Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

You cannot say:

Because opinions have been oppressed in the past.

This is true but the oppression of opinions was to try to force on opinion to be dominant over others through force. This doesn't make an opinion any more useful than before. The legal right to an opinion doesn't mean your opinion matters.

Because of the political process/voting.

Your opinion is barely, if at all, reflected by politicians that you elect, outside of what politician you think would be the best candidate. Also, you can vote for a politician and have them lose, making your opinion borderline worthless.

This isn't a debate about censorship or oppression, so keep that shit out of there. We're asking, in a situation where that oppression does not exist, what actually "makes" your opinion "matter", in the long run?

I argue that personal opinions are borderline worthless outside of in fields of expertise. Why? Because your actual ability to influence others is pretty much naught unless you have the skill, experience and persuasive power to actually convince others to agree with you, and because you're in the same situation as about 99% of the other 7 billion fucks that you share this planet with.

Now on a smaller level such as internet forums you can argue that you are able to convince others to change their opinion quite easily but again, these people also don't really have the ability to

You might argue that a large pool of opinions might be useful, but I disagree again. The large pool first off does not reflect the opinions of all of them inside but rather a normalized group of opinions that people will either somewhat agree with or somewhat disagree with, and this determines whether or not they are a member of that large pool. Secondly, while a large pool of people can definitely have influence on opinions on a much larger scale, we're still met with the same problem of "who cares?".

Let's consider this. Let's think about how difficult it would be to force a country to accept homosexual marriage. Not the hardest thing on the planet since it only changes the marriage certificate from having different sexes to having the same sexes, at least in terms of legal woes. But it has taken hundreds of thousands of people and decades to even reverse this extremely simple problem, and really only so that people can shut up about it.

There are literally hundreds of political influences much much more powerful than just something simple like gay marriage that we will basically have no fucking control over and we will have to tolerate it.

Now what cases do I think opinions matter much more? When you have results backing those opinions and present a case that makes the opposition look like such a retard that they can't keep perpetuating shit. In politics this is much easier said than done, but in many other things in the world that have jack shit to do with politics (like science, technology, and other scientific advancements) people have the potential to educate themselves to the point of becoming an expert and being able to formulate opinions that truly matter, and have the results to force people to respect them.

And when I say "respect", I don't mean "agree', I mean "taken seriously". Do you seriously think any high end person really gives a fuck about what any of us tarts have to say? They're only going to spend their time talking to people who actually understand what they're talking about.

And even then, don't expect to "change the world" unless you can produce results.

I feel that a lot of time is wasted on having opinions without actually gaining the results to back them up.

Why does your opinion on how we should spread our opinion matter? People can express their opinions all they want when they want, its how they feel, they don't need facts/"results" to back up how they feel about an issue. Our opinion doesn't matter but who cares? We're not trying to change things, we're trying to have a goddamn discussion.
Also what the hell is the context of this thread and why are you trying to tell us how we should express our opinions?

I like how you're so easy to shake up that just challenging the concept behind having an opinion is enough to get your jimmies rustled. How about challenging them thoughts yo? How about instead of being defensive you actually try to make a point? Or are your opinions too valuable to you?

Anyways, it has nothing to do with criticizing how you or anyone else approaches their opinion, it's more to question the process of having opinions.

The context of this thread is philosophy and questioning shit we take for granted because as it turns out, how people interpret opinions is dynamic and reflective oftentimes of the times, not the individual. So doesn't it make a little sense to try to introspect and question why we have opinions in the first place?

Or are you going to go back to posting the same manufactured shit over and over again?

People can express their opinions all they want when they want, its how they feel, they don’t need facts/“results” to back up how they feel about an issue

I can tell you read about 3 sentences into my first post and then negvoted it, good job on that reading comprehension. Of course we're allowed to have opinions and we don't need facts or results to have an opinion. But the question wasn't whether or not we are allowed to have opinions, it's whether or not that opinion means anything on a global scale, and if it is possible to do so, how to maximize that opinion's potential. Because let's face it, pretty much 95% of opinions can be summarized under either "I like something" or "I want to do this to make the world better". Addressing the latter, if we really want to actually make the world a better place and we have opinions (our ideas to do so), you'd want to actually get those ideas running so that you can, I dunno, make those opinions become a reality? And that's why I made this thread – to discuss the process of making opinions and its value in the long run. Because in its current state your opinion does not matter and your feelings on that also do not matter. The question is how to make it matter.

