Skip to main content

Opinion is Dead



When I was much younger, like an undergrad, I’d go out with friends for maybe a pizza and the discussion would be enjoined.  We’d argue this way and that, about one view or another.  We’d argue on and on until the pizza was long gone and bedtime or study time was upon us. Few feelings were hurt by the other. After all, it was just opinions shot back and forth. 

The critical value of an opinion is in its flux of belief. It can or could be changed.
Today, it’s different. When venturing onto websites of columnists, especially those of contributors, opinions are no longer changeable.  They are fixed, hardened, even cast as metal. Modern students are about the same, most with cast-iron views, not to be changed by anyone, any way, anyhow.

The point here is you can’t call it an opinion unless you can cite something that someone can do or say to change it.  It rare we see this. What is slapped down on the page is not opinion but absolute truth in the mind of the contributor. 

Opinions are dead. Nowadays, the irrefutable and immutable position is taken. If history needs a bit of revision to support, that’s ok.  If vague words such as “civilized” are needed, that’s OK. If the occasional white lie is needed, that’s ok.  But never, ever, change the position. In legal terms, it’s become a swearing match.

Even actual science has been infected with this incurable malady, say with cosmology, now almost a pure theory with hardy a chance of resolution by testing. In politics, particularly in the USA, studies have shown there is hardly anyone on the left or the right that associates with someone of the opposite persuasion. 

Self-validation is in. Inclusiveness is out.

-------------------
previously published by the author on writerbeat.com 
http://www.writerbeat.com/articles/23107-Opinion-Is-Dead

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Human Simulation is Possible - by Humans

  Human Simulation: Agent-Based Modeling and the Computational Case for Our Reality   1.       Introduction In the essay, we introduce the notion that humanity could be a deliberate simulation based on an extremely simple single-celled organism, hardly anything more complex than that. This will allow an (apparently) new interpretation of the notion that humanity is simulated, but that there is no master engineer at a massive number of dials and switches, responsible for every twist and turn of our universe and lives. We begin with the notion that the universe exists and operates under its own laws. So, given the Earth [2] , when and where life first began, it was infused with a living agent, self-actualized, reproductive, and with other basic rules for its operations, interactions, and much of what single-celled organisms do today. The idea from this occurred some years back when writing code in ActionScript (formerly Flash), I was able to create...

The Calculus of Ideas and Patterns

  Introduction. When dealing with ideas, patterns, intuition, and brainstorming, we need operations or rules not unlike those of arithmetic. The goal is not proof, a finished device, or a fait accompli , but rather a foundation for further investigation and study. In some cases, these operations may yield a proposition, that is, something capable of being proved. In this sense, they form a practical logic of intuition. The article concludes with a few select examples from a variety of venues. Setting. We are working with a given idea, problem, or project, or simply just thinking. Our aim is to discover pathways, patterns, or conceptual connections that may be useful. The following operations describe ways in which ideas and patterns can be generated, transformed, or refined. These also work toward understanding the imagination. Yet, this framework is distinguished from formal logic and proof. We are tempted to call them as “soft logic” because while nothing is proved, reasons...

Freedom of Speech

  Think of freedom of speech as a living organism. Then think of what is required for it to survive. Coming to mind are a population agreeable to its constitution (its environment) and the institutions (its nutrients) that keep it healthy. Currently, many institutions, including some political parties, question unfettered freedom of speech and are working to deny it, claiming it is unhealthy for the body politic. Yes? No?