Belief and conviction - a n00b question

[indifferent betty]

If it is taken that we all have our own paradigms, as we all perceive reality differently, what is true to myself may not necessarily be true to the next person and vice-versa. With this in mind, if "Person A" believes in something and "Person B" believes in something else which contradicts the former's belief, is the former right in affirming their belief to the latter as an absolute? Is prefixing a statement with "In my opinion" every time political correctness to excess? Do we have the right to express our beliefs, however factual and convincing they seem to us, as facts at all?

This is bugging me. Can I take some opinions please.

[Brotep]

There is no such right, and no such prohibition.

"IMO" is implicit.

[the last yatto]

Only if your person C may you attempt anything

[rong]

Only if your person C may you attempt anything

that's, like, just your opinion, man
                               \

[Manta Obscura]

If it is taken that we all have our own paradigms, as we all perceive reality differently, what is true to myself may not necessarily be true to the next person and vice-versa. With this in mind, if "Person A" believes in something and "Person B" believes in something else which contradicts the former's belief, is the former right in affirming their belief to the latter as an absolute? Is prefixing a statement with "In my opinion" every time political correctness to excess? Do we have the right to express our beliefs, however factual and convincing they seem to us, as facts at all?

This is bugging me. Can I take some opinions please.

I want to answer your question seriously, but I'm finding it a bit too conceptual without any concrete examples to put with it. So:

Person A hates cold weather. Person B doesn't. PA says to PB, " Damn, this weather is wack, yo" (because PA is down with tha' street). PB replies, "No, good sir, these weather conditions are not inclement. They are, instead, quite agreeable to one's disposition" (because PB is one highfalutin' sonofabitch).

I see now problem in not using IMO here. Same thing with using it:

PA: "The way I sees it, this weather be trippin'." PB: "In my humble opinion, this weather is quite nice." Still seems to work.

Another example, less innocuous:

PA: "God created the world in six literal days, the Earth is just over 6000 years old, and all land-bound animals in the world were within walking distance of a man who made a boat for a flood. God said so." PB: "The universal configuration of bodies formed as the result of some as-yet-unknown process that is presumed to have been a rather large "Bang." The Earth is really fucking old. Like, billions of years. Life progressed from the chance configuration of protein strains to create DNA, which developed over countless millenia into birds and Republicans and stuff. Various archeological and scientific evidences prove so."

In this example, the addition of "IMO" would not change anything of what they are saying, other than to assert the fact that they believe what they're saying (which should, of course, be implied by their statement and how they word it). In this and other instances where one is asserting some that they believe to be true based on various evidences, the addition of "IMO" does not usually seem to add anything significant to the dialogue, other than a way to soften the blow of the assertion one is making. Of course, if one's intent is to persuade or use rhetoric effectively, the appropriate use of "IMO" qualifiers is justified.

All in all, IMO has its uses in minute, rhetorical discourse, but for most interactions it is an unnecessary and implied qualifier that neither adds to nor detracts from the conversation. Well, that's my humble opinion, at least. 

The greater discursive and behavioral patterns that one should be on the lookout for are the tendency to impose one's data or opinion on another person when that person is unreceptive. It's one thing to have an opinion about something, or to assert that something is true; it's a whole other ballgame if one is to brazenly assert that another is somehow lesser for not believing one's idea.

For example, in the previous instance, PA could have said, following PB's statement, "Well, that's definitely evidence that is unsupported by the will of God as written in the Bible, but I'm curious to learn more. Please continue." And vice versa. Or, PA could have said, "No! You're wrong! You're a dirty atheist, and shall burn in hell if you don't believe in the Word!" And vice versa. The former would have opened up the conversation, and the latter would have shut it down and imposed PA's pattern upon PB.

Short story very long, the important thing to remember about conversing is not to pepper one's language to make it acceptable to others. Instead, the most effective way to communicate is to not try to shut down the discourse by shutting up your brain and shutting out what others have to say.

[hooplala]

"In my opinion" is honest.  It's as simple as that.

[Cramulus]

It's hard to give a generalized rule when there are so many possible applications. In general, I think more people could benefit from learning to verbally distinguish facts from their opinions. Miscommunication frequently occurs when people say stuff like, "Modern art is crap" when they meant to say "I don't like any of the modern art I've seen". More specific language would resolve a lot of headache for a LOT of people.