Nobody said it was wrong to have opinions but you can continue to embarrass yourself if you want.

My opinion only matters if someone cares about it.
Also sharing opinions is a great way to share perspectives, remember that what you see is most likely not the same way someone else does.
So it's up to the listener to question if the opinion matters or not, he can change his opinion based on someone else opinion or develop your own opinion with the one you just heard, because if something is right, it doesn't mean the other one is wrong. Both can be right, both can be wrong, it's up to the listener to make the choice. He can also just ignore it.

"Why does your opinion even matter?"

I'm gonna keep this (relatively) short and sweet. It really doesn't.

Your opinion matters in the same vein that your life matters. That is to say that in the complex infinity that is the universe, you (and by extension, your opinion) have absolutely no objective meaning.

Now if you actually want to find meaning in your opinion (and life). You'd have to look at it through subjective means. In other words, it's important because it is important to you. That's literally the only reason your opinion would matter, and even then it wouldn't reach any further than you can stretch.

Gotta second Bob on this one to be frank.

OP's question is kind of a given. Opinon sharing is probably one of the primary content output on the internet, but the only person to whom it's really valuable is the one who holds it.

On the other side of this matter, I'd like to segue in talking about disagreeing with the opinions of others.

Having people disagree with your opinion is really very important indeed. To have your own ideas challenged is good for your own mind as it forces you to look at whether your view is based on good reasoning and rationality. The good news is that on this big internet, you're guaranteed to find someone who disagrees with your view. At the end of your pontificating you may decide "they have a point" or "nah fuck them" (although on most occasions I think most people will gravitate towards the latter). But at least you had a moment of discovering that not everyone felt the same as you.

So no opinion is really important, but it's important to remain aware that your opinion will be challenged and that this is a good thing.

Your opinion probably sucks and is meaningless, but keep shouting it to the heavens nonetheless and keep challenging the opinions of others. You're unlikely to change another person's mind, but challenge and calling people out is important.

EDIT: I would also like to second Lombs' post below that opinions basically are the outward expression of shit we care about, which causes us to act on things. A reasonable counter-point, I feel.

You dismiss the majority of opinions as simple, but most innovation comes from a simple want or need. Someone expressing an opinion they can't act on themselves might spur an idea in someone who can. Opinion can also be a common factor. I really like keeping reptiles, so I support hobbyist groups that lobby against state laws which ban them. Large organizations and charities serve as the "person who can do something in the long run" but only if people agree with their opinion (that regular people should be allowed to keep exotic animals, in this example). Our individual contributions combine to enable these groups to work on behalf of our shared opinion, which moves the world forward industrially, socially, it moves the world forward in general. What would we do if nobody cared about anything? Are you content with the world as it is?

A couple of you really need a xanax 'scrip.

I agree for the most part, but here's some food for thought:

The opinions that do "matter" (aka opinions of those in political power) actually make quite a lot of influences on many lifes – to the point of sometimes leading to their extermination. So there is some value of having opinions outside of a self-identity sort of thing, and there is value in trying to force your opinion to change things outside of your own life.

That's kind of a depressing view you have if you think your opinions are truly completely worthless outside of your own head.

Our individual contributions combine to enable these groups to work on behalf of our shared opinion, which moves the world forward industrially, socially, it moves the world forward in general. What would we do if nobody cared about anything? Are you content with the world as it is?

This is something I kind of tried to hit on in my OP but I don't think I worded it well. Opinions are important – but only a very small sliver of them are – those that we dedicate our entire lives to. Think of it as becoming an expert in your field – your opinion "matters" a lot more than someone who isn't an expert because your passion gives you the knowledge, background and experience needed to hold such an opinion (this is also why I don't agree with NoN).

