No opinions are right or wrong. Agree or disagree?

[HawkPerception]

Agree

Disagree

[nightdrot]

So, it is perfectly right to throw Jews into ovens? Keep African-Americans in chains and force them to eat at segregated lunch counters? It is all matter of mere opinion? Force women to submit to their men?

Suffice to say, voted "Disagree." The argument is the fallacy of moral relativism. Nothing is right or wrong but only thinking makes it so.

Of course, that fails on two levels. On the factual level, calling a dog a goat does not make the dog a goat. It is a thing peculiar to itself and the opinion that the dog is a goat does not make the dog a goat.

On the moral plain, it gets a bit more complicated but the same absolute standard still applies. The difference is that we do not always know the answer as to what is a right thing and a wrong thing. So we debate - in government, in politics, in the schools, in the churches, in families, in the media, in town halls and in a thousand other venues, both public and private.

We judge the merits of an opinion on moral questions by both its basis in obvious observable factual data and in terms of its practical consequences. These judgments being made over the long sweep of history and experience.

Seven hundred years ago, keeping slaves was a broadly accepted norm. However, it gradually came to be realized that doing so had disadvantages that were practical - slave labor was less efficient in economic terms - that were utilitarian - it represented a net reduction in human happiness - and moral/philosophical. A society that treated humans as property was apt, over the course of time, to treat all men as property.

The truth of the immorality of slavery was glimpsed in experience and reflection upon those experiences. It not being less true simply because it was less immediately obvious.

[HawkPerception]

Finally the answer I was hoping someone would say. Almost lost faith.

[nightdrot]

Ha! Thanks for your kind comment. Take heart. Moral relativism is the easy "easy answer" for people. It spares them the torture of actually having to think.

In general, what you find is that people will tend toward it in theory but when faced with its implications in practice they run away from it as fast as they can. It is why the nation's political debates are so intense even in the best of times.

Still, glad I could offer you a little cheer - and thanks for the thumbs up.

[HawkPerception]

Accurately stated. One of the few intelligent ones I've seen.

[nightdrot]

Thanks again. You can come to my party anytime.

[hellionthesagereborn]

Their are wrong opinions BUT that doesn't necessarily mean what some might think. Their is one truth, that is not subjective no matter how many people may want it to be. Our perceptions of the truth however, are, so if your arguing an opinion based upon objective fact, you can in fact be wrong. If your opinion is subjective but not logically consistent it can be wrong. If the opinion is based upon a falsehood then it can be wrong. That said, as long as your premise is correct and your not disregarding objective facts and your logically consistent then your opinion will not necessarily be wrong.

For example, I don't agree with abortion, I think its immoral. Other people claim its not, now if they argue that abortion should be acceptable because no one should have a right to anothers resources/autonomy, then they have to logically apply that to everything. That is to say, you have to also be against taxes (forced removal of some one elses resources/autonomy), you have to absolutely be against child support, and you have to even be perfectly accepting of child abandonment. Now I may think that's immoral, but if you believe that you are logically consistent and nothing you have stated is incorrect so no matter how much I may disagree with it, you are not wrong in your opinion because its the logical conclusion from your premise, its consistent and it doesn't violate known facts.

In this way, opinions can be wrong, often are wrong, but that doesn't actually have anything to do with morality or justice or what is efficient or best, but rather logical structure and not violating/going against known objective facts.

[FreyaRed]

Red is red, green is green this is a fact and nothing else. Opinions can be 100% right or wrong.
However sane people don't want to start a crusade against color blind people who have different opinions about specific colors.

[HawkPerception]

Well said!

[Hannibal_Lecter420]

Opinions are subjective its impossible to prove an opinion. You can prove a fact though.

[The_Other]

I clicked disagree, however I changed my mind (but im not allowed to change to another option) after thinking about it some more. I actually agree.

(Dictionary) Opinion: "a view or judgement formed about something, *not necessarily based on fact or knowledge*"

Facts can be right or wrong.
For instance I know that 1 1 is 2 and never 13
But opinions are subjective and doesn't have to be based in facts.
For instance I believe that 1 1 is 13 and never two.

[HawkPerception]

So if someone believes that stoning someone to death for apostasy is the right decision "in their opinion" then it's not considered right or wrong? There are many other examples, but let's stick to that.

In the past, the vast majority of people held views that we could never come to terms with nowadays, however they were raised and conditioned with those mentalities so they couldn't help it. If opinions can't be right or wrong, then it wasn't right or wrong to enslave black people or burn jews or burn red haired people.

My "opinion" is that there is always an opinion that is right or wrong or at least closer to the truth than the other.

[The_Other]

The example you gave raises the question of "morality"
Morality is completely subjective, one person's morality can not be close or closer to any truth than another person's morality.
Example:
>John believes murder is wrong
>James believes it's ok to murder
>Ana believes murder is only ok in the case of self defense.

Either one of these people's opinion on murder is not closer to any "truth" than the other because we are talking about "morality", you either agree with any of them or not.

