It's my opinion man

[King Aragorn]

But when it comes to games, movies, TV, etc, I don't care if someone wants to go into more detail about their preferences, cause it's a matter of entertainment. I'm here on these forums to talk about my likes and dislikes. But if someone simply wants to state their opinion and doesn't want to enter a heated (let's face it - gaming forums get insane at times) discussion, then that's perfectly fine.

They have reached a point where they either see no point in continuing or just want to step away from the debate before things get nasty.

What's the point of stating their opinion if they want to replies what so ever? wouldn't making a blog and then putting the comments to disabled be more handy to that?
It's a social place where you say something, others see it, they reply, then you reply, so on and so forth. I can sort of get people saying that when you get to a point where is just nothing left but when people put it as an instant defense line the minute you imply you don't agree kills discussion and can be at times infuriating when they go on about you trying to ''put them down'' when you just stated your subjective opinion.

 

[madwarper]

you do have to support your opinion with valid reasoning otherwise what the hell is the damn point?

And, who gets to say whether or not the reasoning behind someone's opinion is "valid"?

I hate it when people say "Opinions can never be wrong". What a load of horse shit.

Then, you're saying that there are opinions that can be objectively proven to be wrong? Care to list examples?

 

[King Aragorn]

you do have to support your opinion with valid reasoning otherwise what the hell is the damn point?

And, who gets to say whether or not the reasoning behind someone's opinion is "valid"?

I hate it when people say "Opinions can never be wrong". What a load of horse shit.

Then, you're saying that there are opinions that can be objectively proven to be wrong? Care to list examples?

Well the use of the word valid is more liberal here, valid reasoning more or less means just why you think that way, not much else. Also we can just use a bit of common sense here.
Again, using the whole we should just bomb all Middle Eastern people example here. If I say it's because they live in sand and I don't like sand that's just..illogical and not very valid.

 

[wulf3n]

Meh, I find the opposite more annoying.

Try and explain why you like/dislike something and use phrases like "this was good" or "this was bad" and prepare yourself for an avalanche of "I didn't realise you were the authority on what's good and bad"

 

[IceForce]

I hate it when people say "Opinions can never be wrong". What a load of horse shit.

Then, you're saying that there are opinions that can be objectively proven to be wrong? Care to list examples?

"I'm of the opinion that the Earth is flat"
"I'm of the opinion that climate change is a myth"
"I'm of the opinion that homosexuality is a choice"
"I'm of the opinion that transgender people are just attention seeking people who like to play dress-up, and that there's no such thing as gender dysphoria"

Need I go on?

At least a couple of these "opinions" are regularly found on this very forum, despite being blatantly wrong.

 

[madwarper]

Again, using the whole we should just bomb all Middle Eastern people example here. If I say it's because they live in sand and I don't like sand that's just..illogical and not very valid.

So... It's your opinion that said reasoning behind the previously stated opinion is "illogical and not very valid"?

In the unlikely case of someone actually having that opinion, with that reasoning, I doubt they would agree with your assessment of their reasoning. (Subjectivity) is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[wulf3n]

"I'm of the opinion that the Earth is flat"
"I'm of the opinion that climate change is a myth"
"I'm of the opinion that homosexuality is a choice"
"I'm of the opinion that transgender people are just attention seeking people who like to play dress-up, and that there's no such thing as gender dysphoria"

Need I go on?

At least a couple of these "opinions" are regularly found on this very forum, despite being blatantly wrong.

Those aren't opinions they're beliefs.

Opinion refers to that which is subjective. If the thought in question is about something that can be objectively assessed, with a position that goes against the established facts considered a belief.

People who have those positions will often refer to them as opinions, but they're not.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

The only thing worse than people saying something is just their opinion is the people that feel the need to call out the fact that they know it's just their opinion.

The thing is, these statements are almost always taken out of context. Granted, sometimes people say stupid things. However, every time I have stated that something was my opinion and most of the times I've seen, there has been more going on. For instance, when someone is pointing out the flaws in a game or movie, they will, more often than not, say something like "No one should enjoy this." At that point, it's completely appropriate to point out how utterly subjective that is.