What I think is interesting is that a lot of people spend a lot of time on a wide variety of opinions that could not possibly be held under a single "passion" (such as a wide variety of political opinions), which I think personally takes time away from developing opinions that actually matter (like you stated).

Someone expressing an opinion they can’t act on themselves might spur an idea in someone who can.

I've heard this said many times before but honestly, I have yet to see it actually work in action, because if you don't have the power to make things move with your opinion, monetary or otherwise, then why would someone who has the ability to change be interested?

It's true that in very large numbers it can convince people to change but consider how many of these changes are of little cost to those who are actually making those choices. The government is going to be a lot more willing to make something like homosexual marriage legal than it is willing to lower its own wages or prevent shit like the DNC shenanigans from happening again.

In most cases this is completely invalid though, because if you don't have the ability to ilicit change through your opinion, then likely either you don't have the resources to make your opinion a reality, or more likely, your opinion is ignored because those who are more qualified to make an opinion disregard your opinion. There is a chance they might go with your opinion anyways but this isn't because of your own personal influence but likely just because enough people bitched enough, and even then, that pool of "opinions" doesn't actually represent your personal opinion either.

EDIT: MeldeyManiac brings up an awesome point – the scope of an opinion is pretty important too. Being able to influence your immediate surroundings is a lot easier. But what attracts us to trying to go big? I wonder almost if the internet has encouraged us to take larger slices of the "opinion pie" because we think that with a larger audience we can influence more people.

As you have mentioned, highly agreed upon opinions can change things. You argue it's a normalized opinion, which can be true, but is evidence of opinions being able to change things. Now you come to the fact that most opinions will not change things. Then again, how many opinions are worth changing things on a national or global scale? If I think meditation is a good way to balance your soul, then what? Demand meditation in schools? Perhaps a select few radicals might demand it.

What's more likely to happen is a change to my immediate surroundings. I could start classes, advertise meditation to my social group, find new people to meditate with, and so on. While this wouldn't change the world, it would make my immediate surroundings much more enjoyable to me. And many opinions are just that, changing immediate surroundings to make life more comfortable. My opinion matters to me, those who share it, and those who respect it.

But, of course, there are opinions worth changing on the global scale, which I think is what you are concerned with. For example, I could believe in your example of gay marriage, that it should be universally accepted. Alright then, so what? Well, I could elect an official who shares my opinion, but like you said they could lose. I could run for office myself if I meet requirements, but again I could lose. At least in that case I could bring my opinion to a larger crowd than my immediate surroundings allowed. I could donate money to an organization that believes in my goal, or I could start my own. So what happens if I don't have money or can't run for office or even an internet connection to make videos and blogs for my cause? Well, now we're back to changing immediate surroundings. I can again change my social group to reflect my opinion and bring the issue in front of those in my community who aren't in my social group. These people can accept or reject my opinion and maybe take their knowledge on the matter and beliefs to more people. This kind of change is slow, but it can happen. And what if it doesn't? Well, I changed my immediate surroundings, so that is one thing changed. So who cares? Once again, my opinion only mattered to me, those who share it, and those who respect it.

But that's just my opinion

You might like a subreddit called Change My View to find more discussion.

Edit: lol I didn't refresh this before posting, so Bob pretty much nailed it

{ Opinions are important – but only a very small sliver of them are – those that we dedicate our entire lives to. }

I just illustrated why that isn't true. I don't hold any professional knowledge of the exotic animal keeping industry or how it operates or how the laws regarding it work. I just know I want to continue keeping cool foreign snake species. But my totally uninformed opinion causes me to donate to groups made of professionals, who would have no funding if the only people who cared about keeping exotic animals are highly educated professionals who work in the field. Pick any group, a wildlife defense fund or kickstarter or sick kid's gofundme. If nobody cared they couldn't exist. Without our opinions we're machines, we're just going through the motions, eating just to stay alive because you don't care about the taste, making money just to pay the bills because you don't have anywhere you want to go. That's super depressing.

For those arguing for opinions that have changed things, I'd like to point something out.

