But That’s Just My Opinion

But that’s just my opinion…

And yes, it is. It is just your opinion. But it’s also worth remembering that opinions and the truth are separate for a reason.

We don’t state opinions anymore that take a stance or form an alternative argument. We state opinions as contenders for the truth. The fact of the matter is that the truth is something that cannot be argued. The fact that water is wet and that we need oxygen to survive are not opinions. However, there are topics that warrant spirited debate, such as politics. Those are the times when opinions come in fruition, but not in the way they should.

We argue as a way of finding either a common ground or seeking out our own personal truths. We do not argue for the sake of listening and learning from opposing opinions. The pursuit of the truth is what separates opinions from what we think they are and what they actually are. That is the issue that has come up in this political climate, one that has divided us as a nation.

“The sky is blue.”

“Well I think the sky is red.”

See a correlation? I do. And that is the point that is trying to be made.

More to come later…

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “But That’s Just My Opinion

  1. What if I disagree in how one presents a given set of facts? To use your example, if you looked at the sky and said it was blue, and it was in fact blue, would I be stating the truth or just an opinion when I assert that it’s Cyan, or some other variation of the descriptor? Seems that truth remains more or less the same, but can take any number of forms.

    I don’t know exactly what my point is either, I really don’t have one atm. Just wondering aloud, sort of.

    Like

    1. There’s as fine line between perspective and truth. All I meant to state was that someone’s ‘opinion’ is a thought that is naturally meant to be contended, but it is not a contender in itself for the truth. We make our own truths, which is the natural order of things, which adds onto your assertion that the truth can take any number of forms. Of course it can, that’s the beauty of it. But to say that your truth is the end all be all truth that cannot in any way be contended is wrong because there will always be someone with a different perspective. At least, once again, that’s just what I think is going down, I’m not a philosopher, and likely someone out there much smarter than I would probably have a better take on all of this.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. “But to say that your truth is the end all be all truth that cannot in any way be contended is wrong because there will always be someone with a different perspective.”

        On this, we’re on the same page, I don’t really disagree with that. But opinions are based around our understanding of the truth. My point is simply that some opinions are more based on the truth than others. Reality being the final arbiter and judge, but I think for most of my opinions I have a fairly solid reasoning and can usually point to specific instances, incidents, events, occurrences, what have you that support the reasoning.

        To me, critical thinking is a skill, and those who exercise it best generally end up closer to the truth than others. That’s arguably a key purpose of philosophy, to get closer to the truth of whatever it is one’s studying, and as the record of philosophers throughout history shows (at least to me) is that some philosophers thought much deeper than others.

        Trust your own judgement, chart your own path, and get as close to the truth (regardless of how discomforting it might be or how at odds it might seem to ones current outlook) as humanly possible. I actually kind of think that’s a responsibility we each have to ourselves as individuals, to get as close as we can.

        lol all that to say, we’re in agreement about competing perspectives, it’s just that it’s been *my* experience that in the context of specific debates, incidents, etc. some perspectives are far more correct and accurate (true) and some are not (i.e. inaccurate). I tend to think of it as a spectrum I guess.

        Of course… not sure what the point of this long-winded reply is. Just to explain a little bit of what underlies my perspective, and my comments/questions on some of your other posts.

        I do think there needs to be an agreed upon standard of what’s accurate and what’s not (haha essentially capitalism of intellect via free speech, voluntary exchange of value/opinion, or like a game with agreed upon standards to measure goals (i.e. level of truth) by, if that makes any sense).

        No matter what a given concept, idea, strategy, or notion etc. one can come up with, it’s value is determined by it’s level of truth, and the truest opinion should be recognized as such, not brushed to the side so whoever was wrong (or at least further from the truth) can save face and not have to feel bad for (or learn from) being wrong. 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

      2. My last comment was a little long, so the short version, is that I think your right in that there’s probably someone out there with a more accurate take and the same can definitely be said as me. But I see it as fairly irrelevant, since we’re the ones having a back and forth, and since we each our it to ourselves individually to have as good (as accurate) a take on a’l of this as we can possibly have, within the best of our respective abilities. Haha, and sorry for the double comment. I was kind of rambling in the last one so I figured summing it up a little better couldn’t hurt 🙂 .

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s