tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post114654371788534354..comments2023-10-24T04:29:23.693-06:00Comments on Atheist Ethicist: Freedom of ThoughtAlonzo Fyfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1146581451738946752006-05-02T08:50:00.000-06:002006-05-02T08:50:00.000-06:00Oz:The last part of your comment is correct. I tak...Oz:<BR/><BR/>The last part of your comment is correct. I take the statement, "Peas taste bad (to me)" to be a statement of fact (or fiction).<BR/><BR/>It is as true as the statement that I am over 6' tall and I live in Colorado. Anybody who denies the proposition, "I (Alonzo) have an aversion to the taste of peas" is making a factual error.<BR/><BR/>(And, trust me, it <B>is</B> a true statement, and those who assert that this is false <B>are</B> making a mistake of fact.)<BR/><BR/>If "I am six feet tall" is not an opinion, then there is no reason to classify the proposition, "I have an aversion to the taste of peas" as an opinion. I see no non-arbitrary way to treat these any differently.<BR/><BR/>Clearly, I hold that people have the 'right', so to speak, to like or dislike the taste of peas -- just as they have the 'right' to be more or less than 6' tall. Yet, I would not classify the right to like or dislike peas as the right to an opinion, any more than I would classify the right to be more or less than 6' tall to be the right to an opinion.<BR/><BR/>By a 'right to an opinion' I am talking about a right to a particualar belief -- what you call a right to one's own facts.<BR/><BR/>Whereas you seem to agree that "you ought to be killed" is not something that a person has a right to in the relevant sense.<BR/><BR/>You seem to want to classify desires as 'opinions', whereas I do not. Desires, like height, weight, pulse, blood pressure, and age, are 'states' that exist (or not) as a matter of fact.<BR/><BR/>At the same time, I classify beliefs as 'opinions.' As in, "In my opinion, the Iraqi will welcome us as liberators." You do not seem to want to do this.<BR/><BR/>Yet, once we get our terms straightened out, we do not seem to be in disagreement.Alonzo Fyfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1146573863060094932006-05-02T06:44:00.000-06:002006-05-02T06:44:00.000-06:00Everyone has the right to his own opinion. Nobody ...Everyone has the right to his own opinion. Nobody has the right to his own facts. If you say "P is true," you are making a statement of fact. Even moral statements are factual in nature: "You ought to be killed" is not an opinion; it is an attempt to express a moral fact. Here the statement is false.<BR/><BR/>"You are a terrible piano player," on the other hand, is mostly an opinion. It may be very close to fact - say you couldn't even play a C-scale. Of course, I could merely be taking issue with your style, not your technical competence.<BR/><BR/>"Peas taste bad" is almost completely opinion; but it can be made into a fact (albeit an uninteresting one) by adding "to me" to the end of the sentence. "I believe P is true" is a statement of fact, even if P is completely false. The fact is my belief, not P itself. <BR/><BR/>So, in closing, everyone does have a right to his own opinion - you just defined it too broadly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com