Why do people think their opinions are better?

If opinions are like cookies, and number 3 took a cookie because number 1 and 2 had them then number 3 would still have a cookie.

Regardless of the reasons or circumstances in which they took a cookie doesnt change the fact that, after all was said and done, they still have a cookie.

That doesnt change the fact that they still have the cookie is the point I'm making.

Also, number 3 could also be basing their opinion on the fact that they trust number 1 and 2.

For example, when my husband got his car, the first thing my stepfather did was suggest that we take it to his mechanic to have him do a pre-purchase inspection and then have him take care of it whenever it needed a fix. My mother backed him up and said the same thing, since, she took her car there when they lived in Queens and still does even though they live in Long Island. When my brother got his first car, not only did he buy it from the dealership next door, but the mechanic was a 50% partner in that business as well and he maintained the entire fleet on the lot as well, and whenever it needed service or inspection, my brother went to the same mechanic.

That car was long in the tooth when he got it and was already well into the 6 figures on the odometer and that car lasted him for 7 years, and held up very well considering his frequent trips between Long Island and Ontario. Even my late-grandfather, who was a mechanic for more than 40 years, agreed with them because he drove his Ford F-250 all the way from Virginia to New York to have his truck repaired by this mechanic, and suggested that we do the same.

He said that he was suggesting that we do this because not only would my parents and brother not steer us wrong, but he wouldn't either and having been a mechanic for as long as he has, he knows an excellent mechanic when he sees one, and therefore gave the mechanic his seal of approval. My husband and I took the advice of my grandfather because I not only agreed with his opinion regarding my parents and brother, and trusted them, I also trusted him as well and I opined that, if my Grandad could drive his truck some 350+ miles north away from his home, as much as he always said he hated long drives as he got older, I figured that this mechanic must be a pretty big fucking deal.

And you know what, they were right. He is an excellent mechanic, always took care of us and treated us like we were family and gave us a good deal and excellent service, just like they said he would, and we are now on our third vehicle (the first 2 were totaled in 2 separate car accidents), and we still go to him and we both have suggested him to our friends. I agreed with their opinion, but before I came to that conclusion myself, I was of the opinion that they were trustworthy and would not steer me wrong.

The point I am trying to make here is that the scenario 3 could have happened because they trusted those in scenarios 1 and 2, and were of the initial opinion that they were trustworthy enough for them to take them at their word.

So even in this case, the opinion is still had, because much like the person in scenario 3, I opined that my parents, brother and late-grandfather were trustworthy enough for me to go with their opinion regarding the mechanic, and in doing so, I ended up agreeing with their opinion.

It was not a matter of me parroting my opinion of the mechanic from my family, I was of the opinion that they were trustworthy and made my decision based on that fact. My husband did the exact same because he went with the mechanic with not only my family's suggestion, but mine as well, since he opined the same about them, but about me as well.
 
Black Angel said:
How can you prove that someone's opinion is not their own?
Click to expand...
Very easily actually as I've done it before. On a number of occasions I've seen people copy or quote someone elses opinion, and then when I ask them to explain it in their own words they cannot, or chose not to, because they don't know what it actually means.
 
Who are you to think you are entitled to an explanation if/when people change their minds? Who are you to be thinking that you are entitled to anything?

You aren't, and a reluctance to answer still doesn't mean that you've proven anything, it simply means that they have opted not to answer you or give you an explanation. Opinions are not facts and thus, cannot be proven, and neither can you prove that a person's opinion isn't theirs for the simple fact that they have the right to change their minds at any time and for any reason, and, they have.

They could have personal reasons for changing their mind and/or simply not care to share it with you or anyone else not only because they don't want to, but because it is none of your business and, you aren't entitled to anything. It is simply your opinion that they could not back it up, that doesn't mean that it is true or that, you have proven anything.

You'd have to be pretty arrogant to think that you've proven them wrong or that you are entitled to anything.. especially when they owe you no explanation at all.

