VorteX
Experienced Member
Stay a while...and listen.
Posts: 723
|
Post by VorteX on Aug 11, 2009 17:44:49 GMT -5
The conflicts on the resolution board are locked because they are no longer debates, but one-sided arguments. An opinion vs. opinion argument gets nowhere and thus has no merit in any more replies being added.
Rep the main problem I have here is that you are vehemently against seeing a matter from the other side. In order to fairly judge anything you must look from both sides, looking from one side only will get you nowhere.
For instance, let us rehash the feud length argument for a moment. If I were to be one sided, I would say that feuds less than three months are the only valid way to go because people like fast paced and varied action. This of course would make me look like a complete idiot because feuds more than three months can be enjoyed also if the writers are good at drawing out a story.
One cannot say that 'feuds less than three months are for ADD patients only" because that is coming to the conclusion that an ADD patient can never enjoy anything over three months. From personal experience, I know ADD patients that can do multivariable calculus and do quite well at it. According do your logic such a person would be incapable of this because the math problems are too long for their brain to handle. There is nothing to be gained from statements like this, and any conflicts that contain such statements are not conflicts worth pursuing.
To add to the topic at hand, we can all do our part in stopping pointless arguments by NOT REPLYING.
|
|
|
Post by xs3 on Aug 11, 2009 17:48:15 GMT -5
The conflicts on the resolution board are locked because they are no longer debates, but one-sided arguments. An opinion vs. opinion argument gets nowhere and thus has no merit in any more replies being added. Rep the main problem I have here is that you are vehemently against seeing a matter from the other side. In order to fairly judge anything you must look from both sides, looking from one side only will get you nowhere. For instance, let us rehash the feud length argument for a moment. If I were to be one sided, I would say that feuds less than three months are the only valid way to go because people like fast paced and varied action. This of course would make me look like a complete idiot because feuds more than three months can be enjoyed also if the writers are good at drawing out a story. One cannot say that 'feuds less than three months are for ADD patients only" because that is coming to the conclusion that an ADD patient can never enjoy anything over three months. From personal experience, I know ADD patients that can do multivariable calculus and do quite well at it. According do your logic such a person would be incapable of this because the math problems are too long for their brain to handle. There is nothing to be gained from statements like this, and any conflicts that contain such statements are not conflicts worth pursuing. To add to the topic at hand, we can all do our part in stopping pointless arguments by NOT REPLYING. I'm going to have to agree with VorteX here.
|
|
|
Post by rep on Aug 11, 2009 17:51:29 GMT -5
The conflicts on the resolution board are locked because they are no longer debates, but one-sided arguments. An opinion vs. opinion argument gets nowhere and thus has no merit in any more replies being added. Rep the main problem I have here is that you are vehemently against seeing a matter from the other side. In order to fairly judge anything you must look from both sides, looking from one side only will get you nowhere. For instance, let us rehash the feud length argument for a moment. If I were to be one sided, I would say that feuds less than three months are the only valid way to go because people like fast paced and varied action. This of course would make me look like a complete idiot because feuds more than three months can be enjoyed also if the writers are good at drawing out a story. One cannot say that 'feuds less than three months are for ADD patients only" because that is coming to the conclusion that an ADD patient can never enjoy anything over three months. From personal experience, I know ADD patients that can do multivariable calculus and do quite well at it. According do your logic such a person would be incapable of this because the math problems are too long for their brain to handle. There is nothing to be gained from statements like this, and any conflicts that contain such statements are not conflicts worth pursuing. To add to the topic at hand, we can all do our part in stopping pointless arguments by NOT REPLYING. You have to remember, Vortex... that I am jot a judge. It isn't my job to see two sides and come to a conclusion. I don't have to do that when it comes to OPINIONS. Now issues? That's what I come to conclusions on. When I come to a conclusion, I have it. Why should I have to look at their conclusion and take it without a grain of salt? An opinion is a fact to the person that it belongs to.
|
|
VorteX
Experienced Member
Stay a while...and listen.
