Magnetic Synthesizer Posted September 4, 2015 Posted September 4, 2015 I am proposing that idealy those words are useless and that currently that ideal is not present. I want to check my opinion. Because If I think it is indeed ideal, I would act differently to promote that ideal (mostly in a subtle manner). And it would be wasteful effort if I was wrong. I also think attention to this detail is due to my personal experience, I am ,say , more irritated by it. Would this be unique of me or something generally normal? I think there is a better way people should think and that it would avoid causing so much evil in the world if people would be wide skeptics instead of what they are now. This symptom reminds me of that reality. Conclusion: There is no difference in the information conveyed between a statement formulated as an opinion or as a fact. When someone conveys an 'opinion' or a 'fact', -The person conveys something he believes in. There's no differenes (besides the diplomatic) between someone saying: ''I think oranges are orange'' or ''Oranges are orange'' I'd rather developp this in a dialogue because I think its just obvious so I would like to see what isn't. People waste time with acronyms like IMO and crap While these terms are useless since if the person makes a statement of fact with certainty you already know he holds the opinion, and if he lies, it can happen regardless of the form used (in fact he'd use the factual form to be ''convincing''). Statements of sources and reliability of information on the other hand are much more useful. When you say somehting without mentioning source it is by default assumed it is what you think. Why does this matter to me? People treat these staments in different ways which most if not all are irrational and wasteful. I would even say damaging. (This originated form the below statement, this is almost a rant) The statement ''it is important to differentiate opinion from fact'' means either the person never realized there was a difference and believed eveyrthing said as fact. Now she is only half retarded. If I say Oranges are purple without mentioning ''IMO'' or ''I think'' does that change in any way the fucking reliability of the statement! maybe just a tiny little. Or B. the person always applied the same objective data processing (wide skepticism) but only now discovered there was a diplomatic meaning to it.
shirgall Posted September 4, 2015 Posted September 4, 2015 Statements which have been challenged and not resolved should include qualifiers like "I think" or even "I assert". An important part of strengthening arguments is challenging assumptions and making better statements. If you say "Oranges are purple" and I say, "Odd, their color appears to be between red and yellow and not between blue and red" you should come back with "Oranges are purple because I did x test and got y verification." 1
Magnetic Synthesizer Posted September 4, 2015 Author Posted September 4, 2015 I think it's only necessary because -people might get offended if its not stated as an opinion -They might make a bigger deal of it if its either : - not mainstream OR - People are later convinced you were wrong. So I am annoyed at the realization that I better say IMO IMO IMO IMO all day UNLESS I am convinced that others will never collectively think I am wrong. Is this just your opinion? That would be an easy answer if it was an opinion on something material (it almost is). It seems to be dealing more with abstract concepts of human communication. Could there be an objective right answer like in 2+2? If I establish the productivity ( and the value that productivity is based on) of my form of communication, I would argue that it is almost flawlessly superior. I would get rid for the use of a sophism that only has merit based on people's irrationality. IT is like tataulogy, except that if you don't use it you can suffer from negative consequences because everyone suddenly thinks differently if you don't say ''I think''. (not sure how that happens: Because they have this black and white attitude to information. They walk like omniscient gods and have the pretense that you are wrong until you prove them wrong if they disagree with you UNLESS you state the obvious) I think it is not just my opinion. I wouldn't be here or I would have presented this in a different manner: Stating that I am wrong and want help understanding where my reasoning fails. Statements which have been challenged and not resolved should include qualifiers like "I think" or even "I assert". edit: I mean, I don't see your post challenging or placading my post. So I may be completly missing the link. Why? It does take extra saliva... what's the use? How is the statement better? Because I do think it can help ''challenging assumptions'' but only because the person won't consider it otherwise. I do think somethimes, menitoning IMO and etc, appeases people's irrational defences. I just need to check my opinion. Because If I think it is indeed ideal, I would act differently to promote that ideal (mostly in a subtle manner). And it would be stupid to do such efforts if I was wrong. I also think attention to this detail is due to my personal experience, I am ,say , more irritated by it. Would this be unique of me or something generally normal? I think there is a better way people should think and that it would avoid causing so much evil in the world if people would be wide skeptics instead of what they are now. This symptom reminds me of that reality.