That would be like a person who used to be vehemently opposed to abortion, suddenly realizing that it isn't their place to limit a woman's right to choose, and then being pro-choice from that point onward. If you ask them to tell you why they've changed their mind, they'll either tell you or they won't, but if they decide not too, then that is their right, and if they do, then it is just a courtesy, but you aren't entitled to an explanation.

Trying to force an explanation when you aren't entitled to one or assume the reason when you weren't given one and you don't know all the facts makes you look like a colossal asshole.

Especially if the reason why they changed their mind were because they really thought about it or because they ended up in a situation where it affected them or someone they know and did not want to divulge for that reason. Meanwhile, you are walking around with your head in the clouds and puffing out your chest thinking that you've "proven" something you didn't.

Not everything warrants an explanation, and even if it does, it still doesn't mean that you'll get one or are entitled to one, because no matter how you slice it, it is still none of your business and you aren't entitled to anything.
 
Black Angel said:
If opinions are like cookies, and number 3 took a cookie because number 1 and 2 had them then number 3 would still have a cookie.

Regardless of the reasons or circumstances in which they took a cookie doesn't change the fact that, after all was said and done, they still have a cookie.

That doesn't change the fact that they still have the cookie is the point I'm making.
Click to expand...

I see it differently. Going by the cookie explanation, #3 doesn't have a cookie. He just wants the cookie #1 has.
#1 and #2 took the time to take a cookie they liked from the cookie jar. #3 is more interested in wishing he had their cookie than in getting his own cookie.
 
I have already elaborated my point on this using the mechanic example above.

But, in a nutshell,

Memento Mori said:
Also I can't bring myself to call copying an opinion, having an opinion.
1. I visited both France and Italy and my opinion is that Italy was better in most aspect. Thats having an opinion.
2. My opinion is that France is better than Italy in every aspect because after the person above said so I made some research about both.Thats having an opinion.
3. My opinion is that Italy is better than France in every aspect because #1 said so.Thats not having an opinion.
Click to expand...

Person 3 simply formed their own opinion that person 1's knowledge and experience was good enough for them. True, they might not have had that particular opinion until after they went for themselves, or if they decided to do so, but they were still of the opinion that person 1's opinion was reliable enough for them to concur. Their opinion was expressed of Person 1, and they agreed with their opinion because of it. My husband and I did the same where the mechanic was concerned, and because of this, we went to that mechanic where we had gotten validation of my family's opinions and through our own experience, we concluded the same.

This happened because we were of the initial opinion that my family was trustworthy and would not steer us wrong. It was because of this that we went to the mechanic, and came to the same conclusion about the mechanic that my family did.

In either case, an opinion was still had which only proves that everyone has opinions.
 
It's all good. It is just my opinion that those who go along with someone else are of the opinion that that person and their opinion is reliable enough to do so, simply because their own personal opinion, was of the person itself, and not, of their opinion, and are therefore, still expressing an opinion of their own. Which would then prove my original statement of everyone having an opinion.

Looks like we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, but it was fun exchanging with you anyway. :)
 
Black Angel said:
Who are you to think you are entitled to an explanation if/when people change their minds? Who are you to be thinking that you are entitled to anything?
Click to expand...
LOL.

If someone gives an opinion on the internet, whether they copy it or not should give an explanation to it. Who said anything about people changing their minds?

If someone posted right now and quoted someone elses opinion, I ask them about it. If that person has no opinion and they just copied someone else then they wouldn't be able to answer me. Nothing to do with changing minds.

Who am I to think i'm entitled to anything.... lol don't be silly. Seems your raw nerve has been touched.
 
GamerPerfection said:
LOL.

If someone gives an opinion on the internet, whether they copy it or not should give an explanation to it. Who said anything about people changing their minds?

If someone posted right now and quoted someone elses opinion, I ask them about it. If that person has no opinion and they just copied someone else then they wouldn't be able to answer me. Nothing to do with changing minds.

Who am I to think i'm entitled to anything.... lol don't be silly. Seems your raw nerve has been touched.
Click to expand...

