|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2010 : 01:31:54 [Permalink]
|
Dude:
But seriously, don't strawman me. It's embarrassing because you should know better. |
I wasn't. I really wanted to know where you draw the line. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
 |
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
 Posted - 03/12/2010 : 03:37:30 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
While it's true that one shouldn't hide behind an opinion to ward off challenges and calls for reasons why the opinion is held, or be provided in a debate with good reasons why the opinion holder is just plain wrong, (though support for a stated opinion still falls on the opinion holder, and it's up to the person he is debating with or talking with to decide whether or not to provide reasons why any particular opinion is bogus) an opinion still falls short of a claim to a fact on the continuum leading up to a claim of fact, usually due to either not knowing all of the evidence to support the opinion, or because the evidence is lacking or can't be substantiated as valid enough to support it as a claim of fact.
In other words "In my opinion cell phones cause brain cancer" is an opinion but can be treated like a claim to a fact because the facts are out there.
But statements like "in my opinion animal captivity is abuse" is lower on the scale of what we know to be true, either way, and is a belief that at the very least, requires the person who holds that opinion to explain why they hold it and be ready for a challenge. That becomes a discussion, really. And if the facts are not available for both sides, or studies support both positions, then it remains an opinion on both sides of the debate. Neither side can legitimately present their belief as a fact, so conclusions must be qualified as opinion.
Now I realize that all conclusions are tentative anyway. But stating that something is an opinion suggests a much weaker conclusion than those conclusions that are well supported. And that's where the honesty comes in. It's an acknowledgment that given what you know, you have come to a weak conclusion, subject to debate and correction, and you know it.
I doubt that I'm making myself as clear as I should be but I'm in a hurry. Sorry about that.
|
I think what you're saying here basically shows that a statement can always be challenged and found to be wrong, even if it is claimed to be an opinion.
I think what makes an opinion unchallengable is whether the statement itself cannot be evaluated on its facts, not whether you claim that it is your opinion or not.
"I think blue is the prettiest color there is."
This statement cannot be evaluated on facts. We can discuss the merits of the color blue versus other options, like red and yellow (all very pretty colors indeed), but if you feel that blue is a pretty color, I cannot bring anything against that, that would force you to change your mind. It is a statement of personal preference, not a statement of fact.
"In my opinion, animals are better off in the wild than they are in captivity."
This is a vaguer statement, because we need to define what "better off" means. Also, if we defined "better off", can we evaluate that in an animal. Do we mean "living longer"? Than the statement is easily checked. Do we mean "happier" (whatever we mean by that), that probably will be harder to check. Nevertheless, even though you preceded your claim with "in my opinion", we can operationalize the claim and check it. It is a claim to facts and therefore can be challenged.
"In my opinion, cellphones cause brain cancer." Again a factual claim. It basically would revolve around the question whether you give a lot of weight to the case-control studies of Hardell et al or not and if so, why? As above, while it is a factual claim, there is some legitimacy in defending it. But you should be able to give reasons why you hold the opinion you do.
"In my opinion, I can jump off the cliff and fly away."
Well by all means go and do it then.
As far as I can see in all these cases, you can always be called on defending a statement. Whether it can be defended is a function on whether the statement contains claims to facts or claims to personal preference. The former can be resolved in principle, the latter cannot be. Whether the former can be resolved is a matter of where the science has progressed to at this point.
Now, in my opinion can be a qualifier that you do not want to defend a statement at this point in time. But than your statement can just as well be ignored, because how are we ever to find out why you made the statement you did? We can just as well ignore it then, so why did you make it in the first place? |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2010 : 18:29:07 [Permalink]
|
Dude.....
bngbuck asked:
You have made a statement of alleged fact when you state: "The sentence - confinement of wild animals constitutes abuse - is not an opinion, it is a statement of alleged fact."
What is your evidence for this statement of alleged fact?
|
Dude responded: | Your posts where you make the claim. |
However, playing by your rules, the fact that you state it is a "claim" does not make it so. Because I challenge you, you must prove it. I have given ample authority demonstrating that an opinion can be many things, it is not necessarily a claim to fact. You now must give me equivilant authority that your statement.....Saying that all animal captivity constitutes abuse is not an opinion. It isn't an opinion no matter how you "qualify" it. It is a claim of fact and the only qualification is degree of certainty.
|
...is backed by evidence, specifically evidence that my opinion is claim of fact. Merely your statement that it is, does not constitute evidence.
