[ SECRET POST #3983 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3983 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 17 secrets from Secret Submission Post #570.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I don't see why opinions can't be bad.

[thewakokid]

Because opinions don't harm others. Opinions can't be good, either, cause the don't help. Only actions cause good and bad results.

[(Anonymous)]

Surely an opinion can be bad in the same sense in which - for instance - an apple can be bad. Not just because it'll hurt people, but because it's fundamentally flawed in some way, or inferior to other apples.

[thewakokid]

Opinions can't be inferior. the can be less valid as facts but as opinions they're all equally valid. All opinions are fundamentally flawed in some way. if they were flawless, they would be facts.

[(Anonymous)]

First of all, even if we accept that basic definition, it doesn't follow from the fact that all opinions are flawed that all opinions are equally flawed.

Second, I'm not sure if I agree with your conception of opinions. I don't think it's accurate to think of opinions as being, basically, inferior, shitty, bargain-basement version of facts. I agree that it's impossible to positively evaluate opinions based solely on their correspondence to external reality, in the way that you can attempt to evaluate facts. But we can still evaluate opinions with regard to their nuance, robustness, explanatory power, validity, coherence, etc, etc, etc. And in fact, I would argue that this is precisely the role that is played by the human faculties of reason and judgment. Opinions are not lesser than facts; they are a distinct kind of thing from facts, with different standards.

[thewakokid]

I agree with a good chunk of what you're saying, infact my statement begins "Opinions can't be inferior" which is what fundamentally separates them from facts. The point being that the only objective measure on whether an opinion is inferior, is how closely it aligns with facts, that is the one merit you can use to say "This opinion is bad" because it is counter factual, and even then it's not much of a measure since no opinion alignes with facts 100%. this is what I mean. if it aligned with facts 100% it wouldn't be an opinion, it would be a fact. I'm not saying that opinions are lesser than facts I am saying quite the opposite. you can measure the value of a fact and determine whether it is a fact or not, but you cannot do that with an opinion.

[(Anonymous)]

But you can still evaluate opinions. You can form meaningful, substantive, albeit non-objective and non-factual, valuations of them.

And I think calling an opinion "bad" is a reasonable common-language expression of a particular valuation of an opinion or group of opinions.

Of course, such valuations are themselves opinions, so, you know, it is what it is.

[(Anonymous)]

That’s only true if a) you keep them to yourself or b) no one cares what you say. Otherwise, words have power, and that can be used either positively or negatively. Example: the programming on Fox News is at least 85% opinion. Their only actions are talking and writing the occasional book filled with their opinions. You may find people who will argue about whether or not their influence has been positive or negative, but they’ve undeniably had a non-neutral influence on US politics and, by extension, the world.

[thewakokid]

But 1) that act of talking about and publishing their opinions is an act. A weak act that is easily countered by someone opposing their view publishing their opinion. And 2) even then the fact is Fox can publish opinion, which can influence others, but even then no harm is actually done until someone decides to act on it.

Also, if you believe there are Bad opinions, you presumably believe there are also Good opinions? What makes it good? Because it's just as capable of leading to harm. A good opinion can be divisive and can lead someone to commit a bad action.

[(Anonymous)]

So if expressing that opinion through speech or writing is an act, and acts can be defined as good or bad, then the only way opinions can remain value-neutral is to keep them to yourself. I’m glad we’re on the same page.

[thewakokid]

Sneaky sneaky. Acts can be good or bad or neutral. Opinions - the think we're arguing about - can only be neutral.