Child, please. (I figure that if you can say that I am being "silly," that I can call you a child.) I asked a rhetorical question. I simply asked who you thought you were that you felt that you were entitled to an explanation, and why you felt that you are entitled to receive one. It is up to the person themselves regarding whether or not they wanted to offer an explanation.

I was playing devil's advocate with my questions, I only did to you, what you say you have done to others to 'prove' that they didn't have an opinion of their own. I asked you for a follow up and you've elected not to provide one. The difference here, is that I am not making any assumptions about the fact that you have not given an explanation, because I know that I wasn't entitled to one in the first place, you've simply decided not to elaborate.

Who says that there should be an explanation to a posted opinion anyway? Where is it written that anything posted must have an explanation behind it?

That might be the case if you are reading a review or something in which as much info as possible would be ideal, but that is not the case with a casual discussion. There is no "should" or "have to" in this instance, because it is a courtesy. You can ask, sure, and yes, it would be nice if they answered, not just to disprove your assumption, but for the sake of keeping the flow of discussion, but the simple fact is that they do not have to answer, because you are not entitled to it.

The fact that they have opted not to, however, doesn't prove anything.

It just means that they chose not to answer you. They might know that you have already made the assumption that they were just following along with everyone else, and have already made your mind up and decided that if you were going to be that arrogant, that they just don't want to bother with explaining anything to you.

I'm just saying that people can change their minds, it is their right to, and the best thing is to give them the benefit of the doubt, since it isn't worth the risk of looking like an asshole by making assumptions based on information that you do not have. So, if you asked a person who originally opined that Sonic had better games than Mario, and later on, after a discussion about this with more people, that same person said that Mario did have better games, and refused to elaborate for whatever reason.

Let's say for argument's sake that, reiterating valid points made by others they agreed with would've been redundant, and that, they really didn't feel like getting into the whole process of how they came to their own conclusion and changed their mind, you would still assume that they changed their opinion because it was the popular thing to do, and not because, they really gave it some serious thought and decided to change their mind.

Much like my earlier example regarding abortion, they simply could have changed their mind and then decided not to go into a detailed reason why.

In that situation, you're basically asking for something that you aren't entitled to, and instead of giving that person the benefit of the doubt, you then, act as if you have proven something you did not, and then draw your own half-cocked conclusion from information that you do not have.

As for "raw nerve" you seem to be the one who has one, since you immediately resorted to being condescending toward me in your response, and then took and extra minute to scroll up after your original post at 5:51 p.m. and deducted my reputation at 5:52 and then edited your post again at 5:53. I think you take things way too seriously, and took my post personally when it wasn't directed at you or anyone in particular.

This was a fact that I stated on the last page. I think you need to lighten up and not take things so personally since it's really not that serious and was never directed at you. You took my questions personally when I was only playing devil's advocate and turned the tables on you, and asked you follow up questions, (that you have said that you done, wanting their explanation) that you didn't answer to prove my point. I repeat, it was NEVER personal, and it was NEVER directed at you. Ok?

For the record, I am very well aware that there are those who are flakier than a biscuit when it comes to their opinions, and having been on this planet for 31 years, I have come across more than my fair share as well. I just don't agree with the assumption that a person who changes their opinion without explanation doesn't really have one.. and to avoid looking like an ass, I am not going to make that assumption. Like Mori said, I tend to agree with a lot of your [collective] points, but it isn't as interesting if everyone agrees with you and as I said to him, I am actually enjoying the exchange.. :)

P.S. Since I have obviously upset you, and it was not my intention, I do apologize, and as a gesture of good will, I have decided to give you a +1. I have also sent you an apology via pm.

Are we cool? :)

P.P.S. I have edited my post to include the apology I forgot to post earlier.. and to correct some spelling and grammar.
 
I'm not okay with opinion copying because, it's always misused, you need to have your own opinion.
 
I don't get people who looks down on others.
They shouldn't think their opinions are better but then again, no one can change them
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top