Is it the opinion that mattered? Or was it the influence that mattered? Would a person of great opinion but no influence change anything? Conversely, would a person of terrible opinion but great influence change anything?

For this reason, I say opinions really aren't important (objectively). It's how far you can spread that opinion that matters.

@Lisa

No one is saying that no one should care, you're jumping to conclusions. I'm only saying that they don't matter in an objective lens.

Truth be told, they're absolutely important simply because humans are completely subjective beings.

Edit: Clarified a few things because I'm switching scopes in my points and it's getting hard for me to follow. Hahaha.

What does "being depressing" have to do with anything? Life is depressing, get over it. Also, I'm not saying that "we should just assume our opinions are worth shit" because of course its helpful. I'm probing why our opinions are useless most of the time.

Seems like a lot of people forget about that word these days…

Anyways, I can say one thing about this: either you're misinterpreting the value of your opinion, or you're misinterpreting why your opinion is valuable.

I should clarify, "dedicating your whole life to something" isn't exactly what I should have said, rather, "being more aware of the current situation at hand" is more important. In the case of recommending places to donate to, yes, you're actually more "aware" than the donation places because you actually know of places that need help, that they don't. So yes, your opinion is valuable, but not because you're an expert at reptiles, but because you're more of an expert at knowing what areas need help than the expert at reptiles are.

This is important because it shows that everyone has a weakness and that by contributing towards improving society, even those who seem to be "more educated" than others.

Second, your opinion is not "uninformed" because you clearly have substantial knowledge of owning reptiles. If anything your opinion is more amateur because you aren't a practicing professional. Your opinion of reptile care is more valuable than say, my opinion on reptile care, because even though you aren't an expert, you know substantially more than I do. It should be noted that people tend to lower the value of their opinion unknowingly because of the false assumption that "experts" by default know more than nonexperts.

For this reason, I say opinions really aren’t important (objectively). It’s how far you can spread that opinion that matters.

Disagree here, trigger warning blind rant incoming:

I've dedicated my passions to studying stuff about blindness. That's already known. Now while I cannot question the importance of spreading an opinion, I disagree that my opinions aren't important (objectively) because my background and understanding is what allows my opinion to spread in the first place. Because I understand the problems that blind people face a lot more than most people, I can be more accurate in explaining these issues, give more evidence to support my opinions, and provide potential solutions to the problem – much more than what can be said about pretty much any other opinion I have. People are more willing to listen to me with that blind shit because they know I know my shit and that out of anyone they know I'm probably the best person to ask on that. And in a way that allows me to imprint my opinion on the issue on anyone who asks. That is incredibly powerful. And I did this through my own passion, so yes, opinions can most certainly be important outside of the scope of yourself, and yes, you can certainly influence those around you. Both Lisa and I gave good examples of this direct influence.

Disagree here, trigger warning blind rant incoming:

I’ve dedicated my passions to studying stuff about blindness. That’s already known. Now while I cannot question the importance of spreading an opinion, I disagree that my opinions aren’t important (objectively) because my background and understanding is what allows my opinion to spread in the first place. Because I understand the problems that blind people face a lot more than most people, I can be more accurate in explaining these issues, give more evidence to support my opinions, and provide potential solutions to the problem – much more than what can be said about pretty much any other opinion I have.

Well, that's a noble endeavor. Though to be fair, everything we accomplish and everything we are will be completely erased from the annals of history with enough time (whether 1,000 years or 1,000,000 years). That's why I say it doesn't matter objectively.

That's not saying it doesn't matter though. I believe humans should live subjective lives in order to be happy. In other words, what you do matters because it matters to you. Fuck the universe, fuck everything else. Because you love your opinions and you love those blind people, it is important.

Though because humans are subjective creatures, the only way to make another person care is to have some form of influence. Hence why I'd imagine that would be what matters more if you're talking outside of your own personage, which I guess could count as a form of objectivity.

Though to be fair, everything we accomplish and everything we are will be completely erased from the annals of history with enough time (whether 1,000 years or 1,000,000 years). That’s why I say it doesn’t matter objectively.

