Opinions: Philosophy Forums

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

Page: 1 2 3 4 5

Opinions

dman1
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 19, 2009

Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 13

Posted 06/19/09 - 02:56 AM: Subject: Opinions	#1
Can they be right or wrong? I am just going to type some words here because it says "your post needs to be at least 1 characters and 25 words long." But yeah, I've pretty much asked all I need to ask. Edited by Incision on 06/19/09 - 09:31 AM. Reason: they also need capital letters

Khoshaba2
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 19, 2009

Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 4

Posted 06/19/09 - 03:36 AM:	#2
In the Dictionary an opinion is: A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof. When it's not substantiated by positive proof, so it cannot be absolutely right nor wrong. Opinions are varied in different minds, because our minds are formed with different shapes of thoughts, therefore an opinion can be true for someone but not for the other. Will we comprehend the absolute truth someday?

treysuttle
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 07, 2003
Location: Phoenix

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 213

Posted 06/19/09 - 03:43 AM:	#3
First, 'right' and 'wrong' strictly speaking, are ethical notions. I am going to assume that you are thinking about 'true' and 'false'...which are epistemic notions (concerned with knowledge). Distinguish between the opinion and the content of the opinion. The opinion itself is a propositional attitude. This is just being in a particular mental state. Qua mental state - no, opinions are neither true nor false....although if you have an opinion, it is true that you have the opinion (but that is saying something about being in the state...not what the state is 'about'). The content of the opinion (what the mental state...or propositional attitude is about) may be either true or false if it actually expresses a proposition (a statement that actually >can< be true or false)...or neither (as some might say perhaps concerning the content of ethical or aesthetic opinions). One way to conceptualize this is by 'bracketing' - distinguish the proposition from the attitude. The proposition is usually what comes after the 'that' -- 'that' signifies what the non-attitude content of the statement is. so: (My opinion is that the war in Iraq is bogus) - as a whole. It's true that you have the opinion. As stated, you have merely told me that is your opinion. At this point, it stands no differently from statements like (My opinion is that apples are delicious). It's true you have the opinion, but you are merely stating how you feel about something. now: My opinion is that: (The war in Iraq is bogus) Notice now, it's still true that you have the opinion, but then I can say, 'Look, I know you have the opinion...but my concern is what the opinion is about...what is in the brackets. What is in the brackets is a statement (a contender anyway, for such a statement) that can be true or false. But notice, to attempt to establish it as true or false, we need to know more than just that it is your opinion. We need to seperate the content from the attitude about the content, so we look at: The war in Iraq is bogus and ask if this is true. At this point, we need some understanding of what it means for a statement to be true, and if it is true, how we can know that it is true...which moves beyond the subject matter of this thread.

mayor of simpleton
CAT vs. DOGMA

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Feb 20, 2009
Location: Vienna, Austria

Total Topics: 12
Total Posts: 515

Posted 06/19/09 - 04:39 AM:	#4
The question is a bit to general. Right or Wrong... in what context? Local or Universal? Within a limited local system of reality and moral system based upon connotations, without regard to the dennotations of things (as this is not necessary for moral opinions) and critically reviewed within ONLY this particular limited local system of reality, I would say yes. If the questions is of "right and wrong" in the context of an all-inclusive universal system of reality based in the dennotation of things and excluding all connotations, "right and wrong" is non-sense. This is. Just is. Value accessments are not factors for dennotations nor for the universal. In this context, it would be impossible as it has no meaning. Specific examples are not within the field of the Universal as all specific examples are local and limited. So what do you mean? Meow! GREG
I am not one to attribute that which I cannot understand immediately to be god(s)-perhaps I will never understand, but god(s) are not defined by my lack of understanding-this is the foundation of dogmas, the pressing of connotative values into the realm of dennotative meaning. - MOS

Elginb
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Aug 03, 2005

Total Topics: 18
Total Posts: 103

Posted 06/19/09 - 08:15 AM:	#5
I think an opinion is a belief, and beliefs can be right or wrong (or true or false, if you prefer). Often, however, beliefs/opinions are about matters of subjective taste, and subjective states of affairs are privileged information for the speaker of the opinion. In that case, it's hard for an opinion to be wrong (or false), because in order for you to state an false opinion, you would either have to be lying or somehow hold two conflicting opinions at the same time (but even then, you're still telling the truth to some extent).

