It is most interesting to me, karen, that you continually feel the need not only to lecture others, but that you continually are sure that your opinions are the correct ones.
I wasn't lecturing you on my opinion. I know better than to lecture anyone on an opinion. That's because I recognize what an opinion is and that opinions aren't lecture material. If you find me in lecture mode, which I acknowledge I do quite a bit with you, then you can infer that I think that what I'm saying is not just my opinion.
I argue my opinions; I don't lecture on them. That is the way discourse on opinions is supposed to work. When I argue an opinion, I expect you to argue back, which entails finding the flaws in my opinions, either factual or logical, and giving me feedback on them. You never do that. You typically respond with some non sequitur, a slew of links, a trip down that garden path of yours, or a passive-aggressive attack, or so they seem to me. I no longer expect an argument although I keep hoping.
OTOH, when I lecture, it's because I'm speaking from authority. What you reacted to is not an opinion. I said "You can't legitimately rank order a mix of the two." That's material you find in textbooks on analytic process and in the classroom, not something I made up from whole cloth or pulled from the ether. There's an established answer to it and by putting it in lecture format I am asserting that I know the answer and you don't. It has nothing to do with confidence in my opinions because it's not an opinion. You can choose not to accept what information I offer you, but dismissing it as an opinion is mistaken.
Yes, this was a lecture. <g> |
