Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

People seem to have a hard time distinguishing the two.

Like if i say i think a game is shit, people will begin to bombard you, asking for proof. Why would you need to back up an opinion with facts. If you subjectivity don't think something is good, then its already an objective fact that you don't like it. Why would someone need to prove that they don't like something.

But i guess sometimes people tend to state subjective view points in an objective way. But even after people state that its there opinion people still continue to want proof. Which again, i don't understand why someone would need to prove that they don't like something.

"Objective: a; not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased"

By this definition of Objective, "you don't like it" is still subjective. To fit the definition of Objective is to have data, evidence, and facts to support a universal idea. It's funny that people want proof that you don't like a game, but the basis that someone doesn't like a game is almost entirely on subjectivity.

To make it simpler, the opinion that a game sucks is not an axiom.

People want a proof that is, in their opinions, legitimate.
If I don't like Call of Duty because I think the graphics are bad, but xX420NOSCOPE69Xx feels that the graphics are okay, he won't accept that as a legitimate reason for disliking the game. He'll instead feel that my dislike towards the game is unjustified, until I give him a reason that he can agree with. This is just the way certain people on the internet think.

Why would you need to back up an opinion with facts

I this situation people should ask why you have such opinion and not ask for proof unless your opinion on something is backed by factual proof and if you have an opinion like that you are being objective.

Because subjectivity doesn't provide immunity to criticism of your opinion, TripleA.

If you read the post, thats not the point i was making. At all. If you don't like someone's opinion thats one thing. But asking someone to prove an opinion with facts, is well, stupid. I don't need to provide proof for why something does or does not appeal to me, or bring me joy or unhappiness.

I think a lot of people are used to, in the current age, assholes trying to push their opinions as facts all the time. Be it individuals on forums or social media, to E-celebs trying to advocate for different causes or usually pushing their opinion as a cause in it and of itself, to people who are employed to give factual information to the people using their platforms to push a large amount of Opinion Pieces with actual news, and not bothering to distinguish the two on their own sites or shows or papers, and then to the industry trying to push why they're right and everyone else is wrong.

It's become the norm for someone who says "I don't like X" or "I like Y" to be doing so not as a statement of opinion, but as a statement of fact. There's just been so much of that arrogant type of attitude, that it's become more expected for those to be fighting words then it is for those to be discussion or even just people expressing themselves.

At least, that's what is going on in my opinion.

Well mainly its because without providing any reason to why you do or do not like something becomes almost pointless. The reasons lead to discussion.

Sure you can say I don't like cheese. That's fine. But who even cares what you think? You're not providing anything to discuss except saying I agree or disagree.

Think about it in terms of something like morality, which is also subjective (sorry WarriorMan but it's true). I can say something controversial like being gay is morally wrong. People can ask why I think that. Normally the typical response is something like god says so or it doesn't serve any purpose cause it doesn't make babies.

If we went your route, the person being questioned would be like "Uhhh fuck you its subjective, It's what I think. La la la la I can't hear you!"

@Spider-Byte

Except most of the time people who do think that tend to proclaim it as objective fact. Not once have i ever heard someone use the excuse of hating an entire group and then saying its only subjective. Whether they are sexist, racist, homophobic, etc etc, they always believe it to be an objective fact, the KKK doesn't thinks it's their subjective opinion that blacks are violent, they think blacks are objectively inferior

And even if that were the case one must differentiate the levels of seriousness. If i say i hate a certain video game or a comic book that's one thing. But saying i hate an entire group of living, thinking, breathing human beings is something entirely different. One requires discussion since one has an actual effect on peoples lives

Whether you like or hate something, it does have an affect on your life. Especially to some, who may even depend on the media like a video game or film, if they work in such a field or wish to. That could have way more of an effect than say homophobia in a certain country to a straight person who lives in a community where the majority of people accept homosexuality.

When it comes to it, you choose what you want to discuss. If you can't be bothered to argue with people about some form of art, don't then. If you don't wanna talk about a social issue, don't do it.

And you mentioned different levels or seriousness which in itself is subjective. To some, Minecraft is serious business, and police brutality in a different country is not. When you say you hating a group of people is serious and someone else doesn't, you can't say no you're wrong and pester them if they don't give reasons because it's hypocritical.

Cause if there's no facts to back something up you could be full of shit.

Think about it in terms of something like morality, which is also subjective (sorry WarriorMan but it’s true)

Spider-byte please, your memes are too much.