If it is your opinion -- and you freely admit it to be an OPINION -- why would you rage out attempting to defend or preserve that opinion?
An opinion is just a thing you think, based on the information you have, that you admit may or may not be true.
I adore discussing opinions and the differences between them, but I'm never going to lose my mind because something I voluntarily deem an opinion isn't being respected or agreed with, because by nature of calling it an "opinion," I'm admitting to the existence of a potential margin of error!
THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THE WORD!
Otherwise -- if you're convinced your opinion is not wrong and could not be wrong -- you'd call it "truth"! (Even if what you deem "truth" is, in fact... not.)
A common human behavior I've noticed in myself and others is to conflate "what I think" with "what is true." For example when my ex-wife and I argued she would invariably claim "you just don't understand." I would then explain how I did understand but that I didn't agree and why. But she would fall back on her insistence that I really didn't understand. I eventually figured out that she couldn't conceive of the possibility that I could understand what she was thinking and not agree with her. She thought it, therefore it must necessarily be true.
I eventually figured out that she couldn't conceive of the possibility that I could understand what she was thinking and not agree with her. She thought it, therefore it must necessarily be true.
I've observed this behavior before, but I was never able to think of it in such clear terms, to get to the root of it as you have here. This small-minded, self-assured thinking typically scares me. Whenever I encounter someone who cannot imagine that they may be even partially wrong, I start to judge that person as dangerous (whether or not that's the right thing to do, it's certainly what happens).
People who aren't able to question their own perceptions, who aren't able to be skeptical of themselves, are the ones who can rationalize and justify the most horrible, "means-to-an-end" actions. And when I see that behavior, alarm bells go off.
But that's not an opinion though. That's a belief.
An opinion is a judgment that relies on facts.
e.g. I am against torture, because i. torture has been proven ineffective and ii. It's against international laws.
e.g. I do not like pickles. i. Tried them, it tasted awful.
A belief is something that is internalised as the truth, or close to, and need no support from anything.
e.g. I believe in ghosts
e.g. I think god exists
e.g. I'm pretty sure there's alien life somewhere
e.g. I'm sure it's delivery, not frozen.
So while you can have no respects for opinions or beliefs, only one of those can be really argued about. If you had proof that ghosts or god weren't real, that would be another ballpark. It doesn't mean it cannot be innacurate, or conceited, but since the lack of anything but internal logic makes a debate immensely complex, It's always best to leave beliefs alone.
Beliefs can be based on opinion rather than fact. Just because I believe gremlins are stealing my socks from the dryer doesn't mean my belief is true. So we can chalk this one up to the fuzziness of language. Opinion and belief can have some pretty heavy overlap depending on context.
What I learned says different. Beliefs and opinions are two sides of the same coin, so you can't base a belief on an opinion. What distinguishes beliefs and opinions are trust and commitment vs evidences and facts. A belief is something you commit to, trusts in. This does not preclude inaccuracy or inconsistency. Your beliefs can be wrong, but you have internalized the belief as truth. In logic, there's a whole branch dedicated to beliefs, called doxastic logic, which is quite fascinating to read about by the way. :)
Opinions are something born out of evidence. You've judged the situation based on facts, like when you choose the party you will vote for, the restaurant you will choose, your stance on television programs... You're informed, and that informed your decision. Of course, an opinion can be misinformed, or biased. If the facts are false, your opinion will be "wrong", but they are based on something. Another example would be vaccines. You can have a negative or positive outlook on the process, but your opinion of it is informed by something somewhere.
I do believe that you are correct in the fuzziness of the usage. People use both interchangeably, but when having a serious discussion, we should remember those are two concepts, that while linked, are not supposed to overlap.
Just because I believe gremlins are stealing my socks from the dryer doesn't mean my belief is true.
I'm trying to address this in my kids by letting them know that it's ok to be wrong, and it's ok to not know something. People have this idea that being wrong or ignorant about something is a bad thing, when it should be seen as the first step in learning something new. Like Jake says...
Here's something I've never understood.
If it is your opinion -- and you freely admit it to be an OPINION -- why would you rage out attempting to defend or preserve that opinion?
An opinion is just a thing you think, based on the information you have, that you admit may or may not be true.
