Opinions - Only Allowed If They're The Right Ones?

[Padders]

1 hour ago, Thirsty Relic said:

WHAT!!!!   Thanks bud - will be running there in the morning/afternoon/when I get up!!!  Many thanks for the heads up!!!!!!

Apologies Thirsty,

Just opened a bottle, and it's Old Golden Hen  4-1%.

Still a bargain though...

[leviathan13]

4 hours ago, Anna B said:

This is a discussion site, so all opinions should be valid.

However the poster should be prepared to defend their position with a (polite) and intelligent argument if necessary, and be prepared to accept that sometimes we just have to agree to disagree.

Agreed, but, all too often in the modern day, people are shut down for not having a 'lived experience' of the topic.

 

I don't feel you need to be an expert to have an opinion as it's just that, an opinion - someone's thoughts and ideas on a topic.

[Guest sibon]

1 hour ago, leviathan13 said:

Agreed, but, all too often in the modern day, people are shut down for not having a 'lived experience' of the topic.

 

I don't feel you need to be an expert to have an opinion as it's just that, an opinion - someone's thoughts and ideas on a topic.

It all depends on context.

 

If you want to have an opinion about having Dolly Birds at darts matches, go ahead. That causes nobody a problem, except for marking out those in favour as being a touch neanderthal.

 

If you want to express an opinion about the Covid vaccine being dangerous, then I think that is different. You need evidence for that sort of thing, or you run the risk of influencing poorly informed people and possibly convincing them to reject a life saving treatment. 

 

On the whole, free speech wins. But the idiots do need putting back into their boxes.

Edited March 9, 2022 by sibon

[Flanker7]

9 hours ago, sibon said:

It all depends on context.

 

If you want to have an opinion about having Dolly Birds at darts matches, go ahead. That causes nobody a problem, except for marking out those in favour as being a touch neanderthal.

 

If you want to express an opinion about the Covid vaccine being dangerous, then I think that is different. You need evidence for that sort of thing, or you run the risk of influencing poorly informed people and possibly convincing them to reject a life saving treatment. 

 

On the whole, free speech wins. But the idiots do need putting back into their boxes.

Its the above kind of attitude that gets called called out as 'not allowed to hold an (this) opinion'.

 

Twice the poster , even though he appears to on best behaviour (by his standards), resorts to personal insult.

There is no attempt to evidence or explain the opinion and  the buzz word phrases seem to be irristable to him.

 

I don't mind though. To me this illustrated the poster and says more about his characture than the opinion.

 

[Guest sibon]

15 minutes ago, Flanker7 said:

Its the above kind of attitude that gets called called out as 'not allowed to hold an (this) opinion'.

 

Twice the poster , even though he appears to on best behaviour (by his standards), resorts to personal insult.

There is no attempt to evidence or explain the opinion and  the buzz word phrases seem to be irristable to him.

 

I don't mind though. To me this illustrated the poster and says more about his characture than the opinion.

 

I'm not sure where I resorted to personal insults.

 

Maybe I should clarify. I was trying to point out that free speech is fine, but there is a responsibility on free speakers to try to be accurate when they speak freely.

[leviathan13]

10 hours ago, sibon said:

It all depends on context.

 

If you want to have an opinion about having Dolly Birds at darts matches, go ahead. That causes nobody a problem, except for marking out those in favour as being a touch neanderthal.

 

If you want to express an opinion about the Covid vaccine being dangerous, then I think that is different. You need evidence for that sort of thing, or you run the risk of influencing poorly informed people and possibly convincing them to reject a life saving treatment. 

 

On the whole, free speech wins. But the idiots do need putting back into their boxes.

Funny how you use outdated language about the darts cheerleaders to claim that those who support them have outdated views...

 

And you say having an opinion doesn't cause anyone a problem - it caused those young ladies a problem when it cost them work. The negative opinions about 'Dolly Birds' on TV promoting a sporting event were mostly from people who didn't watch the darts and were happy to take the freedom of choice away from the very women who wanted to do it as a job.