But on the other side of the spectrum, when you apply e-prime too much, you end up spending so much time qualifying statements and addressing grammatical minutiae that accuracy becomes an obstacle to communication. Sometimes it seems like the extreme e-prime camp will argue with any statement which isn't so vague that it loses all concrete meaning.

So I think a balance is necessary

[LMNO]

Opinions generally seem to involve feelings, or is subjective.  "I like Fall Out Boy better than The Jonas Brothers," "It's a good thing when sulpher rains down from the sky," "Your mother is ugly."

You can't really say that it's an "opinion" that an object falls at 32 m/s² in the earth's gravity field.

I suppose you can get around a lot of e-prime by referencing your sources.  "The bible says the earth is 6000 years old" v. "Carbon dating techniques show the earth is 4.5 billion years old." 



On the other hand, your mother really is ugly.

[AFK]

Doesn't stop you though, does it?   

[LMNO]

This is why God invented paper bags.

[Manta Obscura]

Opinions generally seem to involve feelings, or is subjective.  "I like Fall Out Boy better than The Jonas Brothers," "It's a good thing when sulpher rains down from the sky," "Your mother is ugly."

You can't really say that it's an "opinion" that an object falls at 32 m/s² in the earth's gravity field.

I suppose you can get around a lot of e-prime by referencing your sources.  "The bible says the earth is 6000 years old" v. "Carbon dating techniques show the earth is 4.5 billion years old." 



On the other hand, your mother really is ugly.

In my opinion, this is hilarious.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I tend to agree with the general concensus here (which may seem odd since I tend to eprime a lot). However, I've found e-prime to be most useful in personal application... that is, when I use e-prime it seems to act as a constant reminder that my Opinion is just that.

Of course, it can be implied that your opinion is IMO... but this bit Do we have the right to express our beliefs, however factual and convincing they seem to us, as facts at all? is a bit different.

First, as with everything else "Do As Thou Will" there is no question of having the 'right'... However, IMO, there is a question of Good Idea/Bad Idea.

Is it a Good Idea to express opinion as fact? I think NO.

First, it may create semantic issues with others as Cram pointed out. Second, it may create neurolinguistic issues with You... you may actually start believing that your opinion IS Truth... and that seems like a very Bad Idea to me.

[Richter]

If it is taken that we all have our own paradigms, as we all perceive reality differently, what is true to myself may not necessarily be true to the next person and vice-versa. With this in mind, if "Person A" believes in something and "Person B" believes in something else which contradicts the former's belief, is the former right in affirming their belief to the latter as an absolute? Is prefixing a statement with "In my opinion" every time political correctness to excess? Do we have the right to express our beliefs, however factual and convincing they seem to us, as facts at all?

This is bugging me. Can I take some opinions please.

[Jenne]

I tend to agree with the general concensus here (which may seem odd since I tend to eprime a lot). However, I've found e-prime to be most useful in personal application... that is, when I use e-prime it seems to act as a constant reminder that my Opinion is just that.

Of course, it can be implied that your opinion is IMO... but this bit Do we have the right to express our beliefs, however factual and convincing they seem to us, as facts at all? is a bit different.

First, as with everything else "Do As Thou Will" there is no question of having the 'right'... However, IMO, there is a question of Good Idea/Bad Idea.

Is it a Good Idea to express opinion as fact? I think NO.

First, it may create semantic issues with others as Cram pointed out. Second, it may create neurolinguistic issues with You... you may actually start believing that your opinion IS Truth... and that seems like a very Bad Idea to me.

I have nothing wrong with the above, and in fact have said as such myself.

I think many times, though, someone states something STRONGLY as IF it were fact in their heads, and even though you can pretty much take it for GRANTED it's opinion, and it's never stated otherwise, there's a general thought that the speaker's in doubt about this.  And therefore needs to be told it's JUST their opinion.  When that's all they've been saying all along, but instead of hearing "it's just your opinion," they hear "you're wrong and everything you say is wrong."

It's an extreme disconnect on BOTH sides.

Also, unless someone is referencing sources, I usually assume as they are speaking it's their opinion coming out.

[LMNO]

Well, it seems like you get to a point where you need to either disagree, or tacitly agree.

For example:  "AIDS is a punishment by God."

What do you say? Sure, it's only his opinion, but in a way, it's a challenge, as well.  Technically, if it's an opinon, it can't be "wrong".  But at the same time, you're not going to agree with him.