not good at languages, so everyone else sees the words in your quote and says you're typing in English, while it is my opinion that you are typing in French, because that's what I see."

It doesn't matter if what they see is different from others, it doesn't make them any less wrong. The sky is still not red, and your post is still not in French, even if I see it differently from others.


But what that person thought and imagined can't be called wrong, because without the ability to think outside of the box, without the ability to think it terms that don't seem real to others, our world would be different. Einstein is the example I'm hinting towards.

It sounded like you just said "everything that's said and thought can't be wrong until proven wrong."


Then there's just opinion...y opinions. Like "I think this food is the smurfing :bou::bou::bou::bou: dude". Don't try to seriously quantify anyone as truly right or wrong.

Nobody said that all opinions can be right or wrong. But it really doesn't take a genius to figure out that certain opinions can be wrong.

[Goldenboko]

Then there's just opinion...y opinions. Like "I think this food is the smurfing :bou::bou::bou::bou: dude". Don't try to seriously quantify anyone as truly right or wrong.

Nobody said that all opinions can be right or wrong. But it really doesn't take a genius to figure out that certain opinions can be wrong.

Oh yes, I'm going to argue this with you, the person who insists that all bands past 1995 suck and everyone who likes bands post-1995 has no musical taste and sucks eggs. :monster:

[LunarWeaver]

If it doesn't have "imho" then it shouldn't be counted no matter what imho.

[PuPu]

Then there's just opinion...y opinions. Like "I think this food is the smurfing :bou::bou::bou::bou: dude". Don't try to seriously quantify anyone as truly right or wrong.

Nobody said that all opinions can be right or wrong. But it really doesn't take a genius to figure out that certain opinions can be wrong.

Oh yes, I'm going to argue this with you, the person who insists that all bands past 1995 suck and everyone who likes bands post-1995 has no musical taste and sucks eggs. :monster:
In this quote: "I can't think of anything to prove him wrong, so I'll just make a personal jab at him." Besides, opinions can be wrong, as I said. After all, you certainly think mine are wrong. :eep:

Also, not all bands. Just post grunge, metalcore, and nu metal bands. Nothing wrong with, say, hardcore punk.

[Goldenboko]

Alright, lemme redo that post.




Then there's just opinion...y opinions. Like "I think this food is the smurfing :bou::bou::bou::bou: dude". Don't try to seriously quantify anyone as truly right or wrong.

Nobody said that all opinions can be right or wrong. But it really doesn't take a genius to figure out that certain opinions can be wrong.

Oh yes, I'm going to argue this with you, the person who insists that all bands past 1995 suck and everyone who likes bands post-1995 has no musical taste and sucks eggs. :monster:

Done. Notice, the this and you are italicized (instead of just you), arguing this argument with you would have both of us run around and circles and would waste x units of my time. No personal jab, just a statement of, "Not here and not ever."

[Tavrobel]

I love people who love Physics enough that the discussion of it makes them angry. :)

No, argue it correctly. Show me a theory that gives us a different definition of light.

[PuPu]

Done. Notice, the this and you are italicized (instead of just you), arguing this argument with you would have both of us run around and circles and would waste x units of my time. No personal jab, just a statement of, "Not here and not ever."

Spoken as if it doesn't apply to nearly all arguments. But believe me, you don't have an argument.

[Cuchulainn]

If an opinion can't be wrong, how to Holocaust Deniers get convicted in Germany & Austria?

[Bunny]

Because Germany is full of drunk nut jobs and Austria gave rise to Arnold Schwarzenegger.