Postmodern Beatnik
I Just Work Here

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Nov 18, 2005

Total Topics: 17
Total Posts: 2099

Posted 06/19/09 - 08:34 AM:	#6
dman1 wrote: [Opinions]: can they be right or wrong? Of course they can. Frank and Carla are looking at at a flock of geese, wondering how many there are. In Frank's opinion, there are at least 25. In Carla's opinion, there are at least 30. In fact, there are 27. Frank's opinion is right (correct/accurate), while Carla's opinion is wrong (incorrect/inaccurate). 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. dman1 wrote: I am just going to type some words here because it says "your post needs to be at least 1 characters and 25 words long." But yeah, I've pretty much asked all I need to ask. Thread starters need to be at least 25 words long because if they're not, it means you don't have a substantive enough question to ask the forum. This question, for example, would have been more appropriate for the Intro/Factual/Books forum, where opening posts need only have at least one character and be five words long. (And that's why I've moved the thread.) Khoshaba2 wrote: When it's not substantiated by positive proof, so it cannot be absolutely right nor wrong. Frank: Stars are made of purple cheese! Carla: Prove it. Frank: I can't. I have no positive proof with which to substantiate my claim. Carla: I guess you can't be wrong, then! No, Frank can definitely be wrong. "Stars are made of purple cheese" is either true or false (in this case false), and the fact that he is ignorant in no way improves his argument. treysuttle wrote: First, 'right' and 'wrong' strictly speaking, are ethical notions. No, they aren't. Philosophers tend to restrict usage of the words "right" and "wrong" for purposes of clarity; but they are not consistent about it themselves (especially when the context is clear), and the terms have been used as stand-ins for "correct" and "incorrect" probably since before "correct" and "incorrect" were even words.
"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

treysuttle
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 07, 2003
Location: Phoenix

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 213

Posted 06/19/09 - 08:56 AM:	#7
Postmodern Beatnick, technical terms in philosophy are of course stipulative -- but just that, they must be defined...otherwise they are vague and everyone is talking over everyone else's head. I do restrict my terms for clarity...and my restrictions are (admittedly) the result of a particular philosophical tradition (of which I am aware of no discussion of truth using phrases like 'right' and 'wrong', or 'correct' and 'incorrect' to characterize statements as true or false). Of course, I will also admit that I primarily restrict myself to fairly technical philosophical works, and so I do admit to a certain bias (and sensitivity) when it comes to how terms are used in philosophical discussion... but otherwise, sure. If one wants to define 'truth' as 'right'...they can do that. I see it as vague and potentially leading to confusion (what term are they going to substitute for 'right' in ethical discussions...or do they use the same terms and say things like (x has a right to p' is right)...but that is just sort of philosopher that I am.

Postmodern Beatnik
I Just Work Here

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Nov 18, 2005

Total Topics: 17
Total Posts: 2099

Posted 06/19/09 - 09:21 AM:	#8
treysuttle Even in the professional literature, though, people use phrases such as "there seems to be something wrong with such a solution" or "if we are right to assume P." You'll even see it in papers on ethics or epistemology from time to time. There are advantages to maintaining the highest standards of clarity at all times, of course, and a strictly regulated personal vocabulary is one way of doing so. But you have to keep that in mind that not everyone does it -- and even if they do, they may not do it in the same way).
"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

treysuttle
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 07, 2003
Location: Phoenix

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 213

Posted 06/19/09 - 10:19 AM:	#9
Totally agreed. From my reading, in the context that dman1 is using it: 'Can opinions be right or wrong' is left extremely vague without defining his terms. If dman1 is asking something equivalent to what I am thinking about when I inquire whether opinions can be true or false...then I wouldn't accept that 'right' in that sense means the same as when one says 'if we are right to assume'. I would be completely ok with using the term 'right' in a political context such that it would be ok to say that 'I have a right to assume' and 'p has a right to x'....because 'right' in the technical sense (as related to rights, duties, blah blah) has presumably been defined and we understand that we are speaking in a political context (we have a frame of reference for understanding the non-technical uses of 'right' in the context. In our present case...there was no such context...so I created one. Granted, 'strictly speaking' was too strong on my part...and I might be splitting hairs within the context of this thread that make no real difference to the substance of the question our poster submitted -- assuming anyone on this thread has correctly interpreted his/her terms Edited by treysuttle on 06/19/09 - 10:26 AM

dman1
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 19, 2009

Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 13

Posted 06/19/09 - 03:20 PM:	#10
I meant, all right, let's say it's my opinion that the Axis won WW2. Factually, I am incorrect. But is my opinion wrong? Can something as subjective as opinion ever be wrong? Better yet, is there such thing as an objective opinion? Personally, I believe that opinions can never be wrong because nobody can actually truly be in the exact same mind state as anyone else. I believe that when an opinion goes into the realm of the objective, and can be objectively proven or disproved it becomes a fact. And facts can be right or wrong. I believe objectivity/subjectivity are the fundamental differences of the two. Someone can say that they have an opinion that sounds very objective and is based upon facts, but at the end of the day, their actual opinion is subjective, because that's just how they feel, given whatever information. Edited by Incision on 06/19/09 - 11:16 PM. Reason: capitalization, punctuation

Page: 1 2 3 4 5

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