In most other instances, I've seen it as an effective to concede that, yes, that thing you mentioned is objectively true. However, because I enjoy that thing subjectively, your objective reasoning doesn't matter to me.

This whole issue people have seems to come down to this feeling that they can't accept that someone could think differently than they do. That some pathetic foolish mortal could possibly stand up to the avalanche of hard hitting objective facts they have assembled with their puny [i/]opinion[/i].

 

[lacktheknack]

"I'm of the opinion that the Earth is flat"
"I'm of the opinion that climate change is a myth"
"I'm of the opinion that homosexuality is a choice"
"I'm of the opinion that transgender people are just attention seeking people who like to play dress-up, and that there's no such thing as gender dysphoria"

Need I go on?

At least a couple of these "opinions" are regularly found on this very forum, despite being blatantly wrong.

Those aren't opinions they're beliefs.

Opinion refers to that which is subjective. If the thought in question is about something that can be objectively assessed, with a position that goes against the established facts considered a belief.

People who have those positions will often refer to them as opinions, but they're not.

I firmly believe that lexical semantics are overrated and generally useless, and do nothing for conversations but grind them to a halt and annoy people.

OT: "If your opinion isn't worth defending, then why did you post it?"

 

[KingKickass]

"I'm of the opinion that the Earth is flat"
"I'm of the opinion that climate change is a myth"
"I'm of the opinion that homosexuality is a choice"
"I'm of the opinion that transgender people are just attention seeking people who like to play dress-up, and that there's no such thing as gender dysphoria"

Need I go on?

At least a couple of these "opinions" are regularly found on this very forum, despite being blatantly wrong.

Those aren't opinions they're beliefs.

Opinion refers to that which is subjective. If the thought in question is about something that can be objectively assessed, with a position that goes against the established facts considered a belief.

People who have those positions will often refer to them as opinions, but they're not.

Wait wait wait, opinions are different from beliefs? If I believe that The Room is a god awful but hilariously funny movie to watch, that is also my opinion is it not? Saying opinions and beliefs aren't connected is really misinformed. They're essentially two sides of the same coin as with an opinion you take a stand on one side of an argument and a belief is your view on what's true. If you believe that any sort of god exists it is also your opinion that said entity exists.

Ice made a really good list of blatantly wrong opinions; even though they may be beliefs as well, it's still a stand on one side of an argument for each subject.

 

[wulf3n]

I firmly believe that lexical semantics are overrated and generally useless, and do nothing for conversations but grind them to a halt and annoy people.

Really? having everyone having an agreed upon meaning for words hinders conversation. More so than people arguing for countless posts because they each think the other is saying something they're not?

 

[wulf3n]

Wait wait wait, opinions are different from beliefs? If I believe that The Room is a god awful but hilariously funny movie to watch, that is also my opinion is it not? Saying opinions and beliefs aren't connected is really misinformed. They're essentially two sides of the same coin as with an opinion you take a stand on one side of an argument and a belief is your view on what's true. If you believe that any sort of god exists it is also your opinion that said entity exists.

Given that a belief is just a position on a matter that doesn't take into account evidence, then of course there'll be some overlap.

The point being if a position is objective, then it's not an opinion, because an opinion is a belief of something that is subjective.

Ice made a really good list of blatantly wrong opinions; even though they may be beliefs as well, it's still a stand on one side of an argument for each subject.

What Ice made was a good list of common beliefs people mistakenly refer to as opinions.

 

[lacktheknack]

I firmly believe that lexical semantics are overrated and generally useless, and do nothing for conversations but grind them to a halt and annoy people.

Really? having everyone having an agreed upon meaning for words hinders conversation. More so than people arguing for countless posts because they each think the other is saying something they're not?

It happens either way, hilariously/tragically enough. People would rather talk than understand, even when the topic is dissected thoroughly before they get there.