[cressida]

1 hour ago, leviathan13 said:

Funny how you use outdated language about the darts cheerleaders to claim that those who support them have outdated views...

 

And you say having an opinion doesn't cause anyone a problem - it caused those young ladies a problem when it cost them work. The negative opinions about 'Dolly Birds' on TV promoting a sporting event were mostly from people who didn't watch the darts and were happy to take the freedom of choice away from the very women who wanted to do it as a job.

I don't have a strong viewpoint on the dolly bird issue,  but some would say they are sexualising a sport,  dolly birds in the sixties were a pleasant sight in fashionable terms,  and most had brains -  don't see many models lying on cars nowadays or stroking prizes on game shows - just an opinion but they don't go together.

[L00b]

13 hours ago, leviathan13 said:

Agreed, but, all too often in the modern day, people are shut down for not having a 'lived experience' of the topic.

 

I don't feel you need to be an expert to have an opinion as it's just that, an opinion - someone's thoughts and ideas on a topic.

You seem to be mistaking the right to hold -and to express- an opinion, with a “right” to have that opinion respected by everyone, and bemoaning the challenging of opinions as disrespect.

 

That is not how debate works, it never was: any opinion, about anything, of anyone, is only ever as valid as the facts which underpin it.

 

Anyone can hold and express the opinion that e.g. stealing should not be punished, or racism is justified, or sexism is acceptable, or all [insert religious denomination here] are out to turn [insert country here] into a theocracy, or (…) because <reasons>.

 

Challenging such opinions is not “disallowing” people from holding and expressing them: clearly they can hold and express them, otherwise how could these opinions be challenged?

 

It’s just debating with those people, how invalid these opinions may be (or have become), as social norms and morality evolve over time.

 

It’s also why experts in this or that subject frequently ‘win’ opinion debates about this or that subject (as experts, they are better informed than Jim down t’pub), and why opinion debate between experts soon gets terminally boring to non-experts (because facts are not in dispute).

 

EDIT to add: current events and this topic just made me recall that French legislation has long, long forbidden people from expressing opinions denying the reality of the Holocaust (the ‘Holocaust-denying’ offence). So yes, that is one example of an opinion being “disallowed”, albeit it’s the expressing of it which is disallowed, not the holding of it. It is censorship. And I agree with that particular law. People should not be able to rewrite factually-proven history without serious personal consequences.

Edited March 10, 2022 by L00b

[Flanker7]

2 hours ago, sibon said:

I'm not sure where I resorted to personal insults.

 

Maybe I should clarify. I was trying to point out that free speech is fine, but there is a responsibility on free speakers to try to be accurate when they speak freely.

" Dolly Birds "

" neanderthal"  

" idiots "

 

I the 'woke' world  opinions set you free are free to all and no-one ever suffers.

In the real world, as you point out, voiced opinions often have consequences. There is a responsibility to take them into account and allow for them if possible. For example, Womens equality cannot be achieved without restricting the options men currently have.

 

Is it worth the disruption? Its a matter of opinion.

[DavidFrance]

22 hours ago, leviathan13 said:

Do you agree that everyone should be able to have, and air, their opinion on anything? Or should people be censored for having the 'wrong' opinion?

Opinions carry with them the burden of responsibility.  It is very easy to form an opinion. It is less easy to form a balanced, reasoned argument. Opinions become arguments (a) when they are expressed and (b) when they are met with an alternative opinion.  Responsible participation in any debate requires a degree of understanding of the other points of view AND a full understanding the effect of expressing one's viewpoint will elicit.   Knowing  when to not express an opinion is one of the roots of wisdom. We do seem to have reached a point in society, no doubt encouraged by the anonymity of social media and forums such as this, where people express an opinion without any regard to the feelings and the effects upon others. Sadly, this seems to be accompanied by a withdrawal of willingness to either apologise or to review one's own thoughts on a topic after hearing opposing views. But that's just my opinion.