Wednesday, July 18, 2007
And now for something completely different......
I just spent the last hour reading literally hundreds of submissions to the editors of a new website that should, hopefully, be up and running soon. Many were intelligent, funny and generally engaging; some were just brutal. In any event, I have come to one conclusion: It is far easier to respond to another’s opinion than to develop your own. In my years of writing, I have come to see, although begrudgingly, that there is more than one right answer to everything. No one starts off knowing this. As a child, everything our parents say is fact, until we realize how we were lied to about the whole Santa Clause debacle (yeah, finding out when your 7 years old from the 4 year old next door that Santa doesn’t exist really sucked. Thanks, mom. I just lived that down yesterday). It’s not until years later that we see, not only that there is more than one way to think about a topic, but that more than one is correct. But so often instead of doing the research, gathering facts, and coming to a logical conclusion on one’s own, we look for the first opinion we see and decide whether we agree or disagree with that opinion. So is an opinionated person one that has an opinion about a topic, or someone that has an opinion about another opinion? (I know that just set some record for the use of the word opinion, a fact of which I will get about a million editors reminding me.) It is far easier to critique a conclusion arrived at by another, which usually takes a matter of seconds to do, than to develop a good, valid opinion on our own. The opinions I respect don’t begin with “I think….” but, rather, the words “I have concluded….” presumably after much thought and research. (By the way, for the purposes of this blog, I am my own editor. I know I suck at it, and that is why in my other life I have a professional handling it. We have heard from a few volunteers for the position, and you may be getting a call soon, but not that so-called editor that called me an “ass-clown.” What’s that about? Ass.) Perhaps this explains the popularity of a Bill O’Reilly or Rush Limbaugh. We enjoy either loving or hating them and the opinions they spew, but would never take the time or, perhaps, even care enough to think of our own. I think this might also explain the popularity of religion. How many, in the search for the answers to all the great questions of life, have even read the bible? Wouldn’t we just rather pick whatever opinion of the book we like best and sign up? How different would are life be if we stopped asking what others thought until after we considered the issue ourselves? What would we believe if there was no religion, but just the bible, prayer, and are own conclusions? And so I come back to reading all of these submissions. Try making me think. Not about how ridiculous or stupid or uninformed my opinion is, but give me something worth replacing my opinions with. I don’t need to be told how stupid I am. You write something worth reading, and I’ll come to that conclusion on my own.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
First of all, I would like to say that reading some of your posts is much like a glimpse into my scatterbrained mind--you keep going and going on to topic after topic until you forget the point you were originally going to make! Although, in most cases, once you pause in a thought, you are forced to retrace the steps that got you there in the first place. On the topic of opinionated people just having opinions of other's opinions (I think I just one-upped you!), it can be argued that any information one receives through a media source is an opinion in and of itself! A common example: history books--the information contained therein is largely the opinion of the author, not necessarily the factual account. Hmmm....enough rant. Thanks for blogging!
Okay. Here's an opinion on "opinions". Always keep an open mind. When someone is speaking it is usually "their" opinion, even if they're too chicken to "own it"--even when they're reiterating someone's else's "so-called opinion"--it's still their interpretation of it (to a degree). People tell me that I'm quite analytical, and I concur. That is because I firmly believe that what you say is a great representation of what you really believe in and/or at least "how you think" and come to conclusions and your blessed "OPINION"--and what you're not saying tells me even more...
The nature of both human thought and the scientific method help insure that it's easier to dismantle an opinion than assert one of one's own People are likely to form opinions and take actions based on arbitrary events, and then attempt to justify it later. Of course, this results in many statements and opinions that are easy to dismantle. A rigorous approach is easier to take with a deconstructive stance, because the holes are almost ubiquitous.
The fact that the scientific method is based around challenges to established facts also affects this; while most people don't consciously follow it in their informal daily affairs, it's one of the underpinnings of industrialized western society. As a result, the virtues of challenge and test is ingrained into the rhetoric of the culture; in many real ways, it's what built current society.
Of course, pointless criticism also runs rampant, impelled by little more than the author's desire to attack their target. Just because one is able to point out flaws in an opinion, idea, or argument doesn't make one's ideas any more sound.