So, when I ask you:
| "What is your evidence for making the claim that -bngbuck's opinion that confinement of wild animals constitutes abuse IS an alleged fact"? |
in other words, when I ask you; | What is your evidence for claiming that "his opinion IS a claim to fact"?..... |
(Not the evidence that I made the statement, that is unquestioned; rather what is the evidence for your claim that it is a statement of alleged fact;)
.....your response is: | my evidence is that he stated what he called an "opinion" in an earlier post. |
Therefore you are stating that my comment, "Confinement of wild animals constitutes abuse" is proof of your allegation that the comment is a claim of fact, not an opinion. The independent reference to authority that you must present to support your claim to fact is apparently me and my comment, which I labeled as opinion, according to you.
You are maintaining that my statement alone constitutes proof that it is a claim to fact. I dispute that claim of yours and maintain that the burden of proof is upon you to demonstrate by reference to recognized authority that your claim to fact is true! I recommend various dictionaries and the Wikipedia!
I am truly sorry, but playing by your rules, you cannot take a position that your statement:| "An opinion is a statement of alleged fact" |
is a self-evident statement that does not require proof by reference to recognized authority. It is not true simply because you say it. If challenged, you must defend it and give substantial basis for your defense. Playing the game by your rules still; if you say that it is your opinion, I challenge you to offer proof. If you say that your statement is a claim of fact, I challenge you to offer proof of that by reference to outside authority, not simply by stating that I made the statement that I did.
|
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2010 : 19:52:30 [Permalink]
|
Tomko.....
What do you think of Dave's declarative statement: | opinions are assertions of facts. |
Note that he does not use the conditional mood "may be", rather the realis declarative mood "are" |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2010 : 20:46:26 [Permalink]
|
bng, I'm sorry that your advanced age had rendered you incapable of recognizing fact claims, even when you are the one making them. It's kind of pathetic really.
(hey, dglas, that sentence of mine above this one is a FINE example of argumentum ad hominem! See how it's done now?)
As for your most recent post here bng, can I loan you a flame to set those strawmen alight? I'm uninterested in responding to your stupidity in any substantive way. If you, at some future point, decide you want to honestly discuss the issue, just go ahead and bring it up.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2010 : 21:28:38 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
What do you think of Dave's declarative statement: | opinions are assertions of facts. |
Note that he does not use the conditional mood "may be", rather the realis declarative mood "are" |
I see that you're not replying to me anymore, but you're still digging yourself deeper. Find me someone who states an opinion that they think is false or precisely equivocal, and you'll falsify my "declarative statement."
(Note well that I cannot find any such examples, and I've been unable to invent even horribly contrived examples on my own. I'm not trying to shift the burden of proof, I have failed to falsify my idea, but not due to a failure to try.)
With regard to your particular opinion, the one which started all this, you clearly think it's true (and have cited your experiences in support of its truth), even if you don't know whether it's true or false. "In my opinion..." is a preface meaning, "I think the following is true, even if I don't have much evidence for it..." And "I think the following is true..." indicates an assertion of fact.
Nobody, not even Webster, has presented any evidence for me to reconsider this interpretation of the phrase "in my opinion." |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2010 : 21:53:41 [Permalink]
|
Astropin.....
| I'm with Dude on this one. |
Are you also with him on this declarative statement that he has made?.......| any declarative statement that can be objectively evaluated can't be an opinion, no matter how many ways or times a person says it is just an opinion. |
|
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2010 : 23:57:57 [Permalink]
|
Dude......
I'm uninterested in responding to your stupidity in any substantive way. If you, at some future point, decide you want to honestly discuss the issue, just go ahead and bring it up.
|
I am bringing it up. I honestly want you to respond to my post as your hero Dave always does; at least he has the guts to not run away. Rather, he evades by ignoring the questions that he can't answer. But it looks like you just dismiss out of hand when you are not able to sensibly respond. Insult will never replace reasoned logic on SFN!
Just so you don't appear to be an "intellectual coward" by copping out with "I'm uninterested in responding", stop parroting TMOTU's endless repetition of "strawman" and answer my post with reason and logical dissection. If you can. Otherwise, you're a phony, a fake and a coward!
