Opinion Entitlement
Content
1. Popular Belief
2. Three Types of Satements
- Baseless Opinion
- Fallacious Logic
- Sound Logic
3. The Dark Side
4. Close(?)
1. Popular Belief
When a person says "Everyone is Entitled To Their Opinion" they are not saying what they believe they are saying. This statement is popularly (mis)used in order to defend and deflect rudeness as a means of trying to maintain and control a sense of compromise however ironically that statement actually destroys compromise and instead harbors malice and grows distrust.
So there are three types of statements which must be understood for one to understand how "EETTO" applies to a statement at all. The first is an opinion, the second is fallacious logic, and the third is logical argumentation; there is a fourth that could apply which requires higher level logic we will not go into called induction which is generally built from very complex sets of complex syllogisms and arguments and for this purpose it's just not useful.
The key thing about managing EETTO and knowing when to use it, when someone is misusing it, and what it really means will empower a reader to be able to see through and properly allocate the value of a message and it's intentions regardless of which side the message may be on.
2.1 Baseless Opinion
An opinion, for this particular "essay" is a baseless statement generally regarded in known popular social terminology as a "preference". EETTO does not and never has and never will actually apply to opinions particularly because opinions are baseless, they cannot be argued for or against, and that's easily provable. "In my opinion chicken is tasty!"
Alright, so first and foremost is my liking chicken really a preference? No. What is it comparable to? The key thing about preference that people fail to understand is that it refers to a set of criteria in which a person has to choose; I didn't exactly choose to like chicken (*hint hint, wink wink* "You don't choose who you are attracted to is also a really common statement/argument." /self-defeating irony) but I can say I have a preference for how I like my chicken cooked or prepared, no problem. The key to preference is control; since you do not control any of the features you're attracted to and only control whether or not you act on an attraction the concept itself nullifies.
2.2 Fallacious Logic
Sticking with chicken because it's great I want you look at this plate of Chicken & Waffles and tell me if this makes sense:
"I like chicken with waffles because I like waffles with my chicken. It's delicious!"
If you said "that's circular logic, you're a fool" you're right, you win! This is actually astoundingly common when people talk about the preferences that aren't actually preferences at all and are baseless opinions. This is where we start to see where EETTO is misused for the greater evil and where rudeness becomes justified by false logic. "I like skinny women because fat women are (get this) overweight.", of course it has a counterpart, "I like thick women because (surprise) their's more meat on them!"; the problem actually lies with the word "because", the speaker thinks that by stating the same thing twice in a different manner and shoving the word because in there they've created a logical statement. They of course have not.
There are many other examples one could go into including things like No True Scotsman, False Attribution (Stereotyping), False Correlation (Height for men), Ad Hominem (too many to list), etc. Now the big thing is that many times because our brains are so awesomely advanced and kick ass we fill in the gaps for the people who make these statements for them automatically so they appear not only valid but sound as well when in reality they are often not even valid but definitely not sound.
2.3 Sound Logic
Preferences are only present here. EETTO only works here. However I do want to point out that it is relatively impossible to make a sound argument that isn't an Appeal to Authority(Self) or Personal Anecote thus where we allow ourselves to also mix this term up with an "Opinion"; this is indeed a type of opinion and it isn't wrong to call it an opinion but it isn't a baseless opinion and doesn't hold the same value.
"I like chicken more than other meats because I have gotten sick off of other meats but never off of chicken."
Now this is a statement which takes two combined standards and applies a personal status as a means of stabalizing the connection between the two. It is a personal anecdote so there is an issue but that issue is far lesser than the previous two and it has to be understood that it only works within the context that is "Despondency's Experience". By no means does this directly imply that chicken is the safest meat but obviously I'm sure some of you have already stated in your heads "That doesn't make chicken and safer to eat!" and you're right, congratulations.
Preferences regarding race do appear here but again they exist only within the bubble; for instance: "I like Latinas the most because their culture seems to vibe well with mine." That is a logical, fair, not fallacious statement. It's not based on anything that could be seen as weak logic nor anything that requires an external proof. Same with preferences regarding weight ("I like thinner women because I enjoy picking them up during sex and can only lift 150 lbs. max"), height ("I like taller guys because I myself am taller and don't like bending over to kiss midgets"), culture, and even as simple as style ("I date only people who are fashion forward as I feel those people would mesh well with my outlook on fashion as well as represent me in a good light when out together.") but now we have to talk about the dark side.
3. The Dark Side
So when is a person being rude and when is a person actually properly utilizing EETTO? I offer a two limitus test; if the person fails even one point they are likely being rude:
- Was saying it necessary to understand the opinion?
- Was saying it able to generate a debate versus an argument?
This is big. The first point focuses on core necessity even if it's perceived as rude by a reader versus being intentionally disruptive. For instance let's take the man who likes to pick girls up during his sexytime and can only lift 150lbs. for a prolonged amount of time. His statement in totality does make sense, all of it is essential, and he isn't doing anything that could be considered cruel. Now if we take the height element calling shorter people midgets is relatively rude and unnecessary; the statement without the word is just as effective.
The second point focuses on positive versus negative communication. "I date people who are fashion forward..." is probably positive; one could ask what that person considers fashion forward and not end up in a terrible debacle about who is right and wrong. Meanwhile going back to the circular logic someone saying "I think thin chicks are hot because..." and giving a definition of a thinner woman is probably not looking to be kind and it probably won't generate anything worthwhile.
4. Close
There is no close. Go away.
Oh, and clearly understand one thing: Not Everyone Is Entitled To Their Opinion.
Most Helpful Opinions