In My Opinion

[SalixIncendium]

I usually have no issue with qualifiers such as 'in my opinion' or 'as I see it' when expressing personal truths in posts in this forum or any other. In fact, I use them quite often when sharing my personal truths resulting from personal experiences that cannot be tested using the scientific method and encourage others to do the same when expressing ideas about belief or personal truth.

But there are times with which I take issue where such qualifiers are abused, in cases where people use these in an attempt to present their personal truths as universal, preemptively excusing themselves from presenting any evidence to support their claim, especially in the case of creating a thread in a debate forum, or to insult a person or an entire group of people.

Hecks, there are more than a couple in this forum that either have this as their signature or tack it on every post they make. I see this as an excuse to post whatever nonsense one wants without having to support anything one says.

Thoughts? Rants? Comments that are in your opinion?


In my opinion.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I usually have no issue with qualifiers such as 'in my opinion' or 'as I see it' when expressing personal truths in posts in this forum or any other. In fact, I use them quite often when sharing my personal truths resulting from personal experiences that cannot be tested using the scientific method and encourage others to do the same when expressing ideas about belief or personal truth.

But there are times with which I take issue where such qualifiers are abused, in cases where people use these in an attempt to present their personal truths as universal, preemptively excusing themselves from presenting any evidence to support their claim, especially in the case of creating a thread in a debate forum, or to insult a person or an entire group of people.

Hecks, there are more than a couple in this forum that either have this as their signature or tack it on every post they make. I see this as an excuse to post whatever nonsense one wants without having to support anything one says.

Thoughts, rants, comments that are in your opinion?


In my opinion.

I think that on RF, some members use the phrase “in my opinion” more than they would in other places to make sure they don’t break our rule against proselytizing.

 

[wizanda]

comments that are in your opinion?

The forum moderators have stated in the past that no where in our posts did it state it is our own opinion...

So to keep to the policy the moderators have imposed, many of us are doing what has been stipulated as a forum rule.

Personally find it ludicrous to have to stick it on each post, and especially when it is only a question; yet so scared of having posts deleted just for expressing our opinions on here, post it every time to be sure.

I see this as an excuse to post whatever nonsense one wants without having to support anything one says.

As someone sent to educate mankind before the Tribulation, generally try to post all specific data in concern to the topic being understood, else wouldn't bother posting...

Literally just trying to be altruistic in a narcissistic world.

In my opinion.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I think that on RF, some members use the phrase “in my opinion” more than they would be in other places to make sure they don’t break our rule against proselytizing.

Which begs the question, is it acceptable for one to post with the intent of proselytizing and just throw and 'in my opinion' somewhere in the post just to cover one's most rearward anatomy against a rule violation?

 

[joe1776]

I was once inclined to write without qualifiers, which made me sound like a know-it-all. So, I now start more sentences with "I think."

I haven't been bothered by others overusing IMO.

 

[Windwalker]

I think that on RF, some members use the phrase “in my opinion” more than they would be in other places to make sure they don’t break our rule against proselytizing.

Why would someone even outright saying, "I am right and you are wrong", not even bothering to soften that view with an "in my opinion" qualifier, be considered proselytizing? Dismissing others view as incorrect is not the same thing as trying to convert them to a religion or a belief system. It's pretty normal for people to think how they think is the truth and all other views contrary to that are wrong. It's the rare person who realizes and is actually willing to admit that even their own beliefs are full of holes when pressed.

 

[savagewind]

As someone sent to educate mankind before the Tribulation,

Welcome to Earth! And, thank you!

 

[wizanda]

is it acceptable for one to post with the intent of proselytizing

Since this is literally about me, let me explain I'm not proselytizing or trying to convert anyone to a religion; instead the exact opposite, separate religions are naivety to me, there is only comprehension of what was originally specified globally as a whole.

It is extremely biased to treat someone who simply studies all theologies, as being bias because they talk on many different religious concepts, and beliefs.

At times literally finding it we're not entitled to an opinion, unless we fit into a pre-subscribed label.

It's pretty normal for people to think how they think is the truth and all other views contrary to that are wrong.

Personally like to understand why people believe what they do, and how that might fit with the textual data; yet inevitably the textual data is the end verdict, and personal beliefs that go outside it are naive in comparison.

In my opinion.

 

[Windwalker]

... or there is also the abuse of stating "in my opinion" which is used to try to say even complete garbage views are somehow equally valid as all other views, including highly informed or even expert views. "Everyone has a right to their opinions" is actually often used as a cheat, a "false humility" that tries to take things like "anti-vaxxer" conspiracy theories and give them equal footing with experts, whose opinions actually have more weight than some non-expert who thinks just because they think a thought, it makes it just as valid as everyone else's. I say it's better for someone to just state their mind, and if it's full of crap, then so be it. At least it was an honestly stated position on something, rather than using "in my opinion" to sugar coat a load of nonsense. No, you're not entitled to your opinion

 

[Vinayaka]

Which begs the question, is it acceptable for one to post with the intent of proselytizing and just throw and 'in my opinion' somewhere in the post just to cover one's most rearward anatomy against a rule violation?

