4 ms·

Most opinions are not stated in a way that reads identical to a claim of factually superior rank. If I say "Emacs is my favorite editor" that is not challenging

by mrob 7y ago

Most opinions are not stated in a way that reads identical to a claim of factually superior rank. If I say "Emacs is my favorite editor" that is not challenging anybody. "Emacs is an excellent editor" is not challenging anybody either. But "Emacs is best without a doubt" leaves no room for any other editor to be best, and leaves no room for dismissal of the statement as just subjective opinion, so it is a direct challenge to all competitors.

rowanG077 7y ago
The vast majority of all opinions are stated as a factual claim. Especially in an informal settings like you know a hackernews thread.
- mrob 7y ago
  I said specifically "a claim of factually superior rank". Just an opinion stated as fact is not the same thing. E.g. I looked at all the comments for the highest scoring article currently on the front page ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20531987 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20531987 ). I found opinions stated as fact, but none that simultaneously deprecated anything else.
  - rowanG077 7y ago
    An opinion that deprecates something else is just a subset of all opinions. It doesn't deserve special care.
    - mrob 7y ago
      All specific opinions are subsets of all opinions. Deprecating something is not a challenge if it is presented as subjective. It is the combination of deprecation and statement as fact (e.g. "without a doubt") that is confrontational. And confrontational opinions are perfectly acceptable in the correct context. My claim is that a context where any disagreement breaks social conventions is the wrong context.
  - rowanG077 7y ago
    > All specific opinions are subsets of all opinions. Yes and? why repeat something obvious. > Deprecating something is not a challenge if it is presented as subjective. It is the combination of deprecation and statement as fact (e.g. "without a doubt") that is confrontational. And confrontational opinions are perfectly acceptable in the correct context. My claim is that a context where any disagreement breaks social conventions is the wrong context. An opinion itself can never be confrontational. It's a person that takes it as a confrontation. Just like offense is taken not given.
    - mrob 7y ago
      >Yes and? why repeat something obvious. To illustrate that your response was a tautology, and therefore it did not contribute to your argument. >An opinion itself can never be confrontational. But an expression of an opinion can be. If I say "I am 100% certain that [thing I like] is better than [thing you like]", that is a challenge to you. And it is not a fair argument if I say it in a context where you can't reply without punishment.
      - rowanG077 7y ago
        > But an expression of an opinion can be. If I say "I am 100% certain that [thing I like] is better than [thing you like]", that is a challenge to you. That's not a challenge. It's childish to feel challenged when someone else has a differing opinion. I can't even fathom going through life seeing everything somebody else likes as a thread to something I like.
        mrob 7y ago
        >It's childish to feel challenged when someone else has a differing opinion. I am not objecting to differing opinions, or confrontation. I am objecting to the combination of three specific things: * An opinion expressed as fact * which deprecates something * under unusual circumstances which prevent supporters of the thing being deprecated from responding as they would otherwise be able to This is clearly violating the rules of fair argument. It is very far from "everything", and I don't recall ever seeing it on HN before.

by mrob 7y ago

rowanG077 7y ago

The vast majority of all opinions are stated as a factual claim. Especially in an informal settings like you know a hackernews thread.

mrob 7y ago
I said specifically "a claim of factually superior rank". Just an opinion stated as fact is not the same thing. E.g. I looked at all the comments for the highest scoring article currently on the front page ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20531987 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20531987 ). I found opinions stated as fact, but none that simultaneously deprecated anything else.
- rowanG077 7y ago
  An opinion that deprecates something else is just a subset of all opinions. It doesn't deserve special care.
  - mrob 7y ago
    All specific opinions are subsets of all opinions. Deprecating something is not a challenge if it is presented as subjective. It is the combination of deprecation and statement as fact (e.g. "without a doubt") that is confrontational. And confrontational opinions are perfectly acceptable in the correct context. My claim is that a context where any disagreement breaks social conventions is the wrong context.
- rowanG077 7y ago
  > All specific opinions are subsets of all opinions. Yes and? why repeat something obvious. > Deprecating something is not a challenge if it is presented as subjective. It is the combination of deprecation and statement as fact (e.g. "without a doubt") that is confrontational. And confrontational opinions are perfectly acceptable in the correct context. My claim is that a context where any disagreement breaks social conventions is the wrong context. An opinion itself can never be confrontational. It's a person that takes it as a confrontation. Just like offense is taken not given.
  - mrob 7y ago
    >Yes and? why repeat something obvious. To illustrate that your response was a tautology, and therefore it did not contribute to your argument. >An opinion itself can never be confrontational. But an expression of an opinion can be. If I say "I am 100% certain that [thing I like] is better than [thing you like]", that is a challenge to you. And it is not a fair argument if I say it in a context where you can't reply without punishment.
    - rowanG077 7y ago
      > But an expression of an opinion can be. If I say "I am 100% certain that [thing I like] is better than [thing you like]", that is a challenge to you. That's not a challenge. It's childish to feel challenged when someone else has a differing opinion. I can't even fathom going through life seeing everything somebody else likes as a thread to something I like.
      - mrob 7y ago
        >It's childish to feel challenged when someone else has a differing opinion. I am not objecting to differing opinions, or confrontation. I am objecting to the combination of three specific things: * An opinion expressed as fact * which deprecates something * under unusual circumstances which prevent supporters of the thing being deprecated from responding as they would otherwise be able to This is clearly violating the rules of fair argument. It is very far from "everything", and I don't recall ever seeing it on HN before.