Sadly, an ideal middle ground is largely lacking. While helpful critique does exist in modern discourse (yes, even on the Internet), it's far from being prevalent, or even common. In many ways, it's seen as a show of weakness on both sides. Even worse, as far as popular rhetoric goes, it's not an easy way to score a touch on a perceived opponent: Well meaning and thoughtful advice doesn't carry the clever zing a simple assault does.
This all underlines the fact that discourse, from literati exchanging letters to Naruto and Nascar fans screaming at each other across youtube, is chronically affected by the society that it exists in. It may be impossible to remove that from modern discussion, but at least we can admit that it's there.
Just like admitting something isn't a fact, but "only" our opinion.
I have come to the conclusion after reading several of your posts that this is beginning opinion 101, lacks depth, and is more cliched than all the tea in China.
Saw your ad on craigslist.. I don't quite understand what you need writers for though.
I may be interested.
Actually, I think you're doing very well.. with a small correction.. (sorry...) you need to brush up on 'are & our'... (ouch, sorry...)
Over the years (very long time..) I have read things written by some very highly educated people... Who also seem to be 'not the brightest crayons in the box'...
You write! Give your opinion! It's yours and NO ONE can take it away! This is America!!!!!
(try not to be hurtful..)
Good luck!
Actually, I think you're doing very well.. with a small correction.. (sorry)you need to brush up on 'are & our'... (ouch)
Over the years (very long time..) I have read things written by some very highly educated people... Who also seem to be 'not the brightest crayons in the box'...
You write! Give your opinion! It's yours and NO ONE can take it away! This is America!!!!!
(try not to be hurtful..)
Good luck!
To conclude anything is to negate the possibility of further consideration. Opinions are value judgements relative to ones experience with any given set of variables. No one has an incorrect opinion, only an uneducated one. For the vast uneducated public we can thank our government for dumping most of its funds into killing people rather than educating their citizens.
Opinions! I happen to be know for being a strongly opinionated woman. Some people find me to be intimidating while others appreciate this quality. Myself, I find that people who have strong opinions are able to back that opinion and are wiling to stand behind it. Others, often "borrow" the espoused opinions of otherr, often with little or no concept what they are actually saying.
In these sitautions, the "borrowed" opinion is repeated from televison, radio or even office gossip. This being the case, the person repeating these opinions are seldom able to or willing to support their words. I am amused at times listening to the person trying to support their position. It is quite humorous when this person realizes that they didn't understand the context in which their borrowed opinion was first offered.
Finally, it is just sad when this hapless individual has an epiphany and admits that their personal opinion is starkly contrasted with what they just said.
Your comments on religion reminded me of something I was reading today. A 'friend" posted, at length, on how difficult it is to deconstruct the teachings of the church and to follow this new movement (I'm assuming everyone has heard the new movement is to avoid church in an effort to incorporate God into their life 24/7). She tortures herself pondering whether she should actively pursue the non-believers and dutifully lead them to the Lord, or give up the role of 'contagious Christian' and let things flow naturally. It all leaves me wondering if religions isn't simply ...busy work. Religion adds a dimension to an otherwise empty existence. It fills a self inflicted void, enabling you to ..do nothing...with a free conscience. Literally. It's an excuse and a rationalization for doing nothing more meaningful with your life. Do I aid the quest to free Darfur? No? I'm a Christian! Why bother to do more. But, and this is my point, it gives you something to ponder during commercial breaks. Do I witness to the masses? Or do I assume God will lead them to me? Do I condemn the church of the 21st century as a socially corrupt entity worshipping false idols, and seek the word of God independently, or do I bend to the will of the masses and follow the flock to Sunday mass? Whatever Church/religion is...it's a void filler. The Christian community may only be spewing the opinions of everyone who came before them, but they're keeping plenty busy while doing it.
First I'll say how surprising it was for me to discover, read, then respond to your blog. I stopped looking for intelligent life on the internet a while back while working in the high tech world. Not one question nor comment I've posted online in the past produced a useful response; rather, I would feel attacked for having an opinion. I don't need more reminders of the # of idiots in the world than I'm subject to on any given day.