Happens all the time, but I see no easy solution. The mods have a tough enough time as it is without guessing at intent. I think the best we can do if we suspect it personally is to not engage with it, recognising it as the brick wall of real dialogue.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I usually have no issue with qualifiers such as 'in my opinion' or 'as I see it' when expressing personal truths in posts in this forum or any other. In fact, I use them quite often when sharing my personal truths resulting from personal experiences that cannot be tested using the scientific method and encourage others to do the same when expressing ideas about belief or personal truth.

But there are times with which I take issue where such qualifiers are abused, in cases where people use these in an attempt to present their personal truths as universal, preemptively excusing themselves from presenting any evidence to support their claim, especially in the case of creating a thread in a debate forum, or to insult a person or an entire group of people.

Hecks, there are more than a couple in this forum that either have this as their signature or tack it on every post they make. I see this as an excuse to post whatever nonsense one wants without having to support anything one says.

Thoughts? Rants? Comments that are in your opinion?


In my opinion.

I've only seen In My Opinion abused in a DIR when the member had so much bias over a given topic, and we question its validity that now thats all the member says. I dont visit since I seem to be a pet peeve in the whole matter.

Other times I see it are when someone doesnt want to be rude. I did say what I believed as a statement once and people jumped over how I presented the statement than referring to the statement itself. It was as if I said the world will come to an end or something.

Pryst* lazy to look it up, is more "jesus is the real way. Here is all my proof. You need to believe in jesus. Its to your advantage. Everyone else is wrong."

I think for some scripture-happy posters, its just their (annoying) means of communication. Not prys* just they want people to know they are speaking truth without asking and accepting the other persons belief in the opposite.

Its benefitial to use "in my opinion" but, for me, for instance, it invalidates saying what I KNOW is true without needing to surgar coat what I saw because of how others see and react to it.

 

[savagewind]

I post, "IMO" when I know that I might be wrong.

 

[Windwalker]

Personally like to understand why people believe what they do, and how that might fit with the textual data; yet inevitably the textual data is the end verdict, and personal beliefs that go outside it are naive in comparison.

This is nonsense, in my informed opinion. Textual data is nothing other than a reflection of one's own opinions, which will vary in degrees of integrity and veracity. Even the best opinions, are themselves still reflective of the system of thought itself used to understand the texts with. To assume some pre-given reality that our reasoning minds can figure out and then know truth, point to the text and blindly say, "It's not my word, but scriptures!," is what is naive.

 

[wizanda]

Textual data is nothing other than a reflection of one's own opinions

Depends if the text is intertexual, and with enough study actually justifies its whole concept succinctly....

Entirely agree that many people come to the text with presuppositions, and implant an idea on a line out of context.

Even the best opinions, are themselves still reflective of the system of thought itself used to understand the texts with.

Applying a bias to a religious text is going to happen; yet it depends if we can look at it objectively, and not need to apply our own personal subjective biases...

Realized this is really hard on a religious forum, as people assume the religion of people, and then fit their statements into that belief, not the other way around.

To assume some pre-given reality that our reasoning minds can figure out and then know truth, point to the text and blindly say, "It's not my word, but scriptures!," is what is naive.

That equation is almost backwards for me... Like what the scriptures say can be objectively looked at and questioned... What reality is can be assess separately...

As for knowing the truth, I'm generally pointing out where there are fallacies to come closer to what could be right, rather than trying to establish the truth, which is often subjective.

In my opinion.

 

[Sunstone]

In my opinion, the chief value of using such qualifiers lies in their effectiveness for some good folks in defusing the offense that many of us might take at hearing someone imperiously or high-handedly declare to be true a thing we ourselves believe to be false.

 

[Stevicus]

I usually have no issue with qualifiers such as 'in my opinion' or 'as I see it' when expressing personal truths in posts in this forum or any other. In fact, I use them quite often when sharing my personal truths resulting from personal experiences that cannot be tested using the scientific method and encourage others to do the same when expressing ideas about belief or personal truth.

But there are times with which I take issue where such qualifiers are abused, in cases where people use these in an attempt to present their personal truths as universal, preemptively excusing themselves from presenting any evidence to support their claim, especially in the case of creating a thread in a debate forum, or to insult a person or an entire group of people.

Hecks, there are more than a couple in this forum that either have this as their signature or tack it on every post they make. I see this as an excuse to post whatever nonsense one wants without having to support anything one says.

Thoughts? Rants? Comments that are in your opinion?


In my opinion.

Well, in my opinion (heh), it's probably the difference between the phrases "I suggest" and "I accuse" in the game Clue.