Posts: 723
|
Post by VorteX on Aug 11, 2009 18:30:25 GMT -5
To put it simply, when you weigh in on a subject you are judging a person's opinion with your own opinion. While it is true that a person's opinion cannot be disproven you can in fact change a person's opinion on a matter with a well constructed argument against said opinion. If you only come from one side of a subject it is impossible to construct an argument that will change another person's opinion (for if you never see their side why should they change what they believe?). It is arguments such as these that have been seen lately, if one's intent is simply to argue why argue at all?
|
|
TJ
Experienced Member
I LOVE DAN WHITE
Good, you're working out Freeman....you're gonna need to
Posts: 848
|
Post by TJ on Aug 11, 2009 18:38:54 GMT -5
An opinion is a fact to the person that it belongs to. Source: dictionary.reference.com/browse/OpinionOpinion, o⋅pin⋅ion, uh-pin-yuhn 1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty. 2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal. 3. the formal expression of a professional judgment: to ask for a second medical opinion. 4. Law. the formal statement by a judge or court of the reasoning and the principles of law used in reaching a decision of a case. 5. a judgment or estimate of a person or thing with respect to character, merit, etc.: to forfeit someone's good opinion. 6. a favorable estimate; esteem: I haven't much of an opinion of him. No where in there do I see Opinion being fact to the person it belongs too. And Rep, that's where the problem lies with the arguements on the board, you completely, flat out, ignore the other person's "fact" as you want to put it, while I personally try to see where your coming from as in the latest locked convo. When you said there was a formula, I wanted to see it and put in my "fact", which of course you argued. When you posted that formula, I looked at it and responded half asshole like. I'm not saying you have to and to change cause God and Satan both know you won't, but really at least one of month try.
|
|
TJ
Experienced Member
I LOVE DAN WHITE
Good, you're working out Freeman....you're gonna need to
Posts: 848
|
Post by TJ on Aug 11, 2009 18:42:46 GMT -5
To put it simply, when you weigh in on a subject you are judging a person's opinion with your own opinion. While it is true that a person's opinion cannot be disproven you can in fact change a person's opinion on a matter with a well constructed argument against said opinion. If you only come from one side of a subject it is impossible to construct an argument that will change another person's opinion (for if you never see their side why should they change what they believe?). It is arguments such as these that have been seen lately, if one's intent is simply to argue why argue at all? Just because I'm a bit of a prick, you can prove that someone's opinion is wrong if the opposite of the opinion is indeed fact. Like if you say that the greatest golfer of all time is Ben Hogan, I can prove you wrong with facts that say Jack Nicholas is better than Hogan. Those kinds of cases are rare though. And I agree with the part that say if you never try to see it from someone else's side of a dispute, then why should they change their's, fully.
|
|
VorteX
Experienced Member
Stay a while...and listen.
Posts: 723
|
Post by VorteX on Aug 11, 2009 18:55:37 GMT -5
You are right in a sense, you can absolutely find strong evidence not to believe the same way someone else does. Even if you find facts to the contrary of my opinion, I still can believe in it whether I'm dead wrong or not. In your example, you found hard facts that Ben Hogan is not the greatest of all time, however I can still choose to believe he is no matter what anyone says differently.
|
|
TJ
Experienced Member
I LOVE DAN WHITE
Good, you're working out Freeman....you're gonna need to
Posts: 848
|
Post by TJ on Aug 11, 2009 19:31:24 GMT -5
You are right in a sense, you can absolutely find strong evidence not to believe the same way someone else does. Even if you find facts to the contrary of my opinion, I still can believe in it whether I'm dead wrong or not. In your example, you found hard facts that Ben Hogan is not the greatest of all time, however I can still choose to believe he is no matter what anyone says differently. True, whoa a civil dispute
|
|
|
Post by xs3 on Aug 11, 2009 19:38:21 GMT -5
KIA is right, something is missing... That's better.
|
|