Well yeah but you're saying everything else would also not matter, so it's kind of a silly thing to say. That's like saying the policies of the Ottoman Empire doesn't matter anymore because it doesn't exist anymore, kind of goes without saying.

Now while I do agree with your attitude towards life and that's already basically what I do, I disagree with the fact that it doesn't have objective value. Trying to fix shit for the blind definitely has value for the blind, and it even has value for sighties who want to feel good about themselves help out their family members or friends. And if you make blind people more employable that benefits the economy, and therefore everyone. Yes, it won't matter in 2 billion years but the issues matter now to them, so there is potential value to be had from having an opinion to influence that element.

Now, you did point out that spreading an opinion doesn't mean your specific opinion has value, but what if your opinion is "this is how I'm going to fix the problem, this is my solution, this is what I need to solve it." You may not have the physical resources available immediately but you can influence those around you to provide enough resources for this to happen. For example you can look at a problem like "kids dying in locked cars", and say, "my opinion to fix this is to turn on the AC if a kid is detected on a seat". People will give reasons why this may or may not work out, but if you have the plan to actually show how to make things work, you can influence change.

I would argue this is a direct influence over indirect because a plan is not just "I think things should be better", its a direct set of orders that can be reviewed and can survive in-tact even when spread in a large population. And therefore, that opinion on how to fix the problem can spread across the industry.

Lisa's example is a bit more closer to home – she knows where places of financial need are and suggests those places to receive donations directly. While it's true that those organizations may not respect her opinion on reptiles, because she knows more about these places of need than they do, they respect her opinion and I would say that's also an example of your opinion "mattering directly".

Again, opinions definitely have the power to change the world, but only a very select few opinions ever reach that point.

Now while I do agree with your attitude towards life and that’s already basically what I do, I disagree with the fact that it doesn’t have objective value. Trying to fix shit for the blind definitely has value for the blind, and it even has value for sighties who want to feel good about themselves help out their family members or friends. And if you make blind people more employable that benefits the economy, and therefore everyone. Yes, it won’t matter in 2 billion years but the issues matter now to them, so there is potential value to be had from having an opinion to influence that element.

Helping the blind isn't an objective value. It just means it's charitable. Also, it's driven by a personal feeling of yours, thus subjective.

Now, you did point out that spreading an opinion doesn’t mean your specific opinion has value, but what if your opinion is “this is how I’m going to fix the problem, this is my solution, this is what I need to solve it.” You may not have the physical resources available immediately but you can influence those around you to provide enough resources for this to happen. For example you can look at a problem like “kids dying in locked cars”, and say, “my opinion to fix this is to turn on the AC if a kid is detected on a seat”. People will give reasons why this may or may not work out, but if you have the plan to actually show how to make things work, you can influence change.

I said objective value, it obviously has subjective value. The objective value would be whether or not that kid actually deserved to be saved (as cruel as it sounds). Subjectively yes; because as humans, we care.

Also, the opinion didn't matter in the spread during that instance. Only your ability to influence the others with a well formulated plan.

Again, opinions definitely have the power to change the world, but only a very select few opinions ever reach that point.

Once again, only influence has the power to change the world. Your opinions have no influence on that, just on how you change it.

I like how Bob and OP kinda switched the sides they were arguing.

Anyway, I agree that an opinion's importance outside of your immediate surroundings is pretty tied with your ability to influence other people. The reason we interpret expert opinions as mattering more is not just their experience but the fact that their experience makes us more likely to listen. This is the same with celebrities and other high-profile figures, their opinions are interpreted as mattering more because they can influence more people. With celebrities we like them so we listen to their opinion as we would a friend which makes us more open to changing our opinion or to start caring about that opinion.

However, it's not that hard to get an opinion to an influential person who can fight for your cause. Think about the six degrees of separation theory. Maybe it's not exactly six degrees of separation, but you get the idea. You know a guy who knows a guy who can get you an opportunity to lecture at some university about your opinion. Someone in the lecture knows a guy who knows a politician and so forth.

And at the same time, the longer you argue for your opinion, suddenly the more credit you gain. You become an advocate. Your experience with your opinion is interpreted as you knowing your stuff, making your opinion more influential.