I adore discussing opinions and the differences between them, but I'm never going to lose my mind because something I voluntarily deem an opinion isn't being respected or agreed with, because by nature of calling it an "opinion," I'm admitting to the existence of a potential margin of error!
THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THE WORD!
Otherwise -- if you're convinced your opinion is not wrong and could not be wrong -- you'd call it "truth"! (Even if what you deem "truth" is, in fact... not.)
A common human behavior I've noticed in myself and others is to conflate "what I think" with "what is true." For example when my ex-wife and I argued she would invariably claim "you just don't understand." I would then explain how I did understand but that I didn't agree and why. But she would fall back on her insistence that I really didn't understand. I eventually figured out that she couldn't conceive of the possibility that I could understand what she was thinking and not agree with her. She thought it, therefore it must necessarily be true.
Nor is this a new phenomenon. Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously wrote to Richard Nixon that everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts. Lately a popular thing to claim is that we have to respect everyone's beliefs, but I'm with Patton Oswalt when he replies, NO, YOU DON'T.
I've heard it said that the mark of a good skeptic is not when you debunk someone else's idea but when you successfully debunk your own.
I've observed this behavior before, but I was never able to think of it in such clear terms, to get to the root of it as you have here. This small-minded, self-assured thinking typically scares me. Whenever I encounter someone who cannot imagine that they may be even partially wrong, I start to judge that person as dangerous (whether or not that's the right thing to do, it's certainly what happens).
People who aren't able to question their own perceptions, who aren't able to be skeptical of themselves, are the ones who can rationalize and justify the most horrible, "means-to-an-end" actions. And when I see that behavior, alarm bells go off.
And this gets me into more mind boggling arguments than you can shake a stick at. You can believe in ghosts. Do I have to respect it? Nope.
But that's not an opinion though. That's a belief.
An opinion is a judgment that relies on facts.
e.g. I am against torture, because i. torture has been proven ineffective and ii. It's against international laws.
e.g. I do not like pickles. i. Tried them, it tasted awful.
A belief is something that is internalised as the truth, or close to, and need no support from anything.
e.g. I believe in ghosts
e.g. I think god exists
e.g. I'm pretty sure there's alien life somewhere
e.g. I'm sure it's delivery, not frozen.
So while you can have no respects for opinions or beliefs, only one of those can be really argued about. If you had proof that ghosts or god weren't real, that would be another ballpark. It doesn't mean it cannot be innacurate, or conceited, but since the lack of anything but internal logic makes a debate immensely complex, It's always best to leave beliefs alone.
Beliefs can be based on opinion rather than fact. Just because I believe gremlins are stealing my socks from the dryer doesn't mean my belief is true. So we can chalk this one up to the fuzziness of language. Opinion and belief can have some pretty heavy overlap depending on context.
What I learned says different. Beliefs and opinions are two sides of the same coin, so you can't base a belief on an opinion. What distinguishes beliefs and opinions are trust and commitment vs evidences and facts. A belief is something you commit to, trusts in. This does not preclude inaccuracy or inconsistency. Your beliefs can be wrong, but you have internalized the belief as truth. In logic, there's a whole branch dedicated to beliefs, called doxastic logic, which is quite fascinating to read about by the way. :)
Opinions are something born out of evidence. You've judged the situation based on facts, like when you choose the party you will vote for, the restaurant you will choose, your stance on television programs... You're informed, and that informed your decision. Of course, an opinion can be misinformed, or biased. If the facts are false, your opinion will be "wrong", but they are based on something. Another example would be vaccines. You can have a negative or positive outlook on the process, but your opinion of it is informed by something somewhere.
I do believe that you are correct in the fuzziness of the usage. People use both interchangeably, but when having a serious discussion, we should remember those are two concepts, that while linked, are not supposed to overlap.
oh, /u/gremlin is at his old tricks again? :P
Maybe I am up to my old tricks, maybe I might steal that other 10% of your diet.
Which I assume is poutine (which is a great after midnight snack I might add).
It pretty much is! :D
Your ex-wife doesn't sound like a nice person.
It's not all her fault. Her family has issues.
I'm trying to address this in my kids by letting them know that it's ok to be wrong, and it's ok to not know something. People have this idea that being wrong or ignorant about something is a bad thing, when it should be seen as the first step in learning something new. Like Jake says...