At Ask Me Help Desk you can ask questions in any topic and have them
answered for free by our experts. To ask questions or participate in
answering them you must register for a free account. By registering you
will be able to:
Get free answers from experts in any of our 300+
topics.
That's why I made a specific delineation. Lets say someone posts an opinion that the moon is made of green cheese. Is such an opinion valid since it flies in the face of established fact? On the flip side lets say someone says there is a God. There are logical arguments that can be made to back up that opinion. Not everyone will accept those logical arguments, but they do exist.
My point is that anyone can state an opinion. But my feeling is that if you do so, you need to be able to support that opinion, If you can't then you should recant it.
On the flip side lets say someone says there is a God. There are logical arguments that can be made to back up that opinion. Not everyone will accept those logical arguments, but they do exist.
So let me get this right...
you are saying that while the God opinion is backed by logical argument that isn't universally accepted but should be, it is still not specifically proved?
Nice loop of nonlogic you got there there.
Undoubtedly the next thing to take place is some off the path definition of logic that suits the argument rather than be accurate.
you are saying that while the God opinion is backed by logical argument that isn't universally accepted but should be, it is still not specifically proved?
Nice loop of nonlogic you got there there.
Undoubtedly the next thing to take place is some off the path definition of logic that suits the argument rather than be accurate.
No, I'm not saying the arguments "Should" be accepted. I'm saying that an argument can be made that some people will accept. Unless an argument can be conclusively disproven with hard fact or where no facts exist to to support the argument, then a person is entitled to that opinion.
Look at the argument that the figure to Jesus's right in the Last Supper is Mary Magdelene. It does look female. However, there is other evidence that DaVinci painted John as an androgynous figure in other paintings. It appears that evidence exists that can support either opinion. In my opinion that figure is female. But I can concede that other people can have a different opinion. There are entitled to their belief. But the person who beleives the moon is made of green cheese is NOT entititled to that belief.
An Opinion is something that cannot be proven specifically. A Valid opinion is one that has at least some basis in fact or logic.
Be patient with me, I still don't understand...
how does a "valid opinion" differ from an "opinion that is proved specifically"?
A direct explanation rather than citing examples would work best, I think. (entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem)
And do me a favour please and leave all the God and Davinci code stuff out of it; that really doesn't help with clarity since they tend to be controversial elements in their own right?
Here is the Webster definition of proof just for giggles:
1 a : the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact b : the process or an instance of establishing the validity of a statement especially by derivation from other statements in accordance with principles of reasoning
Isn't an opinion just something someone believes to be true or false. If it has be proven one way or the other then isn't it considered to be fact. A "valid opinion" has nothing to do with it, does it? As with religion, for most people, religous beliefs are just that. Something one believes to be true. Everyone believes different things for different reasons. They may believe because of some sort of "proof" they have accepted to be true.
OK, hold on just one minute there! Are you trying to tell me that the moon IS NOT MADE OF GREEN CHEESE? The last guy I talked to that just got back from the moon told me in no uncertain terms that that moon is made of green cheese and here you go scott trying to tell me that it aint! What I want to know is have you been to the moon or is it just your opinion that it is not made of green cheese? If you have been to the moon then now I have two opinions to sort through and try to come up with the most valid opinion. If you have not been to the moon then what I want to know is just exactly what are you basing the facts that led to your opinion which states quite catagorically that no, the moon is not made of green cheese. Heck, he even gave me a chunk of the green moon cheese that he brought back from the moon but it had gone bad because these little bugs that accidentally got aboard his spaceship had gotten into it, they were lunar tics, I think he called them! No, I really think the moon is made of green cheese but then, that is just my opinion because that's what my friend told me and he ought to know since he was on the moon...a while back.
"One small slice of cheese for man, one giant chunk of cheese for mankind."
I'm not sure I can explain this any better than I have. Let me try to put it this way. An opinion that can be completely disproven by fact is an invalid opinion. Anything else might be considered a valid opinion.
What I'm trying to do is differentiate between someone who makes an outrageous statement that is untrue and trying to justify it because "everyone is entitled to an opinion".
Linear Mode
