"It's just my opinion"

[Doctor Glocktor]

So next time somebody tells you your opinion is wrong, don't regurgitate that pathetic old phrase, tell them why it's not wrong.

I don't owe you anything and I don't have to prove anything to you.

Why do you think you should have the right to?

 

[0p3rati0n]

Some people can take an opinion likes a threat or something. I can say "well I believe in god" (no flame war just an example) yet someone will be like "you imbecile god isn't real!!! Get it right!" But know one respects it. they'll try to show the fact that god isn't real while someone else will try to do the other. I don't get why people just can't except the fact that the world is based around opinions and nothing you'll say will change the entire worlds prospective. It's a part of life suck it up!

 

[mrpenguinismyhomeboy]

"It's just my opinion". There are few phrases that get me foaming at the mouth as rapidly as this one. What's wrong with it? Well that, my friend, is what this thread is all about.

Almost every debate I get into, whether in real life or online, the person I'm talking to inevitably falls back on that old reliable "it's just my opinion" and the person saying this generally assumes that this is immediately the end of the argument, because everybody is entitled to their opinion, and who am I to be critical of theirs? Essentially, most people seem to assume the subjectivist view that all opinions are equally valid, and consider anybody who doesn't share this assumption as intolerant and arrogant.

But have they really thought it through? If we were to genuinely accept that all opinions are equally valid, then all discussion is rendered irrelevant, how can we possibly discuss the merits of my position versus your position if both positions are perfectly correct just because we hold them? If you have ever thought that somebody else is wrong about anything then you have acknowledged that thier opinion is not equally valid with yours. Everyone implicitly accepts that some opinions are more valid than others.

If all opinions are not equally valid, then you are perfectly entitled to criticise someone else's opinion. It doesn't undermine their right to an opinion, you're not forcing them to change it, you're merely arguing that it's flawed in some way. "It's just my opinion" is an utterly redundant phrase, there is no reason somebody cannot be critical of your opinion, and indeed the same thing applies to taste which is just a form of opinion relating to specific areas.

So next time somebody tells you your opinion is wrong, don't regurgitate that pathetic old phrase, tell them why it's not wrong.

Well opinions are neither wrong nor right. That's why they are opinions. You may share an opinion which the majority happens to also have and thus, you all may agree upon it to be right, but it is neither. It is still an opinion. It is the view of a singular individual on the planet. Facts are either true or false, and true facts are worth more then false facts, but opinions are not facts. Your opinion is not rigorously tested. Facts are. Yes, most facts start out as opinions, but after getting scrutinized and verified that the particular opinion was fact, it thus ceases to be an opinion and never was an opinion to begin with because it was fact all along whether we thought so or not.

 

[Bigeyez]

Let me correct you.
To say the acting in any movie is bad, or to have a valid opinion, it has to be well balanced and substantiated. If you say the acting is bad, you have to explain why, and in comparison to what.
If it's bad compared to, say, American Beauty, most people would say there is hardly a difference.
If you say it's bad in comparison to Snakes on a Train, then clearly that person is unobservant, and therefore his opinion is null and void.

If an opinion is founded on ill thought or lack of knowledge or logic, it may not be wrong, but it is worthless due to this.
You wouldn't say someone's opinion on a movie they have never seen or heard of is the same as someone who has seen it several time, as well as hundreds of other movies.

Your quote is incorrectly mixed.
"Half-Life 2 has the worst story ever". Ever? Anyone who uses a hyperbole in an opinion is only going to give a ill-founded opinion, as no one can make such as claim.
"I hated every character in the game". Far enough, but the person has to explain why, otherwise their opinion is worthless as it is not logical.
"They all sounded and looked horrible." Now this is a truly subjective opinion, which in itself is enough to make sense without further reasoning being necessary, as aesthetic and audio appeal is subjective.
An opinion without logical steps is worthless, and nothing more than a mindless comment.

Read what you yourself just wrote. The debate we're having here is whether an opinion can be wrong/right. The answer to that is no.

Opinions can indeed be illogical, irrational, ill-founded, etc, etc but none of that changes the fact that an opinion by it's very nature is something that cannot be proven right/wrong.

I never said all opinions should be held in the same regard. I'm simply saying that they can't be proven wrong or right, only agreed or disagreed with.

Edit: Let me just say that I ultimately agree with what the OP is trying to say. It is frustrating when you talk to someone and they offer no explanation for what they are saying other then "It's my opinion". It's just that he's trying to say that opinions can actually be wrong and thats something that just isn't true.

 

[Lenny Magic]

In my opinion/experience falling back on the phrase often adds more to the convocation as to why it is their opinion.

 

[Shas]

Just because you have a right to your opinion does not protect you from being wrong.

This.

Basically as long as we are not debating anything grounded in fact you can think what you want.

But if your opinion is for example, the sky is pink well that is wrong.

An opinion does not apply to facts.

Anywhere else though, its fine and should be respected.

the sky can be pink though. at sunset or sunrise. at the very least the clouds can

on topic, opinions can be subject to change. if they were to say "this is the truth" as opposed to "this is my opinion", then it would be bad

 

[Ninja_X]

Just because you have a right to your opinion does not protect you from being wrong.

This.

Basically as long as we are not debating anything grounded in fact you can think what you want.