In the case of something else that isn't "morality", then your last opinion becomes more of a fact than opinion.

So we have something like this amendment to your last line:
"The fact is that there is always an opinion that is right or wrong or at least closer to the truth than the other"

Like in science, or theology or something else.
Example, using that last line:
John: I believe that a god created this universe
James: I don't believe that there is a god

One of these opinions can be closer to the truth than the other.

[Laura_Marx]

right ^ I think this is what tends to get called 'justification'. So we can evaluate opinions by justification rather than truth per se. If Jane believes murder is wrong because its a threat to society, we might be able to investigate it and find that its either true or untrue (murder could as easily protect foster in-group solidarity). But if Kwame believes that murder is wrong because life has value, we might consider it justified because of the value he places on human life, or the value society places on human life; but if Frére believes that murder is fine because life has no value, we might consider it justified, but more or less justified depending on how we value human life. In this way we can consider beliefs other than statements of fact without committing ourselves to an absolute relativism.

[TheUniqueOne96]

At least when it comes to preferences, yes.

I honestly can't stand it when people try to act as if someone is wrong, inferior or tries to make them feel bad, simply because they have a different opinion, mostly when it comes to personal taste, like do people want to apologize for not liking the same food they do or something.

[AzureGirl]

Eh, they can be wrong if they’re an obvious thing they’re denying. Take the earth’s surface argument for example.

[Flower7]

I disagree. There is definitely such a thing as a person being wrong. I see it all the time.

[AdithyaR]

Well there are some opinions that are wrong. If somebody the earth is flat or that pedophilia is acceptable, those opinions can never be right.
Certain situations have set rules.

[Boring_Joe]

answering is inherently meaningless, because if agree, what does it matter? opinions mean nothing so an opinion that agrees with you carries no weight.

disagree means nothing because you can just discard it as having no value.

[silvermoon84]

I agree, but I think a lot of people will quickly point fingers at the people who don’t agree with them but no, I don’t think there’s any such thing as a wrong opinion

[ShortCircuit]

Disagree. "Murder is unacceptable." is a right opinion. The inverse would be a wrong opinion.

[rhirhi42]

That is not really an opinion. Based on the law in just about any country murder is unacceptable by law. That is a fact.

[ShortCircuit]

@rhirhi42 Where do you think laws come from? Murder being illegal in most countries is the direct consequence of most people accepting the premise that murder is objectively wrong. Morality isn't derived from laws. Laws are derived from morality. You're putting the cart before the horse.

[rhirhi42]

Well it is a fact based in just about any country murder is illegal and anything that is illegal is unacceptable by law.

[ShortCircuit]

@rhirhi42 My assertion was not "murder is illegal", my assertion was "murder is [morally] unacceptable". You are correct that the former is a fact, however that is not what I said. What I said was the latter, which is an opinion--and a correct one.

[rhirhi42]

Okay...👍😇

[pura_vida12]

No, of course no opinions are wrong. Opinions aren't facts, they are just a way a person feels about something.

[I-am-a-nobody]

This is one of the best questions ever...
The people who agree are obviously wrong.

[perfectchaos]

It truly depends on the opinion and facts surrounding it and intentions of the opinion.

[Mantinziza]

how can any one have a 100% correct opinion when no lives oever 100 year?

[Sargentcaptain]

So my opinion that the Nazis were bad is wrong? Some opinions are better than others.

[Avicenna]

That is sort of the idea behind an opinion. Now the basis for that opinion may be false.

[Snakeyes7]

Opinions based on factual ideas can be wrong but based on feelings aren’t really that simple so people tend to not lose sleep over those that disagree with them.

[razzmatazz110]

Yep opinions can be true for example Michelin make the best tires, I don't think anybody would disagree with that.

[_no_one_]

Different options have different meaning relative to diff. People 🖖😇

[MountAverage]

Opinions are opinions. The facts that opinions are based on can be right or wrong.

[najekim]

Old saying, "Opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one."

[Numbnuts89]

Well, my opinion is that 2+2 is 4.. but, isn't that already proven, by scientific fact?

[rhirhi42]

It is a fact 2+2= 4. It isn't an opinion.

[Numbnuts89]

You'd think, right?

[rhirhi42]

I do not think. I know it is a fact 2+2 = 4. It isn't an opinion.

[Numbnuts89]

Lots of people have theories that 2+2, is actually 22

[rhirhi42]

Well then they are wrong.

[Numbnuts89]

No, it's their opinion

[rhirhi42]

It isn't hard to see that 2+2=4

[Numbnuts89]

In your opinion

[rhirhi42]

I think any person above the age of 10 should know 2+2=4

[Numbnuts89]

Again, in your opinion

[rhirhi42]

Not an opinion. I am pretty sure most people above the age of 10 should know 2+2=4.

[Numbnuts89]

No hun, it's your opinion

[rhirhi42]

No it isn't. I am tired of writting now. I think maybe you should ask other people and they will agree with me most people above the age of 10 knows 2+2=4.

[Numbnuts89]

I guarantee you it's YOUR OPINION