• lemmyreader@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Depends on what it is about. We meet and you say :

    • You’re vegan. Good.
    • You use Linux. Good.
    • You’re on the Fediverse. Good.
    • You love bicycles. Good.

    Now we meet again and you talk about privacy and then ask for my WhatsApp number (which is non existing) to continue that conversation later -> The heat is on! 🔥

  • Alsjemenou@lemy.nl
    link
    fedilink
    Nederlands
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    No, you could have great arguments while being an ass. When you don’t argue from any morals or ethics, or a ground floor of ascertaining the truth, I have zero respect for your opinions. I don’t really care about what a ‘good’ argument looks like, it doesn’t even need to be good, as long as your grounded in reality and ethics, you’re fine.

  • Kwakigra@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    There’s tiers.

    I have no respect for an opinion that the holder doesn’t understand well enough to argue since they are parroting a “common sense” belief based on premises which are easily disprovable.

    I can respect an opinion I disagree with which the holder understands, but up until the point where they are willing to argue in good faith. If they are deliberately spreading info which they know to be false because it’s to their advantage that others hold those beliefs, I thinknit’s a major problem. If they refuse to entertain any challenge to their opinion however obvious, that is also a problem.

    The opinion I disagree with which I respect the most is one that is in total good faith which causes me to question my opinion. This is how I learn.

  • Pandantic [they/them]@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    It depends on how harmful that opinion is. You prefer vanilla ice cream because you like the mild flavor - cool, difference of opinion. You prefer there were no same-sex marriages because your religion is against it - no, that affects other people’s lives so if you want me to respect that opinion you would have to have a good argument.

  • ulkesh@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    I respect facts and objective evidence. Opinion is immaterial.

    Otherwise, there is no point to it.

    • Redfox8@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Unfortunately there are many subjects where all the facts aren’t known, therefore opinions must be discussed to advance the understanding and ultimately help to establish future facts. Also, one person’s believed facts may be a misunderstanding, for example, hence why discussions and arguments may happen.

      As such, there is (nearly) always a point to it!

      • ulkesh@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        I don’t subscribe to the notion of opinion being equated to hypothesis.

        I also don’t believe in facts. A fact simply is.

        Opinions are held beliefs that are usually founded in how a person feels about a subject. I see no reason in respecting a belief. I can respect a person, when earned. But their opinions and beliefs are not anything I require to be respected. And I expect nothing less toward myself.

        It’s also why I tend to extricate myself from any argument people like to have. Because my experience has taught me that most people have no idea of what they speak, and when proven wrong in the face of objective fact, they double down on their beliefs.

        So I reiterate — there is no point without objective fact and evidence.

  • HubertManne@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    good. no. valid. yes. as long as the premise is reasonable and its logical. If its about how you feel or everyone does it type of thing I just won’t care as long as it just effects you.

    • Today@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I have friends who i disagree with but respect because i know they’ve considered different angles and made a decision that feels right to them. I have friends who i disagree with and do not respect because they believe (or pretend to believe?) what their family, husband, tv tell them and can’t express any real thoughts or opinions of their own.

  • radiant_bloom@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    I would say yes. The only time you don’t is when I already agree with you, but that’s because I (hopefully) already know the good argument.

    I don’t believe in “common sense”, that’s just the biases someone already has. Some of them correct, some of them not, all unchecked therefore all invalid as a basis for anything.

    • spiderwort@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      If we could dispose of respect for the individual, then we could replace democracy with science. That would be efficient.

      • hperrin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Science doesn’t have values, and policy needs values. Science can tell you the best way to achieve your values, but if your values don’t align with the values of the majority of people, then you’re going to use science to make people unhappy.

        It sounds like you just want to impose your values onto other people, which is precisely what democracy was invented to protect people against.

    • spiderwort@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      What if they simply see things differently?

      Chocolate is better than vanilla. Argument? Of course not.

      Argument requires shared assumptions. If the assumptions are not shared then you can’t argue.

      And then what’s left? Respect for the individual?

      • invertedspear@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        “Chocolate is better than vanilla” is surprisingly ambiguous. If you said “I prefer chocolate over vanilla” there’s no argument because that’s a subjective statement. If you said “the human pallet prefers chocolate to vanilla, thus those that prefer vanilla are defective” well now you have made far more than a subjective statement that also labels those that don’t share it, you have to be prepared to defend that. If you said “chocolate is healthier than vanilla” then you might need to at least be able to provide some facts and figures like lower sugar content or something.

        The point is: when it’s a matter of subjective preference, presented in a way that makes no judgments of dissenters, no arguments should be expected. Making a claim of fact may require evidence. And making a critique of others is asking for a fight.

  • Railison@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    You’re entitled to your opinion and I’m entitled to eviscerate your opinion if it is my opinion that it’s shit.

    Though I try to debate ideas with logic and evidence.

      • Kwakigra@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        There’s respect for someone as a person who deserves all their human rights as I believe everyone does regardless of their behavior. Then there’s respect for someone’s ability to do or understand something, and that depends entirely on whether they can demonstrate their knowledge or ability in my subjective opinion. I can respect someone as a person even if I don’t respect their ability to, for example, argue the finer points of literary analysis.

          • Funkytom467@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            Let’s also be clear that people should be respected, unless…

            Opinions however are another matter. You don’t have to respect someone’s opinions to respect him.

            Unless his opinions are his whole self, but then it goes into the category of the ‘unless’ i can’t respect.

  • hperrin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    What do you mean by respect? And is it an actual opinion, like “chocolate is delicious”, or is it just something bigoted you believe? That’s usually what people mean when they want “respect” for their “opinion”. If that’s the case, no, I don’t respect it and I don’t respect you.

    • ChexMax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Also by respect do you mean let you think your opinion without trying to convince you otherwise or do you mean allow your opinion to affect me without complaint

  • Match!!@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    This is a spread from yes to no where “yee” applies to hypothetical things that are fully objective and “no” to hypothetical things that are fully subjective

  • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Can you give an example of what you mean by someone respecting your opinion and someone not respecting it?

    As many others have said in this thread, it comes down to how you define “respect” and “opinion”. Based on some of your responses, I think you are using a broad definition of “opinion”, though some more clarification might be useful there. If you’re worried about partisanship adding bias, try offering equivalent opinions from different directions as examples, eg “I think Trump should be president” and “I think Biden should be president”.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        When I read through the thread earlier, I stopped at 3. Looking more thoroughly now, I see it was just those 3. But it is telling that that’s the only part you responded to, like you’re not here for a discussion but to prove some point.