BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion

Subject: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 04:50 PM

Interest article by a philosophy prof. In Australia no less. But not called Bruce.

Patrick Stokes: You're not entitled to your opinion

Every year, I try to do at least two things with my students at least once. First, I make a point of addressing them as "philosophers" - a bit cheesy, but hopefully it encourages active learning.

Secondly, I say something like this: "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."

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 05:05 PM

What in Christ's name are you on about now, Wackers?

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Ed T
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 05:15 PM

Steve is right on this one.
WTF?

What you tell your students does themva diservice, as it is not logical.
People have the right to whatever they please to believe. It is when they promote it to others, sometimes unsuccessfully, that this entitlement to a personal opinion ends.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: GUEST,giovanni
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 05:18 PM

Everyone is entitled to my opinion.

g

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Jeri
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 05:20 PM

Can you people read?

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Ed T
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 05:31 PM

"Can you people read?"

Is that an opinion, converted into a question:)

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 05:56 PM

All the prof said was that you are entitled to the opinion that you can support with logic and rational explanation/argument.

I agree, that you are NOT entitled to try to force an opinion ON ME that you can not support with reason and can't explain other than "that's what I think."

Maybe those who object haven't looked for the reason in his argument?

Everyone should occasionally know how to politely request some others to withhold their unfounded/bigoted/biased/irrational "opinions."

John

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Ed T
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 06:13 PM

If one has an opinion, logically formed or not, (for example that a god exists), why would they not be entitled to hold it, and share it with those of similar belief (lets say in a church)? To me, the professorsv statement falls short.

Should folks choose to promote it beyond this "comfort zone" they should be prepared to defend it. This freedom seems to be the basis of many progressively freedom - loving societies.It is also what people call common sense.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 06:18 PM

So it was the professor saying that, and you presented to as something people might consider, rather than you making some comment on what he said, which was how it was understood. using quotation marks or intakics with quotes avoids that kind of misunderstaning.

Opinions aren't things you have a right to or not. They are facts about what you think at any point of time, and can of course change. And they can be right or wrong, either objectively, or in the opinion of other people. Where to draw the line between "objectively" and "in the opinion of other people" is not always at all clear.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Ed T
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 06:22 PM

Moh,
You seem to uxe the word "fact" more lightly than I suspect many would.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Bill D
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 06:38 PM

Thank you John in Kansas for translating it... saving ME much time.

Oh well...I might as well go further. What she meant was... "for the purposes of this class, it being in Philosophy, just stating an opinion is not enough."

That concept ought to be in general use in many areas and on many issues, but humans being what they are, most will continue to have opinions they cannot coherently defend.

When I was a graduate teaching fellow in Philosophy, we assigned a short term paper to Phil. 101 students to get past huge multiple-choice exams as the only test.
On the first one, we thought we'd 'stimulate interest' by picking as the topic: "The Existence of God"... big mistake! I told them... and I told them... and I repeated... that what we wanted was some idea that they had read various materials and understood BOTH sides of the debate. They were NOT to just 'give their opinion' and spew the classic non-philosophic defenses. Out of 400 or so papers, we had maybe 30 that really got the point, and only 3-4 that were really, really good! The best paper was an African-American boy who 'noted' that he was, in fact, a Christian, but that he owed it to himself to understand the issues. He did fine!

I can't tell you how many sad papers I read (remember... this was Kansas) which were little more than a defense of their church and culture.

Opinions.... it makes no difference whether anyone says you are... or are not.. entitled to one, no one can stop you having one- but in some circumstances you can be graded on how you defend it!

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 06:39 PM

Ed, It is my opinion that you have not read the piece. No problem, people are busy.

Quick summary. The prof says "You're not entitled to your opinion " when the kids enter his class. He then says he teaches them how to analyze what people are saying and speaks a little about credibility.

The headline is no doubt designed to gain attention to get you to read the article.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Lighter
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 06:43 PM

> "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."

I was told something similar many decades ago, and I've repeated it to my own students.

The key words: "this room."

It's the sort of attention-grabber that's said in a class on elementary logic and/or practical reasoning. You'd be surprised how many eighteen- and nineteen-year-olds (not to mention sixty- and seventy-year-olds) will reply to any fact-based argument they just don't like by saying, "Well, my opinion is just the opposite, and I have a perfect right to it." Or, "Well, that's just your opinion."

You have a legal right in a democracy to believe anything you want. But in a classroom - or in a jury room - we'd all better be able to explain and support our opinions logically.

Otherwise the deciding argument always goes to whoever wields the biggest stick.