That being said, I want to let you know I feel your pain. I must OFTEN remind my friends that venting frustrations is a necessary part of maintaining mental "health". I'm not asking them to fix it, just let me get it out before I explode. It's more helpful if the receiving end of the vent can relate to the issue in some way, as with a coworker, or a girlfriend if you're male-bashing, etc.
I have the Serenity Prayer post-it-noted at various strategic locations in my home and workplace..."Lord, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change*, the courage to change what I can, and the wisdom to know the difference."
*I'd like to personally add here "...and just suck it up when necessary."
After turning 40 and over the past 5 years, I somehow transitioned from the blissfully ignorant to the painfully aware group. I still haven't decided if that's good or bad since the latter is so unpopular!
Thanks!
KB
Atlanta, GA
Kim,
I like your Post-it Notes around te office and at home, especially the part you add "just suck it up when necessary." Tht is so true. Thee are times where no matter what we think or feek about a situation, we have little choice but to shut up and "suck it up".
Carry on!
Jessica Bougher
In regards to your article titled And now for something completely different..., I would say I am more or less in agreement with your stance on the existence of more than one right answer to many given situations. You declare that it is easier to comment on someone else’s opinion than create your own. This is certainly true. Why create your own opinion when there is an existing framework to comment upon. It should be as no surprise that people are more inclined to build upon an existing structure than create a new one from the ground up. That might explain why more people buy houses or rent them, instead of building their own from the ground up. It’s obviously taxing to build something from nothing. Which brings to mind a rather interesting query; is it possible to build something completely new? Most of our information comes from elsewhere. We take certain things for granted, but when it comes down to brass tacks, there is little that we can claim with absolute certainty that is not based upon the work and history of others. So where can we go from there? It would seem nowhere, but in fact all we can do is take the information at hand and move forward in the most responsible manner possible, which brings me to your reference of the likes of Bill O’Reilly and similar curbside prophets, espousing doom on non-believers and democrats. Self proclaimed champions of logic do well to take a strong stance on anything. It sells. It boosts ratings. Nobody wants to get their information from a flip-flopping, soft spoken mook. There is no certainty in it, and most are not comfortable with adhering to a belief when its architect is not so sure. You do well to read The Fixation of Belief by Charles S. Peirce. His argument dictates that we are inclined to seek out certainty, because in certainty brings comfort. When we feel confident about an issue, whether we are valid or not is irrelevant, we are comforted by the fact that that is one less thing to worry about. When we are not so sure, we feel unstable, and a look at human history for the last thousand or so years, you will see that most people tend to seek stability, security, and peace (war mongering despots and Machiavellian profiteers being the exception to the rule.) I endorse this because I have had to argue it many times and i still agree. So in that light, it seems as no surprise that we are perpetually inclined to shape our beliefs in response to erroneous logic. Much like your article above referencing advertising and cold beer, there is probably a reason they chose to sell its temperature above taste. That billboard will probably come down in the winter, but when your sweating relentlessly in your old beater without a/c, a cold beer probably sounds great, regardless of the taste. Logic would tell us, if you’re hot and thirsty, drink water. It’s the breath of life in all things. Budweiser would probably respond with something like, “But Budweiser has water in it…” neglecting to mention that alcohol dehydrates. It doesn’t take much to convince us of many things. People only have to persuade our fears into surfacing, to the point of becoming almost full-fledged terror. It is then that we will fall in line and recite whatever nonsense rhetoric has been fed us, because its easier than going out on a limb and being completely wrong. Frankly, I love when I try my very best to argue something, and I mean my very best, and someone proves me wrong at every turn. It is in those situations when I learn something about myself, and more importantly, the world. If everybody were a little less afraid of being wrong, people might actually begin to think for themselves.
p.s. i recently acquired some adhesive philosophy (you like my attempt at recreating nonsensical political wordplay?) that declares "don't believe everything you think"
once again, not mine, but i think there's wisdom in it
Genial fill someone in on and this post helped me alot in my college assignement. Thank you seeking your information.
Post a Comment