Opinions: Philosophy Forums

Forums Articles Gallery Links

Register Login Members Calendar New Posts Search Chat Help

Philosophy Forums » Introduction to Philosophy / Factual Issues / Books » Opinions » Opinions

Print

Print

Page: 1 2 3 4 5

Opinions

Postmodern Beatnik
I Just Work Here

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Nov 18, 2005

Total Topics: 17
Total Posts: 2101

Posted 07/08/09 - 09:19 AM:	#41
dman1 wrote: Postmodern Beatnik wrote: No, you started with that opinion and haven't changed your mind despite the fact that your reasons have been thoroughly debunked. Oh yeah? So you know exactly what I'm thinking at all times? No, but I have read your posts on this thread. All of your posts that are not merely questions display the background assumption that opinions are, in your terms, "subjective" and therefore not capable of being true or false. So it is not that you have suddenly concluded that opinions cannot be true or false, but rather that you simply haven't changed your mind since the first time you decided to take a stand on your own question. dman1 wrote: My opinion hasn't been debunked at all, that's the beauty of opinion. You'll please note that I said it was your reasons that had been debunked. That said, your conclusion should not hold much sway in the absence of reasons to believe it. dman1 wrote: Postmodern Beatnik wrote: If they're telling the truth, it does. The only way one can say "my opinion is x" and be wrong is if x is not really one's opinion. That made no sense in regard to your argument. You're arguing for opinions being capable of rightness and wrongness in the sense that people can have an opinion that is either true or false. So how exactly is it that the ONLY way one can have a right or wrong opinion is if they lie about what their opinion is? Perhaps you missed this passage from post #6 (my first post on this thread): Postmodern Beatnik wrote: Statements of opinion, as in "it is my opinion that chocolate is better than vanilla," cannot be wrong so long as the speaker accurately states his opinion. The embedded proposition "chocolate is better than vanilla," however, can be wrong if we take it as some sort of non-subjective judgment (as if the speaker thinks chocolate really is better than vanilla, and anyone who thinks otherwise is lacking a factual belief). So when one asserts his opinion, rather than merely asserting that it is his opinion is, he can be wrong. This was later supplemented by the distinction between complex and simple opinions found in post #28. In that post, I also presented this quick little summary: Postmodern Beatnik wrote: A personal preference cannot be true or false, nor have I said otherwise. A statement of that preference can be true or false, and complex opinions can be as well. But simple opinions such as preferences cannot be, as they are purely subjective. In short, then, lying is the only way for an assertion of what one's opinion is to be false. But provided that the embedded opinion is a complex one, its truth or falsity rests -- like that of all assertions -- upon its accuracy. dman1 wrote: The point is that people can believe in facts or lies. Their opinion itself cannot be right or wrong, 'cause it is simply a state of belief based on perception. So you admit that people can believe facts or lies (by which I take it you mean truths or falsehoods), but think that something being a belief based on perception means it cannot be true or false? These positions seem to be at odds. If people can believe falsehoods, then it must be possible to have false beliefs (since that's all a false belief is -- belief in a falsehood). It seems, then, that something being "based on perception" holds a lot of weight on your account. However, most of our beliefs are based on perception. I believe I am sitting at my computer as I type this because I perceive myself sitting in front of my computer. I believe there is water in my cup, because I perceive a clear liquid inside it and remember filling it with what I perceived to be water. But maybe someone has replaced it with vodka in the meantime. Or maybe it was never water to begin with. Perhaps my belief is stronger -- I believe there is only water (and the normal impurities found in it) in my cup, for example. But what if someone has slipped something in it without my knowledge? All of these beliefs could be based on perception, but all are either true or false. dman1 wrote: Disproven isn't a word. "Disproven" is a past participle of "disprove." "Disproved" is the sole simple past tense of "disprove," as well as an alternative past participle. For the sake of clarity, and in order to keep straight precisely what is being claimed, "disproven" is frequently favored as the past participle in professional and technical writing. dman1 wrote: And once it becomes proved or disproved, it becomes a fact or a lie (People can believe in facts or lies. An opinion exists when there is no way to objectively measure a belief as being a fact or a lie with means available). An assertion has a particular truth value regardless of whether or not anyone believes it. That's why cancer can go undetected or the existence of unicorns can be debunked -- because it is already the case that they do or do not exist. If there weren't facts out there to discover, we'd never be able to prove or disprove anything. dman1 wrote: But you can't measure someone's opinion, their belief without proof, in terms of true or false/right or wrong. Its all about perception, and we live in a world of 6.5 billion different perceptions. If you believe something without proof, and I believe the opposite with proof, then I can say that your belief without proof (your opinion) is false. So yes, it is entirely possible to "measure someone's opinion." dman1 wrote: I understand what you're saying, but that's only true if you believe that everything must either be true or false. I think it's irrelevant because you can't prove truth and falsity to 6.5 billion people. You would have to first establish the existence of a universal truth, which you will never. First, I don't think that everything must either be true or false. I believe that all assertions (i.e., propositions) must be true or false, with the possible exceptions of future contingents and statements suffering from presuppositional failure. Such statements remain truth-apt, however (that is, they are the kind of thing that can be true or false). Second, you are confusing conditions for truth with conditions for knowledge. Something can be true even if no one ever believes, proves, or knows it. dman1 wrote: http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/measure%5Bverb%5D http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/measure Neither of those links lists "judge" as a synonym for "measure," though Merriam-Webster refers to "judge" as a related word in a list separate from its list of synonyms. Measurement is a type of judgment, as can be seen from examining its definition (which is where you saw it on Thesaurus.com), but that does not mean it is legitimate to use the stricter term in all instances where the looser one is appropriate. Indeed, that is quite the opposite of how the stricter/looser relationship works. And with the possible exception of an idiom or two, "measurement" always has to do with quantification, even if only in a somewhat metaphorical way in some usages. If you meant "judgment," fine. Clarify and move on, no harm done. But don't insult our intelligence by pretending that your usage is standard English. Edited by Postmodern Beatnik on 07/09/09 - 04:24 AM
"An ideal form of government is democracy tempered with assassination." --Voltaire "If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all." --Thomas Jefferson

Page: 1 2 3 4 5

Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.