And for those who claim to believe that's what happens anyway: you'll have to explain and support that view beyond the customary "It's obvious. Don't be so stupid."

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 06:50 PM

Good one g,

Thanks for reading Jeri, JiK, McGrath and Bill D. I thought of you when I first saw the article Bill D. Coincidentally I saw this today. Bill and anyone who is interested, I would be interested in your take on it, since it is about philosophers and a very debatable term on this forum.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 06:53 PM

"
And for those who claim to believe that's what happens anyway: you'll have to explain and support that view beyond the customary "It's obvious. Don't be so stupid." "

Good one! Lighter! can I use "Well, my opinion is just the opposite, and I have a perfect right to it." Or, "Well, that's just your opinion."

:-D

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 06:53 PM

What I mean is that what you are thinking is itself a fact, nothing to do with whether its factually accurate about the world or whatever. The fact is that that is what you are thinking.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Ed T
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 07:05 PM

You are correct, jts, I am guilty of your opinion on that:) I am used to the lead up to a link in an OP being a bit clearer, as I do nof open all links. Sorry about that.

I suspect one may question "what qualifies one as an expert?" Also, who and what are "pulling their strings" This seems fair to me.

I have attended many meetings where "local expertise" is ignored versus that of a with professional qualifications. I have also seen the views of "professionals used or skewed to market an initiative. Often professionals promote personal causes far beyond their professional information. We see itvall the time in criminal trials, where professionals are purchased tobpromote a cause.
Unfortunately, non professionals often do not have the know-how, nor resources, to negate this, and often use whatever power within their grasp to counter.

I recall a meeting where the local observations of fishermen was ignored in faviour of scientists who never left the labratory. Unfortunately, though the fishermen were eventually proven right, they could not present their observations in a manner scientists could fit in their models to access. Traditional first nations knowledge falls into this category- but, those in power do reach out to include it, where tgey arecrequired by law to reach out.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Ed T
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 07:19 PM

I recall a meeting held by a gaggle of professionals promoting thecestablishment of a no-take marine protected area. The local fishermen's, , concerned for their livlihood, were skeptical, and mostly opposed. After numerous overheads of maps, charts, statistics, and a convincing marketing case that fishermen would benefit over the longer term, a small elderly lady stood upcand asked "have yoy ever heard about the statistician that drowned ib a lake with an average depth of one foot?" It certainly had an impact on everyone present, including the professionals.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 07:21 PM

but what if your opinion is that the moon is made of blue cheese, and that all heretics who disagree are worthy only of death.

well of course you are entitled to your opinion.

if you support and finance terrorist groups to propagate your views, are you still entitled to your opinions - just not entitled to be in thrall to them.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 07:23 PM

A big case in point in the UK at the moment being the policies of the Environment Agency as an agent of flooding.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Bill D
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 07:31 PM

First thing that popped into my head as I read it was this:

I HAD rather believe all the fables in the Legend, and the Talmud, and the Alcoran than that this universal frame is without a mind. And therefore God never wrought miracle to convince atheism, because his ordinary works convince it. It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion. For while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them, confederate and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity.

Francis Bacon
In Bacon's day, one rather needed to end up with that sort of opinion. (same with Descartes, a few years later)...and remember, Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake in 1600, (The Roman Inquisition found him guilty of heresy,) during the same years Bacon & Descartes were trying to get a handle on belief.


In the article, Plantinga says: ..."the universe seems to be fine-tuned, not just for life, but for intelligent life. This fine-tuning is vastly more likely given theism than given atheism."
*sigh* The man IS a Philosopher, and I don't get to conduct my own interview with him to ask if is aware of the assumption he makes... namely that 'fine-tuning' is already an anthropomorphic concept which, projected at **existence** suggests the "intelligent designer" answer. At this point, the argument breaks down into subjective attitudes...one side says, "I can't imagine anything as complex as the Universe happening without being designed.".... while the other side says: "I can't imagine anything as complex as the Universe being designed by any intelligence!"

So... my take on the article and the way they debate in it is that strict "atheism" (as in absolute denial of a remote, metaphysical 'cause') is silly and has no way to be tested.

Further on, Plantinga does a bit of (what *I* consider)¹ rhetorical playing with definitions of words like 'belief' and 'cause' and coming to conclusions similar to the psychological ones he attributes to others.

1-just my opinion...*grin*

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 07:52 PM

I recall quite well an incident in a sophomore economics class for engineering and other non-econ students, when the professor in charge "visited" to see how well the teaching assistant was doing.

I innocently stated an opinion, and "Professor Paul" jumped on it with both feet, and we "debated" the opinion for about a quarter of the class time.