And I also disagree that opinions end up not mattering in the long run. Laws of ancient times have been changed and modified and adapted to societies today. We still study Greek philosophers who really just spout opinions and ideas. Very likeable and thought-out opinions and ideas, but opinions and ideas nonetheless. True, most of us will never reach that level, but the things we do with our opinions in our lifetime could result in these opinions surviving in human society and possibly becoming social norms or laws (or maybe a page in a textbook highlighting crazy ideas). So then opinions only stop mattering once they have no one to influence, like when humanity goes extinct.

I should probably explain myself more clearly.

I like opinions. Opinions matter to me. But that's just it, they matter in a subjective sense.

In an objective sense, they do not matter at all as they will have no meaning at some point in time.

I also think humans should live subjective lifestyles because of this. Instead of trying to do things for the good every living thing in the universe, do it because you want to.

So then opinions only stop mattering once they have no one to influence, like when humanity goes extinct.

And that's exactly why I say they don't matter. I mean it in an objective sense. Humanity will eventually run its course, as the universe itself will.

Hopefully I explained myself better for those confused.

I take opinions from a socio-political standview.
I believe sharing opinions and discussing is essential towards at least finding out how to make society better. The more people discuss and debunk ideologies, the closer we get to the "right opinion", if such a thing exists.
Niccolao Machiaveli stated this in The Prince, stating that conflict and controversy are essential to the political maturity of a government in the Republic type.
A good government could be anything. It could be a monarchy, one-party dictatorship, oligarchy, liberal democracy, anything. So long as it tolerates free speech and discussion and invests in education for such a thing to be feasible, which will contribute to its political maturity.

Helping the blind isn’t an objective value. It just means it’s charitable. Also, it’s driven by a personal feeling of yours, thus subjective.

Um. No.

Helping the blind be independent is an objective value towards society for several reasons:

1. Blind people in a dependent state are a liability on society, in the form of either a family member having to take care of them or being put in a home. This is both a labor and financial burden. Blind people who are independent do not contribute towards this social burden. Example: Blind people taught independence skills can go to college and potentially become as efficient as a sighted person; dependent blind people do not have this.
2. Blind people who are dependent are not using their full intellectual potential towards social contributions. Example: Many blind people contribute towards society as programmers, lawyers and business-end work.
3. Any productive individual can go blind at any time and enabling blind people to be productive allows productive individuals who go blind to recover and continue to contribute towards society instead of slipping into being a burden. AKA, I can pour Draino in your eyes but if accessibility is available for you, you can still continue to do your job and be productive without your vision after rehabilitation.

These are three very clear social objective advantages.

I don't want to be rude but your comment seriously implies that blind people are useless and are essentially a basket case. You're honestly part of the problem if you think that. And I apologize for being extremely redundant here but your comment genuinely worries me. It's not that I'm offended, but my educated opinion is telling you to quietly back away from that comment.

@Medley – Don't be surprised that discussions change, discussions are supposed to develop. And it's totally cool to change your view if your view doesn't logically make sense. I would assume that discussing different angles of a situation and exploring all angles would not be possible in a single post, hence a conversation. That's a bit worrying.

And that’s exactly why I say they don’t matter. I mean it in an objective sense. Humanity will eventually run its course, as the universe itself will.

Baw baw baw "I'm a nihilist nothing rly matters" we get it already Nietzsche. Nobody cares that the universe is going to decay. Most of us will be dead in 100 years anyways so it doesn't even matter^. Instead, I look at value from the quality of an individual's life, and social value as the general quality of lives of those in a social enviorment. This is actually useful in actually improving the quality of our lives instead of bawing about how the universe will explodiate in 2 trillion years or some retarded shit.

^If you really REALLY want to go there, you can argue that your personal experience is the only reality, and therefore anything before or after your life doesn't matter. You can argue that the past was already pre-created when you entered the world and made to look like it has apparent history. If your world is entirely created within your own understanding, how are you to know that anything exists beyond it, or that "Reality" is what you believe it is? Either way, focusing on what happens in the future is pretty dumb when we're suffering now, last-thursday-ism vibes aside, and it's about as useful as the "the universe will decay anyway so it doesn't matter" bs you're spouting.