Obviously, if you suspect that someone is arguing about something different than you, then clear it up. But posts dedicated to picking out nits when the context and meaning (while not completely accurate) is perfectly clear need to shove right off.

 

[wulf3n]

It happens either way, hilariously/tragically enough. People would rather talk than understand, even when the topic is dissected thoroughly before they get there.

Obviously, if you suspect that someone is arguing about something different than you, then clear it up.

How is it perfectly clear? The problem here isn't with people having opinions, it's with people trying to pass of a belief as an opinion.

So when people say an opinion can be objectively wrong, they're objectively wrong.

But posts dedicated to picking out nits when the context and meaning (while not completely accurate) is perfectly clear need to shove right off.

Christ, sometimes it feels like I'm talking within a cult. It's a sad sad day when people think clearing up definitions needs to "shove right off"

No wonder there are so many pointless flame wars here.

 

[lacktheknack]

How is it perfectly clear? The problem here isn't with people having opinions, it's with people trying to pass of a belief as an opinion.

So when people say an opinion can be objectively wrong, they're objectively wrong.

You're the first person I've ever met that's enforced a distinction between the two. If you talk to pretty much anyone else, they don't distinguish.

So, sorry. It's perfectly clear to everyone except the one who indulges in semantics.

And so I loop around to my first post.

 

[wulf3n]

You're the first person I've ever met that's enforced a distinction between the two. If you talk to pretty much anyone else, they don't distinguish.

So?

So, sorry. It's perfectly clear to everyone except the one who indulges in semantics.

It's not perfectly clear. It's objectively wrong.

 

[lacktheknack]

Christ, sometimes it feels like I'm talking within a cult. It's a sad sad day when people think clearing up definitions needs to "shove right off"

No wonder there are so many pointless flame wars here.

...

So, you turned "unneeded nit-picking" into "clearing up definitions"?

We're not on the same footing here.

You're the first person I've ever met that's enforced a distinction between the two. If you talk to pretty much anyone else, they don't distinguish.

So?

Does the majority really have to go out of their way to accommodate the tiny minority?

So, sorry. It's perfectly clear to everyone except the one who indulges in semantics.

It's not perfectly clear. It's objectively wrong.

...it's only unclear to you because of your opinion on the importance of sem-

Aaaaand the conversation ground to a halt because of semantics. Again. I'm out.

 

[Guffe]

Okay went on a bit of a rant here, but what do you think of this dilemma we often see on the magical land of internet?

Depends...

If we are discussing actual taste in a thread, like what I prefer (music, movies, games etc) in the "what do you like/prefer/hate/love/chug/hug/bug/etcetc" Then I can answer whatever I want, and if someone starts arguing there about it, challenging me in a "your type of music is shit". Then I usually reply with something like "did you read the topic? It asks what I like, and I like this, so back of!"

If we're actually discussion stuff that you can objectively talk about, then I welcome arguments, debates. As long as we stay classy, of course.
But yes, people need to learn the difference when you can challenge someone into an argument/debate and when we are discussing actual preferences.

 

[wulf3n]

So, you turned "unneeded nit-picking" into "clearing up definitions"?

No, you said "uneeded nit-picking", I said "clearing up definitions"

We're not on the same footing here.

Often referred to as a difference of opinion.

Does the majority really have to go out of their way to accommodate the tiny minority?

When the minority is talking about something based on fact yes. It's why the theory of evolution is taught in schools and not intelligent design.

...only because of your opinion on the importance of sem-

Aaaaand the conversation ground to a halt because of semantics.

No, my opinion on the importance of semantics is why I brought it up, it says nothing about it's validity.

Again. I'm out.

Again? Again implies a first.

Now that's pointless nitpicking.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Given that a belief is just a position on a matter that doesn't take into account evidence, then of course there'll be some overlap.

100% overlap, actually.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/opinion

a belief, judgment, or way of thinking about something : what someone thinks about a particular thing

Carry on.