"I suggest that Col. Mustard did it with the Candlestick in the Ballroom." You can say this, but anyone who holds one of those cards has to show it to you.

"I accuse Col. Mustard of doing it with the Candlestick in the Ballroom." If you say that, you'd better be right, or you lose the game.

If there's one thing I've learned, particularly in a forum where people argue over Evolution vs. Creationism and all the endless bickering over "fact" vs. "theory," it's that no amount of evidence can ever prove anything to be absolutely 100% true. In the legal system, they might use phrases like "preponderance of the evidence" or "proven guilty beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt," but even those seem rather imperfect, since it's not absolute 100% proof. It also calls into question as to what one would consider "reasonable."

I think it's just a judgment call. There are no wrong or right answers, and it mostly because a political question where some people can be more forceful and manipulative in stating their opinions to the point where their opposition crumbles and/or the body politic is sufficiently persuaded that they believe it to be fact.

Then there are things like the "Emperor Has No Clothes" gambit, where people might conspire to spread a lie that the Emperor, clearly naked, is wearing clothes. Or something like the Asch Conformity Experiment (Asch conformity experiments - Wikipedia).

Groups of eight male college students participated in a simple "perceptual" task. In reality, all but one of the participants were actors, and the true focus of the study was about how the remaining participant would react to the actors' behavior.

The actors knew the true aim of the experiment, but were introduced to the subject as other participants. Each student viewed a card with a line on it, followed by another with three lines labeled "A", "B", and "C" (See accompanying figure). One of these lines was the same as that on the first card, and the other two lines were clearly longer or shorter (i.e., a near-100% rate of correct responding was expected). Each participant was then asked to say aloud which line matched the length of that on the first card. Before the experiment, all actors were given detailed instructions on how they should respond to each trial (card presentation). They would always unanimously nominate one comparator, but on certain trials they would give the correct response and on others, an incorrect response. The group was seated such that the real participant always responded last.

Subjects completed 18 trials. On the first two trials, both the subject and the actors gave the obvious, correct answer. On the third trial, the actors would all give the same wrong answer. This wrong-responding recurred on 11 of the remaining 15 trials. It was subjects' behavior on these 12 "critical trials" that formed the aim of the study: to test how many subjects would change their answer to conform to those of the 7 actors, despite it being wrong. Subjects were interviewed after the study including being debriefed about the true purpose of the study. These post-test interviews shed valuable light on the study: both because they revealed subjects often were "just going along" and because they revealed considerable individual differences to Asch.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Which begs the question, is it acceptable for one to post with the intent of proselytizing and just throw and 'in my opinion' somewhere in the post just to cover one's most rearward anatomy against a rule violation?

I don't generally assume that people who do that are trying to proselytize. It's just that when someone's vigorously defending their beliefs or trying to explain to someone else how to see things from their perspective, if they aren't careful, it can come across as trying to convince the other person to adopt their beliefs. It makes sense in these cases to clarify what their intent is.

 

[Polymath257]

There is a huge difference in the following scenarios:

1) "I've thought about this and IMO @Sunstone is vapidly trolling this forum. What do you think?"

2) "I an blessed with divine insight that nobody else has and it says that @Sunstone is a vapid troll. But that is just my opinion."

3) "You are a complete idiot if you don't think that @Sunstone is a vapid troll, but that is my opinion".

In my opinion, the first is welcome debate. The second is proselytizing. And the third is being a vapid troll.

But, that's just my opinion.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I usually have no issue with qualifiers such as 'in my opinion' or 'as I see it' when expressing personal truths in posts in this forum or any other. In fact, I use them quite often when sharing my personal truths resulting from personal experiences that cannot be tested using the scientific method and encourage others to do the same when expressing ideas about belief or personal truth.

But there are times with which I take issue where such qualifiers are abused, in cases where people use these in an attempt to present their personal truths as universal, preemptively excusing themselves from presenting any evidence to support their claim, especially in the case of creating a thread in a debate forum, or to insult a person or an entire group of people.

Hecks, there are more than a couple in this forum that either have this as their signature or tack it on every post they make. I see this as an excuse to post whatever nonsense one wants without having to support anything one says.

Thoughts? Rants? Comments that are in your opinion?


In my opinion.

In my opinion is implied to me in every comment I read, even claims of fact and quotations of others' words, so nobody ever need write that to me. Evidence is not opinion, but how it is interpreted is.

In my opinion is also implied in every comment I write @Sunstone commented, "the chief value of using such qualifiers lies in their effectiveness for some good folks in defusing the offense that many of us might take at hearing someone imperiously or high-handedly declare to be true a thing we ourselves believe to be false." I tend to write in that manner, expressing opinions without explicitly writing in my opinion. I probably should add that more often so as not to be misunderstood. I understand that I am only offering my opinions whenever I post, including now.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

I think that on RF, some members use the phrase “in my opinion” more than they would in other places to make sure they don’t break our rule against proselytizing.

Yeah, this^