Yes, on a super universal level they don't matter but on a practical level making our lives at least feel a little better? It's useful to try to trigger change, even if it will be only temporary. And since we're gonna die in 100 years anyways who gives a fuck if the effects are decayed in a thousand years? Won't matter to me lol

I think you're confusing "having a legacy" with "having an opinion that matters", to be honest.

@Blind Spy

You clearly haven't read what I've been dishing out.

Also, just because it benefits society, does not mean it is objective. If it has any form of preference or bias, it is subjective. That includes a societal bias.

Also, you really shouldn't worry about other people's thinking. I'm more worried that you've never taken a day to question these things yourself.

All in all, have a warning for being quite condescending, on the house.

I would say nothing really matters unless it matters to you.

Whether or not something is important is completely up to the individual. People value opinions because it helps you learn more about how people act, info about the world around you, maybe learn a different viewpoint you never considered.

Remember that every invention ever was only created because of an opinion.

"We shouldn't have to get around on foot everywhere. We should be able to fly. We should be able to hunt more efficiently. We deserve to live comfortably even in hot temperatures."

An opinion can be about anything at all, so to say that most people's opinions in general don't matter I think is kind of condescending. Saying that they don't matter in the grand scheme of the universe may be true, but that's an awfully cynical and nihilistic way of looking at the world.

Bob, I'm going to say this right now, if you're going to say something completely fucking stupid like that blind comment, I'm going to call it out. It doesn't matter if it's on topic, I do not appreciate that level of misinformation spouting from you. I don't care if that makes you feel uncomfortable, I'm not comfortable with you thinking that you know better than everyone else, and that people might actually be influenced by your shitty opinion because of your status.

You are part of the problem, just because it hurt your ego doesn't mean I'm not going to stand down.

But I digress.

Also, just because it benefits society, does not mean it is objective. If it has any form of preference or bias, it is subjective. That includes a societal bias.

I am going to disagree here because the "biases" that you're talking bout have no relevance to the point I'm making, and while you may criticize me for reading comprehension problems I think it's pretty clear that you suffer from the same issue here, and the problem is a mutual miscommunication. This is pretty obvious considering you don't even seem to understand what I'm saying at all.

So how about getting off that high horse, and trying over?

Now, I'll explain what I mean. Yes, it's true that biases will exist in society, however, biases have nothing to do with actual recorded numbers of improvement. Yes, people have hiring biases and all that but if a known, measurable problem, such as "percentage of people who are unemployable because of disability" is dropping, this is completely an objective change because the numbers have nothing to do with individual biases. Who cares if there are hiring biases, the numbers are approaching the values we want them to.

It's almost like you forget that society is a system. That's why social engineering is a thing – it's controlling the "rules" of social interaction to try to make people react in one way or another. Sure, there are biases but that doesn't change the fact that you can measure unemployment numbers one month and noticed they dropped the next month.

I know this is an extrapolation but if you were to apply your logic to my model that would conclude that no objective measurement can be made, which is completely useless. That might fancy you if you want to play armchair philosopher but not useful if you want to actually do anything with that knowledge, and we're talking about "opinions" "mattering", so that's kind of important.

You can absolutely measure objective changes in society and I can't believe you would say something so misinformed. What do you think the study of statistics is?

And yes I understand that measurements are subject to bias in of themselves that doesn't change the point at all jfc the actual numbers of improvement are still there even if they're not measured oh my god

Also, you really shouldn’t worry about other people’s thinking. I’m more worried that you’ve never taken a day to question these things yourself.

Bro, do you think I actually have an opinion on this and if so please tell me what you think it is because I'm pretty sure I just made this thread to try to challenge how we approach opinions, not because I wanted to preach some sort of bullshit. You know. Because philosophy. I want to open my brain and question what other people say to try to challenge them and gain my own opinion.

