Ever! You are not even entitled to "I don’t know." You are entitled to your desires, and sometimes to your choices. You might own a choice, and if you can choose your preferences, you may have the right to do so. But your beliefs are not about you; beliefs are about the world. Your beliefs should be your best available estimate of the way things are; anything else is a lie.
It’s not wrong, but this article is missing something. The truth of a claim, and thus a belief in it, can differ depending on the frame a person stipulates in questioning it. I think that's what people are handwaving at when they say loosely "everybody is entitled to his or her opinion." What I think they mean (or should mean) is people are entitled to concern themselves with the questions they care about and not worry about the ones they don't; we aren't really disagreeing about the answer, but about which question we're asking or care about; which is a rather different claim.
I think it's better to phrase that intuition more like: someone with the perspective of J, like mine, would see this claim as X. Whereas I can recognize someone with the perspective of K, like yours, would see this claim as Y.
The different bases J & K, which are decided by stipulation, entitle us each to the claims X & Y. I don't accept Y, not because I don't see that Y follows from K (I might; that'd be a different situation), but because I don't accept K as the proper basis to apply in this situation for these other reasons; or at least, it's not the basis I care about. That's what I think the phrase "we are each entitled to our opinions" typically means or ought to mean if people had the time to think through it.
I'll give an example. I'm particularly thinking about aesthetic opinions, which is the classic case study for this. Some people really don't like modern abstract art because it's non-representational and very deliberately alienating and flaunting of romantic norms. So they can have the opinion a modern abstract work looks like crap based on that gut instinct (which instinct such a work is probably trying to evoke). But looking deeper, what entitles them to that opinion isn't really "everyone is entitled totheir own aesthetic opinion", but "I don't care about the basis fornon-representational art, what led a lot of other people to ever care about it."
But if they took an Art History course, they'd be expected to articulate how they can recognize how certain works are better orworse exemplars of modern abstract painting from the perspective of the people that constructed and followed it, e.g., 1950s New York, largely led by Continental expats, and their exasperation & disgust with the Continental Romanticism of the last 60 years which had just dragged us through two world wars, giving them a compulsion to purify the arts of it as absolutely as possible, and abstract expressionism gave them a very "American" utilitarian way to do that which was fresh at the time, etc. One is entitled to share that disgust & exasperation or not, and see the work as purifying or pointless accordingly; but they are not entitled to an opinion about whether or how well a work taps into that exasperation and disgust from the perspective of a literate critical audience that recognizes it and takes it to heart. Something like that.
I think... The writer was addressing the notion that people use "I don't know," as a form of argument. (Opinions in the style of this essay, are argumentative)
That isn't a valid argument. In an argument, not knowing is simply realizing that you aren't in an argument, you're just a listener. If asked a direct question about something; you are not in an argument. And the asking party has already stated that they don't know but would like to. Hence the asking. (this is a better way to suggest you don't know, ask for assistance)
If in an argument, you have enough understanding to think someone else false, then saying "I don't know," is fallacious! You know enough to argue, then you must also know enough to present some sort of argument. Not knowing cannot be presented as an argument.
Stating that you don't think you have enough information to correctly argue, is to concede to the other party. Ending the argument. And invalidating you position. So it would be best to avoid (if you are actually trying to gain ground in an argument) saying "I don't know."
I agree. There are many ways of interpreting what he is saying. What's the difference between a "best estimate" and an opinion, as someone else has asked? Are we entitled to a "best estimate", even? Not clear.
I think I heard someone once say during a certain event that opinions are about things and not people. He or she said something about having the same information. I couldn't agree more because people can be unpredictable and always subject to change. What's the point of having an opinion when people defy it anyway?
Not everyone acts the same, so what's the point of generalizing people into these groups except to justify prejudice? Not everyone believes in the divine or morality, so what's the point of having it around other than to justify your own life? Not every person adheres to certain standards, so what's the point of having them except for yourself and yourself alone?
Possibly because you feel more entitled to challenge the opinions of women than men. Or perhaps you feel women's opinions are less valuable? Either way, I'd say it speaks more about your attitude than theirs.
Er. Producing a crap estimate from minimal resources might bias your lines of thinking on the topic even after you receive sufficient information to make a non-crap estimate. Which might be counterproductive.
If you know enough to expect that any estimate you made is very unlikely to be true, mightn't it be wiser to refuse to estimate?
A former teacher of mine recently emailed this link to some of her former students. She agreed with the majority of the post, but held the position that people are entitled to say "I don't know" because it's true sometimes.
But it isn't true--you will always have a best estimate. Anything that can be related to prior experience will allow you to place a degree of certainty on an answer. You always know what the possibilities are, and you can certainly decide which is most probable. It seems the phrase "I don't know" is really an excuse that means "I don't think my information, and hence my belief, is more accurate than yours."
You are nopt entitled to not know? that is the most stupid opinion ever. If you have no information you don't know. Why should I pull something from my ass instead of admitting that I don't know?.
Given a moderate amount of effort, your best estimate might obviously be wrong to someone who's put in much more resources and effort into solving a particular problem. And what's the practical difference between "the best estimate" and "opinion", anyway?
LG, I'm not so sure you can change your favorite color easily at will.
Chris, you lost me.
J, I never claimed you should make a large effort. But given any level of effort, there is your best estimate given that effort, and you have no right to believe anything else.
I wrote a response to a re-post of this.
