Uninformed Opinions and Discussions

LouieW

I originally posted this in the activity page, but the responses seemed interesting enough to me to warrant making an actual thread about it. The following is my original comment.

I guess this is a stupid question, but is there really a point of sharing one's opinions, especially if they are uninformed? It seems like plenty of things that people talk about are basically just their personal views and tastes and I wonder why it is worthwhile to share such things (if it indeed is).

For example, if you do not really have any background in media criticism (e.g., film criticism or literary criticism) are there really any good reasons to talk about your favorite japanimations, magmas, movies, or books? I mean, do people actually care about such things? Should they care?

Abyss_Worm

"Well, how else are you supposed to let people know there's something wrong with the world if you don't share your personal views? You don't need to be informed to realize that simply buying lots of stuff does not necessarily make you happy."

 

Ideally, I would think that people who are informed about such things could raise awareness. In any event, I doubt talking about such stuff without any kind of movement behind it is really going to persuade people anyway.

 

 TheConductor

"See, there's this thing called "conversation" where people exchange ideas and opinions in order to entertain one another."

 

captainbrass

"^ This, basically. I once read a good quote along these lines - "If everyone, everywhere, only spoke when they knew what they were talking about, a dreadful silence would descend on the earth." There's a good and a bad side to that."

 

I guess my problem with the supposedly bad side to that silence is that people can still learn from other people without having to blab about their personal tastes and the like. I am interested to know what you think the disadvantages to that silence would be though.

 

Juan_Carlos

"You can only expand on what you know if other people correct you and notice what is wrong with your views. This applies doubly so to film and literary criticism. Not to mention that with discussion, you learn to elaborate your points and your beliefs. With that said, as long as you're aware of your lack of knowledge and explain that you're not that knowledgeable, then there's no problem. However, if you act with the certainty that you know something and the unwillingness to listen to any counterpoint, then you simply can't contribute to a discussion."

I think that logic makes sense in a classroom setting, but in general, I do not think it really applies. I mean, it seems to me that you can notice what is wrong with your views by observing others and asking them questions rather than asserting your own opinions.

I agree with what you said about learning how to elaborate your points, but I guess I just am curious what you think the value to others is of adding an uninformed opinion to the conversation. Just doing something for oneself does not seem like an adequate justification, but maybe I am just being a bit too harsh here.

RedEyedAbyss

Personal tastes don't originate from a void, ya know.

Icalasari

If I didn't talk about my views, I would still follow the conservative ideals that my dad follows blindly (for example, he had me believing for the longest time that the death penalty is the best idea possible (I still think it could have uses, but those would be very rare and probably involve someone so monstrous that keeping them alive is an affront to humanity)

MillerCross

I think that logic makes sense in a classroom setting, but in general, I do not think it really applies. I mean, it seems to me that you can notice what is wrong with your views by observing others and asking them questions rather than asserting your own opinions.

Yes, but the first one involves interacting with people and putting your own logic and thought to a test whereas the second one depends entirely on whether you decide to do this, so I'd say that the first one helps to accelerate the process whereas the second one might or might not even work.

captainbrass

I think the point I was trying to make is that, unless you're some kind of Renaissance Man/Woman with expertise across a wide range of areas, it's going to be very difficult to carry out any kind of conversation if you shut up every time you hit an area you don't know about. They will inevitably come up frequently. You'll end up not participating at all.

There are ways of participating in those conversations without being an expert, so long as you don't try and pretend you are and acknowledge that there are people who know more than you. It's how you learn, and it also isn't very healthy to have people who know a lot going without any kind of challenge to their views at all, especially on the Net where it's very easy to bullshit people about your knowledge. Being an expert doesn't mean you never have to defend your views.

LouieW

Abyss_Worm,

Sorry, I guess I do not quite understand what you meant. Would you mind clarifying that last comment?

Icalasari,

If I didn't talk about my views, I would still follow the conservative ideals that my dad follows blindly

I guess that is a good point. That being said, I have heard of people changing their views because of arguments they have seen other people make, especially about religious stuff. That being the case, I am interested in hearing why you believe that you had to talk about your views to evaluate them.