The Prof and I were apparently the ony two there who realized we were having a discussion rather than an argument, and several classmates expressed concern that I'd "blown the course" by "arguing" with the Prof, but Professor "Paul," according to news reports, used some of my arguments in testimony before the Senate a couple of weeks later - without crediting me, of course. (He apparently realized that to state something in terms idiots could understand he needed to ask an idiot?) His testimony was significant in the Congressional Hearings, and a significant part of the reason why the US now (or at least for a while) has had an "inflation adjustment" for Social Security payments and for income tax "brackets."

Professor (Dr.) Paul Samuelson received the Nobel Prize for Economics a couple of years later.

[That "opinion" was really fun, even if all my classmates had forgotten the incident before I had a chance to brag about it.]

John

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 09:24 PM

Yeah, Bill, some of the same things went through my mind. When I read later that both interviewer and subject were at Notre Dame thing became clearer. Thanks. Thanks for the Bacon quote.

"The Prof and I were apparently the ony two there who realized we were having a discussion rather than an argument"

:-)

Sorry you were cut out of your share of the Nobel.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Larry The Radio Guy
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 09:38 PM

The philosophy professor is in error. Even in that room everyone is entitled to their opinion. But they aren't entitled to 'share' it in the class unless they can back it up.

Same argument could be made re. hateful and racist beliefs. Everyone's entitled to them.   But sharing them....that's another thing.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Mrrzy
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 09:47 PM

People have a right to an EDUCATED opinion. Nobody has a right to ignorance, sorry. It is your duty to think, not a privilege.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 10:18 PM

I hold the opinion that Larry's and Mrrzy's opinions are equally valid and correct.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Ed T
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 10:45 PM

"I dont think, therefore I dont exist?

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Ed T
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 10:56 PM

"Two negative elements cancel each other out to give a positive statement"

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 11:56 PM

If I get you correctly, BillD, that second argument is, "I can't believe that an all knowing, all powerful Diety would have created a mess like this."

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 12:55 AM

The God or no God thing always seems to come down to "you can't prove it" "neither can you."

I liked his argument about the teapot. His arguments for theism seemed a little circular, but appropriate coming from a Catholic. "People report that they sense God, therefor God exists." At least I think that was what he was saying.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 06:21 AM

I don't think many people actually HAVE opinions these days, most "opinions" are just reflections of current media fashion, we seem to have lost the knack of thinking for ourselves.

If you do wish to advance your opinion, you should at least be able to back it with some factual evidence.

Faith is not an opinion.
There is little evidence to support the view that, "equality, democracy, freedom" as actually practiced in our society, have a positive effect.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Ed T
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 07:01 AM

I am curious-if I am entitled to that:
Where does the assessment on the last sentence you posted come from, Ake?

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 08:10 AM

NO. There are many things that are not matters of opinion. Nobody is entitled to an opinion that 2+2=5. It's just plain wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 08:56 AM

from the article...


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.

First, what's an opinion?

Plato distinguished between opinion or common belief (doxa) and certain knowledge, and that's still a workable distinction today: unlike "1+1=2" or "there are no square circles," an opinion has a degree of subjectivity and uncertainty to it. But "opinion" ranges from tastes or preferences, through views about questions that concern most people such as prudence or politics, to views grounded in technical expertise, such as legal or scientific opinions.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Lighter
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 09:41 AM

> It's just plain wrong.

Sez you.

(Another line Jack can use.)

Anthropomorphism aside, the "fine-tuning concept" is essentially circular.

If the universe weren't conducive to intelligent life like ours, we wouldn't be here to talk about it. The "odds" of human life having arisen in a universe where human life exists are 100%.

The real question is, starting from scratch at the Big Bang (or the Equivalent, what would be the odds of human life arising somewhere wholly by chance?

That question is at present unanswerable. As theists claim, the answer could be one in infinity. Or, if the universe is old enough and big enough and natural processes are "few" enough, it could be very high, even inevitable, without a Creator. If, as it's starting to seem, "all of existence" involves a possibly infinite number of universes and Big Bangs, suddenly the odds are 100%.

But so little is known about the period (of any) before the Big Bang, or dark energy, dark gravity, wormholes, etc. (plus things not yet theorized or discovered), that even the idea of "odds" itself may be dubious in that context.

Science: You'll never know anything with 100% certainty, but with enough evidence and consistent analysis you can know things with practical certainty.