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2010 : 00:51:21 [Permalink]
|
Dave.....
| I see that you're not replying to me anymore, |
You poor fucking baby! The fact that I haven't replied to your last post to me (thanks so much for the first person address; God, how I have missed it) for slightly over one day certainly does not mean that I am not replying to you any more. I work most every weekday between 5am and 2pm Pacific; and, unlike you, I do have a few other interests besides SFN.
I understand that your need for attention and your hunger for vilification are insatiable, but try to get yourself under control and read up in your insult book until I have the time to respond to your gargantuan daily davecations of horsecrap and bullshit.
As much as you would like it, I am not on call to you or anyone else, but I assure you that I do not miss your posts and they will all be answered in due time on my schedule. If you don't like that, tough shit!
I do have other fans here, you know! Meanwhile, throw some more shit bombs, you're pretty good at that - you'll get your answer in a few days and I guarantee that it will give you the hard-on you crave. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
 Posted - 03/13/2010 : 01:22:16 [Permalink]
|
You know? I will be on the road all day tomorrow. If I'm lucky, I might be online tomorrow night. And it's a good thing too. Because right now I am very close to locking this thread. And that's something I have never done before. So, has SFN completely back gone back to being
insult-a-rama again? What are you guys thinking? I'm over on Facebook, promoting SFN and this is what the lurkers and newbies get to see. I'm disgusted. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2010 : 01:38:31 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
You poor fucking baby! |
Temper, temper! Better watch that, or you'll show off your true colors.
Go ahead, take your time. My hypothesis about your current posting habits was wrong, even though it was based on prior observations, in which you appeared to refuse to read ahead, to be sure that you answered everything. No big deal for me to admit my mistake. But apparently it's a huge issue to you that I even thought such a thing. So much so that you feel the need to describe how busy you are.
Chill out, bngbuck. No need to delve into your deep repository of four-letter words because of me. I'll wait patiently until you mention my name or quote me again. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2010 : 01:53:52 [Permalink]
|
bngbuck said:
Just so you don't appear to be an "intellectual coward" by copping out with "I'm uninterested in responding", stop parroting TMOTU's endless repetition of "strawman" and answer my post with reason and logical dissection. If you can. Otherwise, you're a phony, a fake and a coward!
|
There is nothing in your post that warrants a reasoned response. You are well aware of that. It isn't that I'm uninterested in responding, rather I'm uninterested in responding to nonsense. You want me to "prove" that your statement is a claim of fact? Get over yourself man. If your statement isn't a claim of fact, then nothing is a claim of fact.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2010 : 08:59:52 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Tomko.....
What do you think of Dave's declarative statement: | opinions are assertions of facts. |
Note that he does not use the conditional mood "may be", rather the realis declarative mood "are"
|
Yes, I think that Dave's statement is incorrect. "In my opinion red is the most beautiful color there is." is a statement of personal preference, not a statement of fact (although I guess you could argue that it is a statement of fact regarding your preferences  ).
However, a statement like the one you made in the previous thread (confinment of wild animals constitutes abuse) is a claim to a fact. It is a statement that alleges that these animals are worse of in prison than they are otherwise (hence, it is abusive).
edited to explain further (just in case): With the claim "confinment of wild animals constitutes abuse" you alledge a potentially testable marker that shows that these animals are objectively worse off in confinement than they would be in nature. That is the basis of your "opinion".
Analyzing your statement further, we could identify two areas your claim might apply to, "health" or "well-being". You might be thinking of health in terms of life span or risk of disease. In this case, abusive would mean that animals in prison would be worse of because they would live shorter lives or be sick more often. As far as I know, this claim is objectively wrong.
The second would alledge that animals are "psychologically happier" in nature. You might claim that confinements used for animals are too small for them and don't supply them with the same perceptual inputs, hence leading to them having similar behavior as humans with psychological problems like depression or stress. Especially in the past, with animals that needed large habitats and locked in too small cages, you could for example observe strongly repetitive behavior. This can be an indication of "depression" in animals. However, at least in the Netherlands, there is a large effort to closely replicate the natural surroundings of the animals, providing them with sufficiently large cages and companions where necessary. I at least haven't observed this type of behavior in animals in captivity in zoos here (although admittedly I'm not an expert on animal behavior). Also, stress would possibly be less of an issue in captivity then in the wild.
So regardless of the way you labeled your statement ("in my opinion"), you did make a (admittedly badly defined) statement of fact. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
| Edited by - tomk80 on 03/13/2010 09:40:50 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
The ‘opinion’ thread