ProfessionalTeabagger Posted September 4, 2015 Posted September 4, 2015 So if it's not just your opinion then you accept there's a valid distinction between stating an opinion and stating a fact ,right?
NotDarkYet Posted September 4, 2015 Posted September 4, 2015 I feel irritation when I read these words used in an argument: "honestly": "really" "actually" "it seems" "it comes across as"
Magnetic Synthesizer Posted September 5, 2015 Author Posted September 5, 2015 So if it's not just your opinion then you accept there's a valid distinction between stating an opinion and stating a fact ,right? No. None of them exclude the other. If its not just my opinion, it doesn't make it a fact or an opinion or stops it from being a fact or an opinion. The definition of opinion isn't ''A belief that is wrong''. If an opinion holds a truthful belief, it can still be an opinion. There are exceptions and I'm glad none have nit picked on it. but to further illustrate my view: Someone can state a 'fact', not believe in it and not consider it a fact. Wether the fact communicated by the message is a fact is independent of the person's mind (unless its a fact about the person's mind). When people state a fact and believe it to be a fact, they necesseraly hold the opinion that what their message refers to, is a fact. Therefore it is an opinion. It is simply an opinion communicated as what is commonly known as a ''statement of reality'', which doesn't change the reality of the world. The only thing it points at is probably that the person is assertive. But I would say that is wrong. Instead, It communicates that the person isn't unsure enough to take the extra time to spam the message with ''IMO''. Even my posts here are riddled with these wastes of time. I get the impression that these differences change dramatically how people process a message as if the epistemology was comepletely different, when in reality, the same components are at play. sometimes this doesn't apply. Where a difference in the form of a statement makes the difference between ''I recommended u do something'' and ''You made a decision according to my opinion'' according to social norms.
luxfelix Posted September 5, 2015 Posted September 5, 2015 It sounds like you're repulsed by the use of indicators of opinion for nefarious purposes rather than the word choice in and of itself. (A tool misused rather than declaring a tool "bad" outright) Is this accurate?
ProfessionalTeabagger Posted September 5, 2015 Posted September 5, 2015 No. None of them exclude the other. If its not just my opinion, it doesn't make it a fact or an opinion or stops it from being a fact or an opinion. The definition of opinion isn't ''A belief that is wrong''. If an opinion holds a truthful belief, it can still be an opinion. There are exceptions and I'm glad none have nit picked on it. but to further illustrate my view: Someone can state a 'fact', not believe in it and not consider it a fact. Wether the fact communicated by the message is a fact is independent of the person's mind (unless its a fact about the person's mind). When people state a fact and believe it to be a fact, they necesseraly hold the opinion that what their message refers to, is a fact. Therefore it is an opinion. It is simply an opinion communicated as what is commonly known as a ''statement of reality'', which doesn't change the reality of the world. The only thing it points at is probably that the person is assertive. But I would say that is wrong. Instead, It communicates that the person isn't unsure enough to take the extra time to spam the message with ''IMO''. Even my posts here are riddled with these wastes of time. I get the impression that these differences change dramatically how people process a message as if the epistemology was comepletely different, when in reality, the same components are at play. sometimes this doesn't apply. Where a difference in the form of a statement makes the difference between ''I recommended u do something'' and ''You made a decision according to my opinion'' according to social norms. Okay, so all of this is your opinion, right?
Magnetic Synthesizer Posted September 8, 2015 Author Posted September 8, 2015 Okay, so all of this is your opinion, right? yes. Btw, you should be reviving your teammates rather than tea-bagging.
Recommended Posts