SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : To be a Liberal,you have to believe that.....

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: CharleyMike who wrote (2156)9/14/1999 6:43:00 PM
From: jbe  Read Replies (1) of 6418
 
Without controversy, there is no discussion, only mutual platitudes.

Quite so. I agree totally. But ad hominem arguments have no place in controversy (e.g., "religion is for people who must have an authority figure in their pitiful little lives in order to develop some integrity of being"). In fact, they undermine controversy, by focussing on the alleged faults/defects of the individual expressing a particular opinion, rather than on the opinion itself.

Why is one opinion or one belief more acceptable than another?

Do you mean more acceptable or more correct? There is a difference. <g> It may be more acceptable, in company, to say: "I love you all." But if the person saying it really feels "I hate you all" then it is not the correct thing to say.

Another point: opinion or belief about what? About a matter of fact, which can be demonstrably proved true or false (e.g.,what time will the sun rise in Montreal tomorrow?), or about a matter of feeling (e.g., viewing sunrises should make one feel good/bad), or about a matter of personal taste (swimming is more fun than skiing), or about a matter of morality (I think drinking is a sin), etc., etc.

Only in the first case would I say it is relatively easy to determine what is "correct," even though many people might still not find it "acceptable." (Not everyone was keen to accept the idea that the earth revolves around the sun, rather than the other way around.)

That does not mean that I personally would be a complete relativist in all the other cases. I do not hold the view that "one person's opinion is as good as another's." More often than not, one person is better informed than another about the matter in dispute, for example, or has some other sort of authority or experience that compels respect, or whatever. But each case would have to be judged on its own merits.

And then there are plenty of matters that are fun and thought-provoking to discuss, but which simply can't ultimately be resolved. The existence of God, or a Higher Power, for example. Let people believe what they believe, as long as they don't force it on anyone else; where's the harm?

Them's my thoughts.

Joan

Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext