“I’m sure you’ve heard the expression ‘everyone is entitled to their opinion.’ Perhaps you’ve even said it yourself, maybe to head off an argument or bring one to a close. Well, as soon as you walk into this room, it’s no longer true. You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to what you can argue for.”
A bit harsh? Perhaps, but philosophy teachers owe it to our students to teach them how to construct and defend an argument – and to recognize when a belief has become indefensible.
The problem with “I’m entitled to my opinion” is that, all too often, it’s used to shelter beliefs that should have been abandoned. It becomes shorthand for “I can say or think whatever I like” – and by extension, continuing to argue is somehow disrespectful. And this attitude feeds, I suggest, into the false equivalence between experts and non-experts that is an increasingly pernicious feature of our public discourse.
On the Mediawatch site, Ms. Dorey accused the ABC of “openly calling for censorship of a scientific debate.” This response confuses not having your views taken seriously with not being allowed to hold or express those views at all – or to borrow a phrase from Andrew Brown, it “confuses losing an argument with losing the right to argue.” Again, two senses of “entitlement” to an opinion are being conflated here.
Only a moron or someone with real control issues would either try to tell someone they don't have a right to their own opinion or that your opinion must be taken seriously by another person.
Originally posted by Eladar Only a moron or someone with real control issues would either try to tell someone they don't have a right to their own opinion or that your opinion must be taken seriously by another person.
The point is that in certain places, you are not necessarily entitled to air your opinion. You may of course have an opinion that you keep private. If you read the whole article you will realise that the intended meaning of the thread title has some subtleties to it.
Originally posted by twhitehead The point is that in certain places, you are not necessarily entitled to air your opinion. You may of course have an opinion that you keep private. If you read the whole article you will realise that the intended meaning of the thread title has some subtleties to it.
Originally posted by Eladar Unless you are talking about screaming fire in a packed building, then no I do not misunderstand.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion. Everyone is entitled to take that opinion as information and simply disagree with it.
As I thought, you have misunderstood what is being said. I suggest you read the article before you next express you opinion (which you are entitled to).
Originally posted by twhitehead As I thought, you have misunderstood what is being said. I suggest you read the article before you next express you opinion (which you are entitled to).
If it was accurately expressed in the opening post, then I understand.
The only way one can defend the opinion would be based on agreed upon assumptions. Only a moron would ignore this fact.
True, he is entitled to his opinion, but I have judged him for that opinion.
Originally posted by Eladar If it was accurately expressed in the opening post, then I understand.
The only way one can defend the opinion would be based on agreed upon assumptions. Only a moron would ignore this fact.
True, he is entitled to his opinion, but I have judged him for that opinion.
if you had read that article, you would understand why you, right now, fit precisely the people the article is talking about.
you have just formed an opinion based on one sentence, hadn't bothered to read the entire article (i didn't want to paste the entire thing here) and came into a discussion to express your opinion.
in this particular case it is bearable, because we know you and what you are (in)capable of. in the case of anti-vaxxers showing up on tv however it is particularly damaging. tv producers give them air time for various reasons but "in the interest of giving both sides a voice" is cited most often. THIS is the issue argued in the article you didn't read. you don't have a side if you can't argue for it. you may scream whatever you want in private but on an informative show, in a scientific discussion, in a committee of whatever kind, you must have an INFORMED opinion.
Originally posted by Zahlanzi if you had read that article, you would understand why you, right now, fit precisely the people the article is talking about.
you have just formed an opinion based on one sentence, hadn't bothered to read the entire article (i didn't want to paste the entire thing here) and came into a discussion to express your opinion.
in this particular case i ...[text shortened]... in a scientific discussion, in a committee of whatever kind, you must have an INFORMED opinion.
I didn't read the article, just responded to your original post.
Can I help if you can't give an accurate representation of the article?
Originally posted by twhitehead As I thought, you have misunderstood what is being said. I suggest you read the article before you next express you opinion (which you are entitled to).
Most people don't actually read the article, just give their opinions about what is written the in the thread.
This has been pointed out to me on multiple occasions.
Originally posted by Eladar Most people don't actually read the article, just give their opinions about what is written the in the thread.
This has been pointed out to me on multiple occasions.
Copying what most people may do is hardly setting the bar very high for yourself. I suggest that you move beyond what most people do since most people are totally ignorant and intend to stay that way. I fail to see what satisfaction it gives you to make so many contributions to a forum without checking that you know what you are talking about and finding over and over again that you have been shown to be wrong.
Put it this way. If you refuse to do any research before announcing your opinions, what is the magical process by which you expect to be right even sometimes? If I sound cocky, as I am sure I often do, it is because I have been searching away trying my best to get reliable information and taking care before I commit to an opinion. That way, when I do have an opinions I can defend it in debate with decent supporting material and, strangely enough, if you tell the truth then the facts tend to be on your side.
Originally posted by Eladar Only a moron or someone with real control issues would either try to tell someone they don't have a right to their own opinion or that your opinion must be taken seriously by another person.
This happens under every tyrannical regime in history.
They can force you what to do and then force you what to say. At this point, only fools dare speak their mind.
Originally posted by finnegan Copying what most people may do is hardly setting the bar very high for yourself. I suggest that you move beyond what most people do since most people are totally ignorant and intend to stay that way. I fail to see what satisfaction it gives you to make so many contributions to a forum without checking that you know what you are talking about and finding o ...[text shortened]... ng material and, strangely enough, if you tell the truth then the facts tend to be on your side.
Well I'm sorry if I don't play your game. Ignore my links, but demand that I read yours.
Sorry but homey don't play that game.
If you want to discuss something, quote it or summarize it.
08 Aug '14 09:33
Everyone is NOT entitled to their opinion
Back to Top