But you're right, I actually didn't, that's why I made this thread to discuss it :^) What's wrong with that? I want to enlighten myself with other people's ideas and challenge them with an open mind. You seem to be under the impression that debates are about winning or defending a position. Why can't I aim to become enlightened?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but all I've gathered from you is that opinions don't mean anything because lolol nothing means anything because nothing has any long standing value. And I'm saying, no shit sherlock, that statement isn't useful because nobody cares what happens that far into the future. You seem oddly focused on this bit, even though the discussion is "opinion matters", and of course your opinion isn't going to matter when the human race is extinct and the Earth is absorbed into the sun. In the long term of the universe it doesn't. But there's also a sense of scale that you seem to be missing which basically makes your philosophy completely useless outside of armchair philosophy.

If you really want to dig deep into armchair philosophy, we can argue that because there's no way to objectively know that the universe even exists that there's no way to know that the universe exists past our own lifespans, so that arguing such a thing is silly. But again, this isn't really a practical philosophy so it's about as relevant to "opinion mattering" and maximizing "opinion mattering" as the universe exploding.

Now, you might think this is my arrogance talking, but seriously Bob, please reflect a little bit on yourself because I honestly think that you are being just as thick as you think I am. It's really easy to say that about other people but not admit it about yourself. Considering I've already repeated myself three times on the nihilism point, if I'm wrong about it, don't you think that maybe it might be you?

Now, I’ll explain what I mean. Yes, it’s true that biases will exist in society, however, biases have nothing to do with actual recorded numbers of improvement.

And that has nothing to do with objectivity.

You can absolutely measure objective changes in society and I can’t believe you would say something so misinformed.

Except that society itself is a completely subjective entity and so any benefits brought onto it would be subjective. I can't believe this is a hard concept for you to grasp.

Bro, do you think I actually have an opinion on this and if so please tell me what you think it is because I’m pretty sure I just made this thread to try to challenge how we approach opinions, not because I wanted to preach some sort of bullshit. You know. Because philosophy. I want to open my brain and question what other people say to try to challenge them and gain my own opinion.

You say that, and yet this entire thread has been why everyone is wrong and you are right (and by extension why you are objective). You can say whatever it is you want to say this thread is about. What it looks like is that this thread is yet another attempt at stroking your own ego.

Meds and I were able to understand and grasp each other's concepts without getting as condescending or in-your-face as you're getting. I think she's honestly here to discuss ideas and learn a little more, unlike you.

Now, you might think this is my arrogance talking, but seriously Bob, please reflect a little bit on yourself because I honestly think that you are being just as thick as you think I am. It’s really easy to say that about other people but not admit it about yourself. Considering I’ve already repeated myself three times on the nihilism point, if I’m wrong about it, don’t you think that maybe it might be you?

And yet, unlike you, I was able to accept and discuss with other people in this thread about their thoughts. You only think I'm being hard-headed because you're narrowing your scope to our exchanges instead of focusing on the discussion in whole. Yet another example of you caring entirely about yourself.

Well, let's step back for a moment. I don't think Bob is being disrespectful by thinking helping the blind is a subjective thing. It is a very good thing, but it can still be argued to be subjective. In a discussion about challenging our opinions, this can be a very good thing. This disagreement can make you look into yourself and re-evaluate why you hold the opinion we should help the blind. It makes you see the objective reasons for doing so, leading to a stronger argument and dedication for your cause. It can be weird, though, to hear someone argue something commonly accepted as an objective good to be subjective. I agree that it's objective, but I can see Bob's argument from his whole nihilist perspective.

"life is depressing, get over it" Look, honey, a cop out!

your right OP opinions don't matter

Opinions matter because making them, even if they're wrong, are still better than any alternative that I could visualize. I would rather make a thousand mistakes through assumptions and opinions than being afaird making them in the first place. I don't want to take a back seat to conflict or remain neutral because of some fear I may have or a false belief that I'm being oppressed. Life is good, however, living in fear is not my idea of living. Atleast through potential mistakes that I make, I can have a chance to learn from them and improve upon myself the way life inteads me to live. However, this is just my opinion….

Why not?

Charlotte riots

I mean, that's basically a mob of likeminded opinions rampaging accross a city.