But if your opinion is for example, the sky is pink well that is wrong.

An opinion does not apply to facts.

Anywhere else though, its fine and should be respected.

the sky can be pink though. at sunset or sunrise. at the very least the clouds can

You are just splitting hairs now.

You know what I mean.

If you say "In my opinion, I weigh 178lbs" when you actually weigh 200lbs then it isn't an opinion. Because fact disproves it.

If you say "I think I am fat." that is just your opinion. Because it differs from person to person what exactly "fat" is.

 

[Seanchaidh]

Opinions can't be wrong, but they can still be fucking retarded.

The difference being? Of course they can be wrong. My opinion is that the world is flat. Is that not wrong?

That's a claim about a matter of fact, not so much an opinion.

 

[Joey-Z]

The only opinion that realy matters is the collective...

Everyone else can f*ck off for all I care,

But thats just my opinion [Bad joke, I know]

 

[Shas]

ok here is an opinion, based on some reasoning (maybe)

Homosexuality in men is good.
Why? Less men in the market chasing the women means more women for me.
Homosexuality is bad in women.
Why? Because less women on the market means less women to chase.

Two opinions with reasons. Are they wrong or right? Can they be wrong or right? Based on whose perspective are they wrong or right? They're also open to be changed with a compelling arguement because i don't hold them as solid fact.

 

[joystickjunki3]

You're wrong... of course that's just my opinion, man.

And let's not get into a fight about it. I mean, there's a beverage involved here.

 

[Shas]

They are simply insufficient.

There is no change with perspective--it's just that each perspective only captures part of the entire reality. The 'rightness and wrongness' changes no more than in the case of a man who walks down a road with a hat that is red on one side, blue on the other. A person on one side will say it is a blue hat; a person on the other side will say it is a red hat. Perspective changes nothing about the nature of the hat: anyone who says the hat is anything but half blue and half red is wrong.

An opinion isnt based on an entire reality. something with the entire reality is a fact. an opinion is based on what you see and know. you can only form it on what you know and experienced. when you discuss an opinion, more facets of reality are revealed to you, and if you're open to it, can change your opinion.

if the man walks by and i see only the blue part of the hat, i can only assume the hat is blue, until it can be proven that there is red also on the hat

 

[Turtleboy1017]

Opinions can't be wrong, but they can still be fucking retarded.

The difference being? Of course they can be wrong. My opinion is that the world is flat. Is that not wrong?

You know there is a difference between opinion and fact.

An opinion is generally based on a subject or topic that people can actually view differently.
For example, It is my opinion that Obama is a good American President.
This is an opinion, for others may think differently on the topic.

Fact can not be associated with opinion, as it is using the word opinion in the incorrect sense.
For example, It is my opinion that 1+1=3.
This is NOT an opinion, but straight up fact. It is proven, and it can not be changed. Therefore, it must be fact rather than opinion.

 

[Shas]

Now for a lesson everyone can learn in real time about differing opinions, in a hypothetical setting:

I disagree with your first argument (opinion with support [Homesexuality in men is good.]), because of the homosexual phenomenon known as the "Teddy Bear Gay." These big, cuddly, cockblocks force their way in between you and a potential mate, and forewarn women of my potentially deviant nature because my Y chromosome isn't written in cursive, and am therefore incapable of real emotional connection with you [women].

However, I do agree with your second argument (opinion with support [Homosexuality in women is good.]) and I therefore do not need to expand upon the argument given.

Notice everyone, that I never said that he was wrong, nor did I ever say he was right, I simply disagreed and agreed on certain points. On my dissenting argument (the disagreement), I offered evidence, probably taken from a personal experience, to support my dissenting opinion.

I don't quite understand why this has taken 4 pages to explain, because it seems like quite a simple thing to answer, opinions, by several stated definitions, are unprovable, therefore not right or wrong. Understanding the structure of a true argument (opinion with support) is what is being debated upon, and for that to truly come to fruition, takes a mastery of the English language to a point to know when some phrases are erroneous.

Where i would counter with, I would believe that there would not always be one of these "teddy bear gays" (which until now i have never heard of, and even a quick search on google or wiki turned up nothing i had a desire to read.)to try and cock block you (or me as the case would be), and that if one were to show up, you could go somewhere else. hopefully he wouldnt follow to warn other women of your "deviant arts"

(and im just guessing that if you agree with my second opinion about women, that you just misspelled.)

 

[justnotcricket]

Sometimes you *want* to end an argument though. Like for example where the person you're talking to is absolutely convinced that they have to convert everyone within lecturing distance of the validity, correctnes, irrefutability and general awesomeness of their opinion on something. At a certain point, you just get so damn sick of listening to them tell you why they're right, and you've basically either:

a) exhausted your options- as in the case of a debate over whether chocolate is tasty or not: you like it, they hate it, and there are only so many ways to say this. No-one's suddenly going to change their mind about their preference for chocolate just because someone has presented a ruthlessly logical argument for one case.

b) lost the will to live - as in the case of a debate over whether or not the moon is made of cheese: one of you knows they are right, one of you *is* right. Eventually, one or the other of you is probably going to use that apparently dreaded phrase, just because the alternative is probably throwing a punch (which incidentally is the problem with most politics).