Religion: We know with 100% certainty what God wants us to know, because the bible, the clergy, and our inner feelings say so. We can't even agree on all of that, or be entirely consistent, but the inconsistencies don't much matter unless the above say they do.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 09:51 AM

"We know with 100% certainty what God wants us to know, because the bible, the clergy, and our inner feelings say so."


I don't believe that at all. I think that God gave us free will to
decide what we want to know and the tools and desire to seek.

Religion is almost always subjective. Philosophy and science are not supposed to be but in my observation, it often turns out that they are.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Pete Jennings
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 10:58 AM

One of the problems with studying art at post-graduate level is the theory (i.e. texts about art) written by non-artists that's needs to be read. As a generalisation, art critics think they're philosophers and philosophers think they're art critics. Makes interesting reading, if you can cut through the opaque language they all use, but none of it is necessarily true...

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: MikeL2
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 11:10 AM

Hi

When I joined the Royal Airforce many years ago our drill sergeant told us on the first day....." Everyone here is entitled to his own opinion but not to express it !!!!

Cheers

MikeL2

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 11:40 AM

Hi Ed.....It's an opinion, but I think I can back it with evidence which proves that under our present system there is no equality, no democracy and no real freedom.
That is not to say that I believe unrestricted equality, democracy and freedom to be wholly positive things.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 11:41 AM

Jerk the sailior is a TEACHER!!!!??????? god bless us and save us ....how did an half educated polltroon such as he get to teach anyone?..he must have bought his degree by mail order.He wouldn't get within an inch of my kids with his half baked judgmental philosophy

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 11:50 AM

& what, Mr Concerened*, may be your own qualifications for so contemptuously dismissive a summation of a fellow-poster?

I ask purely out of interest, in curiosity as to why you appear to think so peculiarly well of your own personality & attainments.

~M~

& why can't you even spell your own chosen forum-name correctly? Or, alternatively, what are we to extrapolate as to your indubitable superiority from this pertinaciously eccentric piece of mis-orthography?

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 11:53 AM

"I think I can back it with evidence which proves that under our present system there is no equality, no democracy and no real freedom"

It is my opinion that you believe. It is also my opinion that no such proof exists.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 11:58 AM

It is my opinion that is what you believe.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Lighter
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 12:05 PM

Of course I should have specified "traditional, orthodox, divinely revealed religion." My characterization doesn't cover Deists, for example, or Buddhists. (My excuse is that I don't interact with any of them on a daily basis.)

Nobody said informed discussion (or "argument" as it is somewhat misleadingly called) was easy.

It is impossible to eliminate all subjectivity. One reason science works is because repeated experimentation and critical evaluation of results keeps subjectivity to a minimum.

> under our present system there is no equality, no democracy and no real freedom.

Not sure precisely which system you're under, but none of these things exist in nature either, in any form, which is one reason why it took a few million years before anybody even began to theorize about them.

Nor could they exist in absolute form in any plausible human society. "Real freedom," for example, seems to entail "jungle law." Not a good idea, if you ask me.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 12:06 PM

"Nobody is entitled to an opinion that 2+2=5. It's just plain wrong."

yes...but they WILL try

"As a generalisation, art critics think they're philosophers and philosophers think they're art critics. Makes interesting reading..."

I used to tell people, tongue in cheek, that one of the reasons I majored in Philosophy was that it was an excuse to 'meddle in everyone's business'. All one has to do is put "Philosophy of" in front of a discipline and offer opinions which make "interesting reading".
It's not 'quite' that bad... there are rules & conventions which separate formal studies from silly 'opinions' that someone decides to churn out. Philosophy of Science is a valuable way to understand the basic concepts ...from wikipedia- "Philosophy of science is a branch of philosophy concerned with the foundations, methods, and implications of science. This discipline sometimes overlaps metaphysics, ontology and epistemology, for example, when it explores whether scientific results comprise a study of truth."
Compare this with this newsgroup where "silly opinions" are a dime a dozen. an example... and not one of the strangest!
Some real scientists go there for amusement... and some make the occasional effort to counter the really odd ones.

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 12:08 PM

Come on!!!! MGM..cut and pasting is not smart, big or clever..if you are going to do that at least use the same type case....very c3 action even for a smart ass such as you..

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 12:13 PM

Who provides entitlement?

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 12:15 PM

I agree lighter, that's why I qualified my remarks, "That is not to say that I believe unrestricted equality, democracy and freedom to be wholly positive things."

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 12:24 PM

Excellent opening article. Too bad people didn't read it to start the discussion. :)

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: You are NOT entitled to your opinion
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 12:25 PM

People are entitled to their opinions. Just the way things are. But remember that people are also entitled to shut up about it, too.