Juan_Carlos,

Yes, but the first one involves interacting with people and putting your own logic and thought to a test whereas the second one depends entirely on whether you decide to do this, so I'd say that the first one helps to accelerate the process whereas the second one might or might not even work.

Maybe, but is it not just as possible that you will be resistant to change/improvement after sharing your views? If anything, I think that being very reluctant to share your opinion would encourage an attitude of respectful deference and that talking about what you think all of the time can often lead to arrogance.

captainbrass,

I think the point I was trying to make is that, unless you're some kind of Renaissance Man/Woman with expertise across a wide range of areas, it's going to be very difficult to carry out any kind of conversation if you shut up every time you hit an area you don't know about. They will inevitably come up frequently. You'll end up not participating at all.

I feel like there are plenty of things you can talk about in real life without having any kind of expertise and yeah, I basically agree with you about conversations with friends and family.

Online though, I am not sure that challenging people who are informed about things when you are not is really going to be effective at all. That does not necessarily mean that I believe you should stay silent all the time, just that if you want to participate, it is probably a good idea to wait until you have studied up on the subject.

Naas_Human

^ Sometimes, it's just an easy way to gain knowledge, no? Just yammer on about something you don't understand, and somebody will try to correct you. I think.

MillerCross

Maybe, but is it not just as possible that you will be resistant to change/improvement after sharing your views? 

It's possible, but I wouldn't say that's a direct product of sharing your views so much as a product of the person's stubborness to accept that they're wrong.

If anything, I think that being very reluctant to share your opinion would encourage an attitude of respectful deference and that talking about what you think all of the time can often lead to arrogance.

It also encourages an attitude of shyness and avoidance of the subject, which doesn't help towards the learning process.

The ideal scenario is for the individual to defend his POV and accept the possibility that he might be wrong. Of course, it's pretty hard to achieve such a mental state, but I think it's something that should be tried.

RedEyedAbyss

In regards to personal tastes, well, they tend to say something about yourself. I for one tend to like spunky, flamboyant characters in fiction, which could probably be interpreted as me having some hidden extrovert side I don't let out very often or something. And if you put it that way, it gets you thinking why you have the tastes you do.

Icalasari

Louie W: Well, if I wasn't shown the other view points via conversation, then I wouldn't have ever known them

If one thinks that they are right, after all, do they necessarily go and research it?

LouieW

Naas_H_Sapiens,

Ideally, yeah I think that should happen. It might just be that I prefer that "yammering on" to take the form of questions rather than statements of personal opinion.

Juan_Carlos,

It's possible, but I wouldn't say that's a direct product of sharing your views so much as a product of the person's stubbornness to accept that they're wrong.

If it is a product of the person's stubbornness, does that mean that there is not really a good unique reason to talk about one's uninformed opinions? I am thinking that the type of person who would be willing to change/improve his or her views after being corrected by other people would also be the type of person who would alter his or her opinions after asking people who do know. Likewise, if someone is sufficiently stubborn, neither technique is likely to change that person's perspective, right?

It also encourages an attitude of shyness and avoidance of the subject, which doesn't help towards the learning process.

You may be right. I guess the point I am stuck on is why talking about your views on things you have little knowledge of is superior to just asking questions or doing some research. I apologize if it seems like I just going in circles here, but while I basically agree that articulating your views can help you get better at arguing, that answer seems to be a bit inadequate. For example, if you do not have the basic background knowledge on a subject, how can you really expect to debate it in the first place?

Abyss_Worm,

Thanks for clarifying. May I ask why you think that looking into why you like the things you do actually helps anything? I can understand it being useful for making friendships better, but does it have any use besides that one?

Icalasari,

If one thinks that they are right, after all, do they necessarily go and research it?

That is a good point. I guess the flipside of that argument is the fact that on some places (e.g., debate forums, OTC, and the like) people are very quick to assert their opinions, but yet they rarely reevaluate them after discussions.