It’s not wrong, but this article is missing something. The truth of a claim, and thus a belief in it, can differ depending on the frame a person stipulates in questioning it. I think that's what people are handwaving at when they say loosely "everybody is entitled to his or her opinion." What I think they mean (or should mean) is people are entitled to concern themselves with the questions they care about and not worry about the ones they don't; we aren't really disagreeing about the answer, but about which question we're asking or care about; which is a rather different claim.
I think it's better to phrase that intuition more like: someone with the perspective of J, like mine, would see this claim as X. Whereas I can recognize someone with the perspective of K, like yours, would see this claim as Y.
The different bases J & K, which are decided by stipulation, entitle us each to the claims X & Y. I don't accept Y, not because I don't see that Y follows from K (I might; that'd be a different situation), but because I don't accept K as the proper basis to apply in this situation for these other reasons; or at least, it's not the basis I care about. That's what I think the phrase "we are each entitled to our opinions" typically means or ought to mean if people had the time to think through it.
I'll give an example. I'm particularly thinking about aesthetic opinions, which is the classic case study for this. Some people really don't like modern abstract art because it's non-representational and very deliberately alienating and flaunting of romantic norms. So they can have the opinion a modern abstract work looks like crap based on that gut instinct (which instinct such a work is probably trying to evoke). But looking deeper, what entitles them to that opinion isn't really "everyone is entitled totheir own aesthetic opinion", but "I don't care about the basis fornon-representational art, what led a lot of other people to ever care about it."
But if they took an Art History course, they'd be expected to articulate how they can recognize how certain works are better orworse exemplars of modern abstract painting from the perspective of the people that constructed and followed it, e.g., 1950s New York, largely led by Continental expats, and their exasperation & disgust with the Continental Romanticism of the last 60 years which had just dragged us through two world wars, giving them a compulsion to purify the arts of it as absolutely as possible, and abstract expressionism gave them a very "American" utilitarian way to do that which was fresh at the time, etc. One is entitled to share that disgust & exasperation or not, and see the work as purifying or pointless accordingly; but they are not entitled to an opinion about whether or how well a work taps into that exasperation and disgust from the perspective of a literate critical audience that recognizes it and takes it to heart. Something like that.
I think... The writer was addressing the notion that people use "I don't know," as a form of argument. (Opinions in the style of this essay, are argumentative)
That isn't a valid argument. In an argument, not knowing is simply realizing that you aren't in an argument, you're just a listener. If asked a direct question about something; you are not in an argument. And the asking party has already stated that they don't know but would like to. Hence the asking. (this is a better way to suggest you don't know, ask for assistance)
If in an argument, you have enough understanding to think someone else false, then saying "I don't know," is fallacious! You know enough to argue, then you must also know enough to present some sort of argument. Not knowing cannot be presented as an argument.
Stating that you don't think you have enough information to correctly argue, is to concede to the other party. Ending the argument. And invalidating you position. So it would be best to avoid (if you are actually trying to gain ground in an argument) saying "I don't know."
I agree. There are many ways of interpreting what he is saying. What's the difference between a "best estimate" and an opinion, as someone else has asked? Are we entitled to a "best estimate", even? Not clear.
Great one-line reply, Hilarious! Pithy! Witty! Wish I'd thought of it! (That's my opinion, anyway...)
Oh the irony.
Absolutely, everyone thinks that they must have something to say on every issue, while i think it is perfectly okay to no have anything to say.
I think I heard someone once say during a certain event that opinions are about things and not people. He or she said something about having the same information. I couldn't agree more because people can be unpredictable and always subject to change. What's the point of having an opinion when people defy it anyway?
Not everyone acts the same, so what's the point of generalizing people into these groups except to justify prejudice? Not everyone believes in the divine or morality, so what's the point of having it around other than to justify your own life? Not every person adheres to certain standards, so what's the point of having them except for yourself and yourself alone?
What is the point?
But that's your opinion (and so the infinite loop continues)
Possibly because you feel more entitled to challenge the opinions of women than men. Or perhaps you feel women's opinions are less valuable? Either way, I'd say it speaks more about your attitude than theirs.
Er. Producing a crap estimate from minimal resources might bias your lines of thinking on the topic even after you receive sufficient information to make a non-crap estimate. Which might be counterproductive.
If you know enough to expect that any estimate you made is very unlikely to be true, mightn't it be wiser to refuse to estimate?
Best is very subjective, without measure.
A former teacher of mine recently emailed this link to some of her former students. She agreed with the majority of the post, but held the position that people are entitled to say "I don't know" because it's true sometimes.
But it isn't true--you will always have a best estimate. Anything that can be related to prior experience will allow you to place a degree of certainty on an answer. You always know what the possibilities are, and you can certainly decide which is most probable. It seems the phrase "I don't know" is really an excuse that means "I don't think my information, and hence my belief, is more accurate than yours."
You are nopt entitled to not know? that is the most stupid opinion ever. If you have no information you don't know. Why should I pull something from my ass instead of admitting that I don't know?.
I just wrote a post similar to this, I found yours checking for similar ideas
in my experience this "im entitled", I get it mostly from girls?
http://yohami.com/blog/2010...
Given a moderate amount of effort, your best estimate might obviously be wrong to someone who's put in much more resources and effort into solving a particular problem. And what's the practical difference between "the best estimate" and "opinion", anyway?
LG, I'm not so sure you can change your favorite color easily at will.
Chris, you lost me.
J, I never claimed you should make a large effort. But given any level of effort, there is your best estimate given that effort, and you have no right to believe anything else.