Posted: Apr 25, 2017 2:05 pm
Sendraks wrote:PensivePenny wrote:
I think the point of that idiom is that opinions ARE equal... they are ALL meaningless! Some, might be interesting, some might be mundane, but they're opinions precisely because there is no empirical evidence to support them. The only "value" opinions may have are to the individual who owns it. If I'm wrong, can you suggest an example of one opinion that is better than another one?
There is a world of difference between an opinion held on facts vs an opinion not held on facts. To suggest there is any sort of equivalent "meaningless" between the two, is nonsense of the highest order. Certainly it is not a rational thing to do but, it is a regular occurrence on these forums that certain people will attempt to handwave away the comments of others as "just an opinion."
Dammit Sendrak! If you keep this up, we may just agree on something!
I think semantics get in the way here a lot. There are at least a half dozen accepted dictionary definitions of the word. I realize it doesn't help when people want to redefine things that AREN'T in the dictionary, but while clarification is in order, argument, isn't. The definition I've been employing here is 1 and 2 below. I think you may be using #3?
From dictionary.com
1.
a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2.
a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
3.
the formal expression of a professional judgment:
to ask for a second medical opinion.
PensivePenny wrote:I
LOL... my point wasn't complaining about the method of responding. My complaint was that something relatively insignificant and unimportant (an opinion) didn't warrant the scrutiny of a nuclear lab.
You don't get to decide if that is the case.
If you mean I don't get to decide how people respond to me, you're right! Again we agree! But YOU don't get to decide whether I like it or not or whether I choose to engage this person or that or whether I think it's a rational thing to do.
PensivePenny wrote: Only to express my inability to understand the motives of those who've done a line by line breakdown of some stupid opinion they may disagree with.
Again, I would point out that your not understanding is simply a matter or choice, rather than ability. The reasons as to why people dissect posts in this matter are all too obvious and perfectly rational, for anyone prepared to make the effort to understand.
But, I can see the of hiding behind an appeal to incredulity rather than make the effort.
Understanding is a choice? I didn't realize. Here I thought I didn't understand quantum physics is because I don't have the reference points required from which to build upon. Communication is far from objective.
Sure, I could be "appealing to incredulity" if I were formally DEBATING. Since this thread is a casual conversation about a mythical book, perhaps I'm simply perplexed. I'm not appealing to anyone. My world isn't going to change one iota regardless of how many people here agree or disagree with me.
YMMV